Skip to content

Who would win - Inquisitor or Fighter/Mage

135

Comments

  • ryuken87ryuken87 Member Posts: 563

    @Schneidend - Invisibility doesn't take that long to cast. And if you go with 'Reasonable preparation', most wizards have contingencies that would be ample to the task of holding off the Inquisitor while the caster gets off a Time Stop. Then it is all over but the crying for the Inquisitor. No benefit is being accorded to the F/M that isn't reasonable. And what spells are the Inquisitor going to get off to counter anything a 20th level mage anyway?

    The Inquisitor's True Sight would dispel the Invisibility, Greater Whirlwind will take care of Mirror Image or Stoneskin within a round, Dispel Magic can potentially dispel anything else. Meanwhile, True Sight is ticking away every round to get rid of any more illusions.

    I'm not saying the Inquisitor has this in the bag, but the assumption that Mages can just walk all over the Inquisitor seems more than a little biased.
    If the mage has PfMW, Stoneskin, Mirror Image, Improved Invisibility, SI: Abjuration and SI: Divination then there ain't much the Inquisitor can do. Dispel is blocked by SI:A, True Sight is blocked by SI:D, you can't use the Rod of Reversal to remove SI because Improved Invisibility doesn't allow you to target the mage, if you want to switch to a normal weapon and hack through Stoneskin and Mirror Image then you'll be dead long before you're able to do so (we'll assume the mage wears the Robe of Vecna rather than Aslyferund Elven Chain).
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689
    edited October 2013
    Monk -> Can't remove PFMW, so he can't do any damage as his fists are magical.
    Bard -> This bard can cast up to level 6 spells and use scrolls. It's stupid to think the bard can win just because he can cast 1(!) timestop with use any item.
    Inquisitor -> Best chance to win but with Spell Immunity Abjuration his whole kit gets destroyed.

    There really is no way for anyone to win an arcane caster (Mage/Sorcerer) without having to go to things like "These spells aren't allowed, we're in an anti magic zone, etc" Put both into an arena, give them whatever equipment they would be able to get through the game and have them fight eachother. The mage will almost always win.

    You guys are also forgetting about Imprisonment. That is auto win for any mage as it ignores magic resistance and saving throws. Only way to combat this would be using a protection from magic scroll, and then you'll still die to a timestop.
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,455
    From NWN PvP I know playing a mage is a lot harder than playing a paladin. Obviously, there's no pausing in a PvP multiplayer setting. It's not a given that the mage player can pull off everything theorycrafted with 100 % accuracy, while the inquisitor is much more likely to.
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689

    From NWN PvP I know playing a mage is a lot harder than playing a paladin. Obviously, there's no pausing in a PvP multiplayer setting. It's not a given that the mage player can pull off everything theorycrafted with 100 % accuracy, while the inquisitor is much more likely to.

    It's rather simple to pull it of in BG2 actually. You just need to put up sequencers and such, the moment you see an enemy you'll have Spell Immunity - Abjuration, PFMW and stoneskin up. This way he can't dispel you, and his hits won't get through, if he changes to a none magical weapon he'll have to tear down the stoneskin. The only thing you actually have to click to cast is Timestop, then improved haste, timestop and you have won.
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,455
    I figured the setting was "thrown into the pits without preparation". Of course with extensive preparation the mage is OP.
  • JoeyJoey Member Posts: 201
    I don't get why people are assuming the mage has anti-Inquisitor contingencies specifically prepared. You may as well say that a thief would insta-win any fight because of traps.
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689
    Joey said:

    I don't get why people are assuming the mage has anti-Inquisitor contingencies specifically prepared. You may as well say that a thief would insta-win any fight because of traps.

    I don't know why people assume that the Inquisitor has any dispel magic, he probably used them all up earlier and haven't rested yet.
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,212
    @karnor00: If you assume both to just stand still, then how is that not inherently biased against the mage? And while we're at free weapon selection, what exactly is the Inquisitor's plan against Staff of the Magi? I don't think anyone is surprised that a melee class has a huge advantage when it starts on top of the mage, without pre-buffs, and without allowing for movement. But that's just not how fights work.
  • kamuizinkamuizin Member Posts: 3,704
    I would like to see some magic ingredients implemented. All the stones we find in the game are nearly useless, except for one rogue stone, to access the twisted rune, one diamond to improve the horn of vahala and a Beljuril to make another improvment on the horn.

    Make some magics use these items (even if to give better effects maybe) would be awesome. Of course we would need more stones and a place to buy them in the game. It's a raw idea atm.
  • karnor00karnor00 Member Posts: 680

    @karnor00: If you assume both to just stand still, then how is that not inherently biased against the mage? And while we're at free weapon selection, what exactly is the Inquisitor's plan against Staff of the Magi? I don't think anyone is surprised that a melee class has a huge advantage when it starts on top of the mage, without pre-buffs, and without allowing for movement. But that's just not how fights work.

    It's all a pretty silly scenario to be honest, but kind of fun to think about. Certain the F/M will easily win if he he can pre-buff or set up contingencies first, or in many cases if he can move much. The conditions have to be pretty skewed towards the Inquisitor if he is to stand any chance.

    As for the Staff of the Magi, I can't think of any defense the Inquisitor could employ against it other than running away :)
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689
    karnor00 said:

    @karnor00: If you assume both to just stand still, then how is that not inherently biased against the mage? And while we're at free weapon selection, what exactly is the Inquisitor's plan against Staff of the Magi? I don't think anyone is surprised that a melee class has a huge advantage when it starts on top of the mage, without pre-buffs, and without allowing for movement. But that's just not how fights work.

    It's all a pretty silly scenario to be honest, but kind of fun to think about. Certain the F/M will easily win if he he can pre-buff or set up contingencies first, or in many cases if he can move much. The conditions have to be pretty skewed towards the Inquisitor if he is to stand any chance.

    As for the Staff of the Magi, I can't think of any defense the Inquisitor could employ against it other than running away :)
    True Sight?
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,212
    @karnor00: That is, largely, my point exacctly. Without extensive crippling conditionals to the fight, there is no contest; and once you start throwing out conditions, it's very hard to stay objective. What's the point of having a fight in the first place if you rig it? That's why this whole debate is pointless. Things are incredibly unbalanced, because they were never meant to work this way. Stop trying to fix it, it's not going to happen.

    @SionIV: you can keep re-equipping the staff to go back to invisible. You won't become visible for more than a fraction.
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689
    edited October 2013

    @karnor00: That is, largely, my point exacctly. Without extensive crippling conditionals to the fight, there is no contest; and once you start throwing out conditions, it's very hard to stay objective. What's the point of having a fight in the first place if you rig it? That's why this whole debate is pointless. Things are incredibly unbalanced, because they were never meant to work this way. Stop trying to fix it, it's not going to happen.

    @SionIV: you can keep re-equipping the staff to go back to invisible. You won't become visible for more than a fraction.

    True sight keeps running. And i'm going to go as far as saying if the F/M is going to be able to spam equip the staff the whole fight just lost it's charm.
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,212
    edited October 2013
    @SionIV: The fight never had charm, see above. And while TS does keep running, it only "pulses" once per round. Just re-requip the staff immediately, and you're back to invisible until the next pulse.
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689

    @SionIV: The fight never had charm, see above. And while TS does keep running, it only "pulses" once per round. Just re-requip the staff immediately, and you're back to invisible until the next pulse.

    Sequencers and triggers are not cheap in any way or form, but doing that with the staff of the magi is just silly.

    It's like giving the F/M the helm of Vhailor and start spammin 1000 clones.
  • ChildofBhaal599ChildofBhaal599 Member Posts: 1,781
    We forget inquis has potions
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689

    We forget inquis has potions

    So does the F/M, but that won't save him from FoA +5 to the face.
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,212
    Why do we keep going in circles here?

    Gun vs. Fist

    But the gun is lying there disassembled, and the guy with the fists is standing right next to the guy with the gun, and they aren't allowed to move. Oh and did I mention the guy with the gun is an underfed nerd, while the guy with the fists is a 200-pound ex-marine.

    Why are we even having this discussion?
  • SchneidendSchneidend Member Posts: 3,190
    ryuken87 said:


    If the mage has PfMW, Stoneskin, Mirror Image, Improved Invisibility, SI: Abjuration and SI: Divination then there ain't much the Inquisitor can do. Dispel is blocked by SI:A, True Sight is blocked by SI:D, you can't use the Rod of Reversal to remove SI because Improved Invisibility doesn't allow you to target the mage, if you want to switch to a normal weapon and hack through Stoneskin and Mirror Image then you'll be dead long before you're able to do so (we'll assume the mage wears the Robe of Vecna rather than Aslyferund Elven Chain).

    Now the F/M gets to start with two castings of SI? The bias, it stings! There shouldn't be any pre-buffing. The F/M should only be allowed to have contingencies they would typically use.
  • JoeyJoey Member Posts: 201
    SionIV said:

    Joey said:

    I don't get why people are assuming the mage has anti-Inquisitor contingencies specifically prepared. You may as well say that a thief would insta-win any fight because of traps.

    I don't know why people assume that the Inquisitor has any dispel magic, he probably used them all up earlier and haven't rested yet.
    If the Inquisitor doesn't get Dispel Magic then the mage shouldn't get any spells at all.

    My point is, why let the mage specifically tailer his contingencies against an Inquisitor?
  • ChildofBhaal599ChildofBhaal599 Member Posts: 1,781
    the way i see it the inquis could buff up quite well with lots of potions if the inquis gets to buff. also i said earlier that the inquis looks like a fighter so there is no way to know that this guy is going to be capable of dispelling until he does. if they didn't buff i would expect the inquis to fire an arrow and keep interrupting with them. i think the inquis can have a chance with potions.
  • FrecheFreche Member Posts: 473
    Chain Contingency with 3x Abi'Dalzim (wouldn't be tailored against an Inquisitor, still would most likely result in a dead Inq.).
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018
    @karnor00 - you are forgetting invisibility/Miss-direction. Either will prevent Inquisitor from being able to attack the F/M for long enough for them to cast True seeing. And in the time it takes to cast True seeing, the F/M casts time stop and it is all over.

    The F/M doesn't need any sort of long term or comprehensive protection. They merely need enough time to get off Time stop.

    Plus, you are forgetting contingencies (and chain contingencies). They are instantaneous and take no time to cast. a properly prepared wizard doesn't need to take even the two turns you are talking about. Contingency - Miss-direction and then what is capable of stopping that time stop spell?

    Even if the contingency only activates after taking half of their damage. Chances are the Inquisitor isn't going to kill the mage in one hit and that's all they will potentially get.
  • BattlehamsterBattlehamster Member Posts: 298
    edited October 2013
    I think it really boils down to who has the better tactics. If a F/M buffed up and went in with all the buffs he'd get slaughtered pretty quick. Also, Inquisitors have pretty ridiculous saves - death spells wouldn't be particularly reliable against a Paladin of any sort because of the high fail chance. The only hope would be to quickly kill the Inquisitor with high Damage - a large amount of which could mostly be prevented by preparing with the proper anti-magic potions beforehand. And let us not forget the following:

    Resist magic - Its a HLA which applies during ALL of time stop if I remember correctly and doesn't end since time is stopped. OR you could use Carsomyr to resist magic as well as potions, amulets, etc. and those are going to negate a lot of damage the F/M deals, despite being otherwise able to dish out a substantial amount of punishment even during a time stop and the inquisitor doesn't need a round to prime the resistance.

    (If you assume preparation with a sequencer, you would have to assume an inquisitor would be prepared with some degree of protections against magic.)

    It would really boil down to luck and whether or not the magic resistance prevents enough damage to negate the value of time stop. Ultimately it would come down to whether the Inquisitor had the gear to survive the initial onslaught as well as the good fortune to avoid most of the initial damage. If he did I think the inquisitor would win simply out of attrition. If enough spells went through though, the Inquisitor would die a quick death.
  • @Battlehamster Why assume that the F/M is doing damage through spells? They've got 13 levels of Fighter, they're dual-wielding, and every attack done during Time Stop hits automatically. The F/M can easily throw down the damage through melee, it's just a matter of maintaining the protections necessary to keep the Inquisitor from taking the F/M out first.
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,212
    @Battlehamster: It's quite easy for a F/M of the mentioned levels to put out enough physical damage to kill even a max-HP Inquisitor during one Time Stop - even accounting for Hardiness + Defender of Easthaven.

    @karnor00 - you are forgetting invisibility/Miss-direction. Either will prevent Inquisitor from being able to attack the F/M for long enough for them to cast True seeing. And in the time it takes to cast True seeing, the F/M casts time stop and it is all over.

    The innate Inquisitor TS is instant. Invisibility isn't half as relevant as simply casting Haste and running away, Inquisitors have no way of ever catching up.

    Contingencies are win-more; you can comfortably defeat an Inquisitor even without any Contingencies or Sequencers of any kind. See earlier posts for the details. If you have a rebuttal that does not involve tying the mage up and chopping off a hand to make it "fair", I'm anxious to hear.
  • In fact, after doing some quick number-crunching, I can suggest a new strategy for the F/M in the event of a no-buffs standing adjacent match:

    Just beat the tar out of the Inquisitor.

    Even taking the Inquisitor's superior (unbuffed) AC and THAC0 into account along with relative chances to hit, the F/M outdamages the Inquisitor by a comfortable margin, and their max hit points are only about 10 points apart. So the F/M just attacks and comes out ahead by the numbers, and if the Inquisitor tries to use any ability to gain the upper hand, he cuts himself off from dispel magic and true sight for a full six seconds, allowing the F/M to pop improved invisibility and re-position to a comfortable distance. The Inquisitor pops TS in time to spot the F/M just beginning his preferred spell combination of doom.
  • BattlehamsterBattlehamster Member Posts: 298
    edited October 2013
    Kaigen said:

    In fact, after doing some quick number-crunching, I can suggest a new strategy for the F/M in the event of a no-buffs standing adjacent match:

    Just beat the tar out of the Inquisitor.

    Even taking the Inquisitor's superior (unbuffed) AC and THAC0 into account along with relative chances to hit, the F/M outdamages the Inquisitor by a comfortable margin, and their max hit points are only about 10 points apart.

    @Kaigen You forget - every Paladin is going to have Carsomyr = much more likely to hit. And since people are ASSUMING that Time Stop can be involved at minimum level only the paladin is going to have HLA which is going to be a dramatic game-changer in the melee department. An Inquisitor could win - but it would be very difficult.

    Once you start hitting the 18-20+ range though the comparison between any single class and any multi-class isn't fair since the differences between any level 16 and any level 21 character aren't as far apart as, say a level 1 and a level 5, which is why 3e handles multi-classing MUCH better imo. Your 15/16 F/M would have to fight a Lv 31 Inquisitor. Good luck with that. In BG though once you hit those higher levels the inquisitor is going to get spanked. My example only assumes the minimum level and the only reason I give him a chance at that point is purely because of a HLA. Without it, its just a one-sided fight.

    Once you get into the higher levels though, any high-level multiclass is more like having multiple characters in one which can adapt to unique circumstances and overall has more options.

    Take the same F/M - a 15/16
    Compare to
    A F/M/T - 13/13/16
    Or
    F/M/C - 13/13/14

    Despite the time stop I'm going to put my money on the triple-class everytime once things are above lv. 12.
    Post edited by Battlehamster on
  • I went based off the numbers in the OP, but it doesn't matter if the Inquisitor has HLAs; as soon as he uses one, he gives the F/M the window of opportunity necessary to pop invisibility and retreat far enough away to ensure that Time Stop goes off, at which point it's game over for the Inquisitor.
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018

    @Battlehamster: It's quite easy for a F/M of the mentioned levels to put out enough physical damage to kill even a max-HP Inquisitor during one Time Stop - even accounting for Hardiness + Defender of Easthaven.

    @karnor00 - you are forgetting invisibility/Miss-direction. Either will prevent Inquisitor from being able to attack the F/M for long enough for them to cast True seeing. And in the time it takes to cast True seeing, the F/M casts time stop and it is all over.

    The innate Inquisitor TS is instant. Invisibility isn't half as relevant as simply casting Haste and running away, Inquisitors have no way of ever catching up.

    Contingencies are win-more; you can comfortably defeat an Inquisitor even without any Contingencies or Sequencers of any kind. See earlier posts for the details. If you have a rebuttal that does not involve tying the mage up and chopping off a hand to make it "fair", I'm anxious to hear.
    If the TS instant ability works like true seeing in the game, it is just as relevant, if for no other reason than the fact that Miss-direction is not effected by True Seeing. But in either case, True seeing doesn't prevent invisibility from happening and thus disrupting target only spells, abilities and attacks. Even momentary invisibility will hose up any combatant or anyone attempting to remove protections. I am no PVP expert, but I would imagine that would allow any Wizard to get Time stop off.

    Haste would be something else as well that I hadn't considered.

Sign In or Register to comment.