All the Path of War Guides in One Place!

[Draacul]

The Rajah needs DEX for the same reason that the wizard and sorcerer need DEX: AC, Saves and Initiative. But even more so because the Rajah's abilities very much require them to be within 25 ft. of combat, which is well within walking or charging distance for most creatures. Unless you know of some way to guarantee that your Rajah will never be the target of an enemy attack, I highly recommend DEX investment because otherwise you will get targeted and you will get hit. Might as well try to hold that day off a little longer.

AC isn't that much needed because it's not a front-liner,initiative is something there is myriad ways to get with maneuvers,while Reflex Save....who cares?
And while nobody can guarantee that you will never be a target of attack...i'd like to note that COUNTERS EXIST.Seriously,they do.In rare situation where you actually get hit in the face-counters will help you better than point of AC or three.AC helps only when you constantly get hit in the face.Aaand since your opponents have to walk to you-they'll provoke AoOs from actual front-liners(and possibly you)so you win by default.

As for The Sniper, I may be a bit harsh, but it really offers a lot less than you think it does, especially with other PoW stuff on the table. Plenty of Archers can ignore cover right from level 1 or veryearly on, with this only increasing as you level.

So,i searched entirety of maneuvers in POW:E.Slipstream Strike allow you to ignore cover by not doing something better with your action.This is ONLY strike in POW:E that includes ignoring cover.
There are two boosts,of levels four and six,respectively,plus eight-level stance.Level four boost,again,does precisely nothing except for ignoring cover.
As for POW,there is Curving Shot that requires frikkin skill check AND is a strike,there is Solar Flare,which thankfully doesn't require a skill check but still is a strike and there is sixth-level stance.
My point is,cover is NOTORIOUSLY hard to negate.And universally require you to make some suboptimal choices with strikes.The only thing even remotely level-appropriate is Solar Flare,but each round you fire it you don't trip or dirtytrick your opponent.And it takes the maneuver of best level in the game-2nd.

In addition, ignoring cover is the removal of a penalty, not the addition of a bonus. The default state is "no cover" and enough combats happen where cover is not applied

This has not been my experience.You see,if you have BSFs in your party then the only reliable way for target not to have cover is for you to be adjacent to the same line that borders both target and BSF's squares.Which usually means that you are close enough to combat to get hit in the face,instead of hiding,you know,behind BSF.And Gods help you if you have more than one in your party,or are last person in formation.

Gaining an attack against a different target when you miss is nice sure, but often you are attacking a specific target because that is the target you need to hit, which makes the alternative target little more than a consolation prize and a potential disruption to your party's plans. As such, its benefit is minor and entirely negated if there is not another valid target available.

Often,but not always.And i can count with fingers on one hand situations in Emerald Spire where my character missed one target and there wasn't another to hit.
As for minority...it's minor for rapid-fire archer.For character that uses strikes it's ENORMOUS.Because it doesn't really matter which target you'll hit with strike that does Bad Things.Either way somebody is screwed.
And if you manage to miss two times and there is two essence invested,you can hit original target again!
"

Compounding this is the need for line of sight and line of effect. Anything that blocks either one of those (such as mist, fog, invisible walls, etc.) can prevent you from getting your cover negating angle of attack.

Yes,but don't these neuter ranged combat(or all combat)by default?
"

I may be a bit overly harsh, but I find that the sniper offers too little for its opportunity cost. It is situationally useful at best.

Ranged combatants are situationally useful in general.Sniper makes a lot of them better though.I posit that it's red/blue.Either completely useless or will be useful in most combats...with right build and until reliable passive ways to negate cover are obtained.So for a LONG time.By no means it's purple,however.And bind is...how do i put it politely...useful only for laser specialists in Iron Gods.

[CthulhuEscobar]

Hey, sorry to be a nagger, but I noticed that you have not mentioned the vigilante and brutal slayer archetypes for the stalker.

[Galacktic]

Those are also things he's created! I'm working on a Vigilante guide myself" though it's slow going as the game I was playing one in had a shift and now I'm playing something else entirely. I still had a good bit of playtime though.

[Elricaltovilla]

Hey, sorry to be a nagger, but I noticed that you have not mentioned the vigilante and brutal slayer archetypes for the stalker.

As Galacktic mentioned, those were also authored by me and so I can't really write objective guides on them. You can actually read the very origin of the Brutal Slayer in the campaign journal found in my signature.

@Galacktic: thank you for your undertaking! I know how rough it can be getting a guide put together, but I eagerly await your finished piece. Best of luck in your campaign.

[Andor13]

I think you under rate Symbol of Mercy. Its use isn't limited to enemies, it also functions as a "I did not give you permission to die" button for the rest of your party.

Also I think it's worth noting for the Sunset feat how strongly it synergizes with the Radiant Dawn Style. I have a Warlord (Bushi) 3/ Zealot 15 in a friends Mythic games and even at that level handing out 17 HP a round that also come with +3 AC/Saves/+15 movement every round is not to be sneezed at. (In addition to the 17 from Radiant Dawn Style, and whatever the maneuver did.)

[Ninjaxenomorph]

If you ever get around to updating the Warlord guide with the Veiled Lord, the Flow of Battle feat and Radiant Dawn actually make the archetype work, since you can get the more-or-less permanent essence from Radiant Dawn and put it in the veil you get, and use the temporary essence from your gambits to power up your Radiant Dawn maneuvers. Flow of Battle just makes the whole thing, well, flow much better.

[Elricaltovilla]

Updated Rajah Guide with The Demiurge and fixed the explanation of Sun's Gleam.

I would appreciate someone doing a write up of the Mithril Current 9th level maneuver as the one we have now is from the playtest before it became a counter.

[sage20500]

Question with the brutal slayer archetype for stalker. I know that use of black seraph will cause your alignment to shift if your not already evil, but with the way Brutal Strikes work does that also have the potential to shift your alignment everytime it is triggered and you receive the profane bonus?

I had an idea for making an non lethal unarmed stalker that had anger issues and I wasn't sure if I played the character as lawful neutral whether or not that could potentially lead to problems with alignment later on.

[Elricaltovilla]

Question with the brutal slayer archetype for stalker. I know that use of black seraph will cause your alignment to shift if your not already evil, but with the way Brutal Strikes work does that also have the potential to shift your alignment everytime it is triggered and you receive the profane bonus?

I had an idea for making an non lethal unarmed stalker that had anger issues and I wasn't sure if I played the character as lawful neutral whether or not that could potentially lead to problems with alignment later on.

No, Brutal Strikes won't cause your alignment to shift.

[sage20500]

No, Brutal Strikes won't cause your alignment to shift.

Sweet, that will help me out a lot since I'd be with a party of pretty much only good people

[MilleniaAntares]

Reading through the Rajah guide...

I disagree with the rating for The Demiurge.... It should be five stars, because the Demiurge's bind effect lets you change your title veils as a move action. This means that even in the heat of combat, if you realize you put a veil terrible for the situation on someone... you can swap it out for a paltry cost.

For the Gravekeeper, you can probably delete the kitten test paragraph. Because the blood pool becomes zero when initiative is rolled, you can't just get a big pool slaughtering kittens before going to battle.

[FabulousChester]

Is it worth taking Barroom Brawler to get any Stalker Art on the fly?

[Elricaltovilla]

I decided to say "screw it" and added Piercing Thunder to all the guides, so that happened.

Spoiler: Shameless Plug Inside

Show

As I've tried to mention several times before, I'm also one of the Authors of Path of War: Expanded and a couple other things from DSP. In the interest of objectivity, I refrain from writing guides on things that I authored.

You can find a list of those things in the first post of this thread. It would be a big help to me and to every fan of Dreamscarred Press if you could take it upon yourself to attempt to write a guide for some of this material and share it in this thread. They don't even have to be particularly good guides (just look at mine), but any help would be greatly appreciated.

And with my birthday coming up at the end of the month, a Medic Guide would be a wonderful present for me.

[Andreaz]

Question about piercing thunder's capstone, since I didn't see it anywhere else: Do you only hit the enemies in that 1x(speed) line? As in, if the enemy is a couple squares away, despite being in melee reach from that position, will it not be hit?

[Elricaltovilla]

Question about piercing thunder's capstone, since I didn't see it anywhere else: Do you only hit the enemies in that 1x(speed) line? As in, if the enemy is a couple squares away, despite being in melee reach from that position, will it not be hit?

That is correct. It's a 1xspeed line.

[Andreaz]

Sad XD

Thank you.

[master4sword]

Dance of the Silver Hurricane***: In addition to using a skill check to block an attack roll, anyone who misses you allows you to move ten feet per miss, which you can use to try and provoke attacks from foes who don't know better (and the average enemy will likely attempt to strike as you pass). On your turn, everyone who missed you gets targeted by an attack with a small damage bonus - while the damage does scale with the number of misses, this requires a foe to either full attack you or for you to repeatedly provoke from a foe with multiple attacks of opportunity. Useful defensive and mobility counter, and the attack at the end is really just icing, but it really requires a large number of foes to really shine. In a campaign where you face large groups, it jumps to blue****.


My two cents. If anyone has more experience with the maneuver feel free to contradict me.

[Elricaltovilla]

Dance of the Silver Hurricane***: In addition to using a skill check to block an attack roll, anyone who misses you allows you to move ten feet per miss, which you can use to try and provoke attacks from foes who don't know better (and the average enemy will likely attempt to strike as you pass). On your turn, everyone who missed you gets targeted by an attack with a small damage bonus - while the damage does scale with the number of misses, this requires a foe to either full attack you or for you to repeatedly provoke from a foe with multiple attacks of opportunity. Useful defensive and mobility counter, and the attack at the end is really just icing, but it really requires a large number of foes to really shine. In a campaign where you face large groups, it jumps to blue****.


My two cents. If anyone has more experience with the maneuver feel free to contradict me.

Thank you very much for your contribution. I'll add it to the documents tomorrow.

[upho]

I decided to say "screw it" and added Piercing Thunder to all the guides, so that happened.

Spoiler: Shameless Plug Inside

Show

As I've tried to mention several times before, I'm also one of the Authors of Path of War: Expanded and a couple other things from DSP. In the interest of objectivity, I refrain from writing guides on things that I authored.

You can find a list of those things in the first post of this thread. It would be a big help to me and to every fan of Dreamscarred Press if you could take it upon yourself to attempt to write a guide for some of this material and share it in this thread. They don't even have to be particularly good guides (just look at mine), but any help would be greatly appreciated.

And with my birthday coming up at the end of the month, a Medic Guide would be a wonderful present for me.

OK, birthday present coming up in the form of a Hussar guide! BUT, this present will only be completed on one condition: that you or another PoW writer answer the following questions about Hussar mounts and the charge/mounted charge and initiation rules:


1. According to this FAQ, sources of AC progression only stack with those granted by Cavalier levels for an AC mentioned in the Cavalier Mount feature. Is this true also for multiclassed Hussars, so that, outside of certain feats or special GM permission, there is currently no way for a Hussar to use any animal other than those mentioned in the template's similarly worded Mount feature as a mount?

(BTW, if this is the case, it's not possible to build/play Barnabas Gorski without special GM permission to use Roch as a Hussar mount, on top of the early level size issues/extra feat requirement caused by using a ram AC as a mount.)


2. PoW Errata says:

"When a character initiates a martial strike or boost during a mounted charge attack, the initiation of the maneuver overrides any damage bonuses that would be gained while performing this action (such as by the Spirited Charge feat or while wielding a lance)..."

This means that an initiator who makes a mounted charge has to choose between boost/strike damage bonuses and mounted charge specific damage bonuses, and cannot gain both on the same attacks, correct?


3. PoW Errata says (continued):

"...and the initiator deals damage as if they were not charging (the effects of the strike or boost are applied to the attack as normal)."

As written, this means the initiator gains no charge damage bonuses whatsoever when initiating a charge while mounted, regardless of whether those bonuses are limited to only mounted charges (Spirited Charge, lance) or just to the Charge special attack (like Horn of the Criosphinx, Blasting Charge, Rhino Hide armor, etc, etc). I assume this is actually supposed to say:

"...and the initiator deals damage as if they were not performing a mounted charge, but as if performing a normal charge (the effects of the strike or boost are applied to the charge attack as normal)."

Is my assumption is correct?


4. PoW Errata also says:

"If a mounted character initiates a strike that includes a charge attack, their mount forgoes its normal actions this round and takes a full-round action to move up to twice its speed in a straight line..."

OK, so if a Hussar initiates say Raging Hunter Pounce while mounted, the mount doesn't get to do anything aside from taking over the charge movement. But the Hussar's Mounted Maneuver Expertise feature says:

"If the maneuver allows the hussar to make a charge attack, both him and his mount are considered to be charging."

Does this mean a Hussar mount is able to perform its own full charge attack when the Hussar initiates a charge maneuver, and not just move like a mount of another initiator?


5. Related to the above, what is the benefit(s) of the Mounted Maneuver Expertise feature (if not the above or in addition to the above)?


6. Also related to the above, in case a A) mounted initiator or B) Hussar performs a mounted charge using the Martial Charge feat, RAW it appears the mount of both A) and B) can perform its own complete charge attack. Is this correct and RAI?


Without those answers, I fear any decent Hussar guide will end up as not much more than a bunch of "ask your GM" and "If...". Not to mention writing the guide would require too much work from someone as lazy as myself...

Hopefully, this is also the last remaining charge and mounted charge related questions not already dealt with.

[upho]

Just noticed in the Warder guide:

Stance of the Thunderlord**** This got an incorrect name - it's called Stance of the Thunderbrand - and the description and rating misses the greatest unique benefit of this absolutely amazing stance. That is, any opponent about to leave a square you threaten provokes an AoO from you, regardless of the cause of the movement, including involuntary movement caused by for example gravity (falling), hostile teleportation effects, bull rush, initiation of a grapple (if the opponent isn't already adjacent), reposition, drag, Pushing Assault, trip with Ki Throw or Wolf Trip, a ton of maneuvers and many other things, performed by you or anyone/-thing else. To gain the most from this, the initiator of course has to be specifically built for melee control using some kind of forced movement, but this stance is still great for virtually any type of melee build.

I believe nothing else Piercing Thunder has to offer can compete with Stance of the Thunderbrand, and it would easily deserve a purple rating***** even had it not included the +4 dodge bonus, and perhaps even without the +5' reach increase.

(See Eddie Pincerhand in this thread or the (cheesy) Nelly Nephilim in Castilonium's Zealot guide for two example builds by me demonstrating how Stance of the Thunderbrand friggin' rules.)

EDIT: Also, if it matters, here's what Castilonium wrote about the stance in his guide:

Stance of the Thunderbrand*****: +4 dodge to AC, +5 reach, and enemies you threaten can’t use the Withdraw action and always provoke an AoO when they move by any means! This is almost completely better than Inescapable Grasp (Eternal Guardian), a 6th level stance! The only thing Inescapable Grasp does that Stance of the Thunderbrand doesn’t is prevent cursed enemies from taking 5 foot steps at all!

I fully agree. /EDIT

[Elricaltovilla]

OK, birthday present coming up in the form of a Hussar guide! BUT, this present will only be completed on one condition: that you or another PoW writer answer the following questions about Hussar mounts and the charge/mounted charge and initiation rules:


1. According to this FAQ, sources of AC progression only stack with those granted by Cavalier levels for an AC mentioned in the Cavalier Mount feature. Is this true also for multiclassed Hussars, so that, outside of certain feats or special GM permission, there is currently no way for a Hussar to use any animal other than those mentioned in the template's similarly worded Mount feature as a mount?

(BTW, if this is the case, it's not possible to build/play Barnabas Gorski without special GM permission to use Roch as a Hussar mount, on top of the early level size issues/extra feat requirement caused by using a ram AC as a mount.)

Paizo rulings trump DSP rulings for anything not specifically altered by DSP stuff. It's their sandbox, we just play in it.

So basically, mounts are now "different" from animal companions, but only in such a way that it makes things more restrictive for players. Yay. So yeah, based on that ruling, you're limited by what the Hussar allows for mounts or whatever else your DM agrees to.

And as I mentioned when I revealed ol' Barney, I addressed questions regarding his build validity already. I got GM permission to make him.

2. PoW Errata says:

"When a character initiates a martial strike or boost during a mounted charge attack, the initiation of the maneuver overrides any damage bonuses that would be gained while performing this action (such as by the Spirited Charge feat or while wielding a lance)..."

This means that an initiator who makes a mounted charge has to choose between boost/strike damage bonuses and mounted charge specific damage bonuses, and cannot gain both on the same attacks, correct?


3. PoW Errata says (continued):

"...and the initiator deals damage as if they were not charging (the effects of the strike or boost are applied to the attack as normal)."

As written, this means the initiator gains no charge damage bonuses whatsoever when initiating a charge while mounted, regardless of whether those bonuses are limited to only mounted charges (Spirited Charge, lance) or just to the Charge special attack (like Horn of the Criosphinx, Blasting Charge, Rhino Hide armor, etc, etc). I assume this is actually supposed to say:

"...and the initiator deals damage as if they were not performing a mounted charge, but as if performing a normal charge (the effects of the strike or boost are applied to the charge attack as normal)."

Is my assumption is correct?

These are the same question, more or less. The entire point of the rules is to forcibly separate mounted charges from maneuver use because the two in combination are upsettingly strong for many people. You pick one or the other, a mounted charge (with requisite feats and bonuses) or a maneuver charge (with separate requisite feats and bonuses).

4. PoW Errata also says:

"If a mounted character initiates a strike that includes a charge attack, their mount forgoes its normal actions this round and takes a full-round action to move up to twice its speed in a straight line..."

OK, so if a Hussar initiates say Raging Hunter Pounce while mounted, the mount doesn't get to do anything aside from taking over the charge movement. But the Hussar's Mounted Maneuver Expertise feature says:

"If the maneuver allows the hussar to make a charge attack, both him and his mount are considered to be charging."

Does this mean a Hussar mount is able to perform its own full charge attack when the Hussar initiates a charge maneuver, and not just move like a mount of another initiator?

It enables the mount to take actions instead of wasting them performing the movement portion of the charge on behalf of the initiator.

5. Related to the above, what is the benefit(s) of the Mounted Maneuver Expertise feature (if not the above or in addition to the above)?

Whenever a hussar is mounted and uses a maneuver with a movement component (such as making a charge attack, or taking an extra move action), the hussar can have his mount take the appropriate movement in his place.

Seems to be the key bit of information that everyone seems to miss. Thorough reading of the ability in question should clear up any concerns.

6. Also related to the above, in case a A) mounted initiator or B) Hussar performs a mounted charge using the Martial Charge feat, RAW it appears the mount of both A) and B) can perform its own complete charge attack. Is this correct and RAI?

Only if the mount of a paladin or cavalier can also perform a charge attack at the end of their PC's spirited charge as well. That's your balance point.

Without those answers, I fear any decent Hussar guide will end up as not much more than a bunch of "ask your GM" and "If...". Not to mention writing the guide would require too much work from someone as lazy as myself...

Hopefully, this is also the last remaining charge and mounted charge related questions not already dealt with.

Sadly, that's part and parcel of trying to write a guide. You have to suss out the most reasonable possible interpretation of the rules as written, often without the help and support of loving authors like me.

Honestly I think you'll find it much easier than you think. I am at least as lazy as the rest of you. I just happened to be at a point in my life where taking the time to write the guides seemed like a good idea.

[upho]

Paizo rulings trump DSP rulings for anything not specifically altered by DSP stuff. It's their sandbox, we just play in it.

So basically, mounts are now "different" from animal companions, but only in such a way that it makes things more restrictive for players. Yay. So yeah, based on that ruling, you're limited by what the Hussar allows for mounts or whatever else your DM agrees to.

Then you'll be glad to know that as written, the FAQ doesn't apply to the Hussar. As the PDT likes to remind people, all FAQs are specific, and this one is specifically about whether the mount progression granted by Cavalier levels stacks with the AC progression granted by other sources such as Druid or Ranger levels (as mentioned in the entry). The FAQ is silent on the matter of the progression of ACs or mounts granted by any combination of sources not including Cavalier levels, while it consistently ties any less class specific terms mentioned (like "mount") to the specific question and context of a Cavalier mount. IOW, as is, nothing stops say a Mad Dog barbarian 4/Divine Commander warpriest X from riding his over-the-top Warcat of Rull with full AC progression, and nothing stops good ol' Barney from having dipped a level into say druid or hunter for his Roch.

I thought it worth asking anyways, since the FAQ is from before you wrote the Hussar (June 2013) and the Hussar's mount feature uses largely the same language as that of the Cavalier, leading me to believe it may have been you actually intended the FAQ to apply also to Hussar mounts. And of course, the question has a huge impact on the number of viable character concepts and the amount of build flexibility the template allows for.

I got GM permission to make him.

What? Your GM must be insane! Or he didn't bother to read your backstory, which flat-out admits that cheese mount can solo a whole group of cavalry officers. I'd never allow something as broken as that in my games.

A bunch of great answers cut for brevity.

Thanks a ton!

Sadly, that's part and parcel of trying to write a guide. You have to suss out the most reasonable possible interpretation of the rules as written, often without the help and support of loving authors like me.

Oh, I believe I'll still get to write a quite a bit of rules interpretations/clarifications, as the mounted combat related rules you've written are probably the least murky existing on the subject. Not to mention the authors of all those other related rules indeed aren't even remotely close to as helpful, supportive and loving as you!

Honestly I think you'll find it much easier than you think. I am at least as lazy as the rest of you. I just happened to be at a point in my life where taking the time to write the guides seemed like a good idea.

Frankly, if I hadn't already spent (far too) many hours researching mounted combat and AC stuff long before you asked for birthday presents, I definitely would've hesitated to write a Hussar guide. When you start going down that rabbit hole, there seems to be no end to it, and the vast number of hazy, non-existent and/or seemingly contradictory rules, errata, FAQ entries and dev comments plaguing so many crucial bits and pieces of those two subjects is kinda intimidating.

If this guide turns out OK, I think I may even have deserved some R&R, like, say, writing a Privateer guide...

[Elricaltovilla]

To put a final point on the question of available mounts, I very rarely write anything with the intent of restricting player freedom unnecessarily. Most animal companion options are not especially cheesy, so I see little reason to restrict the hussar list beyond "is this a reasonable option to actually ride?" If the answer to that question is yes, then I'm all for it. Of course, sometimes that ends up out of my hands, although in this case I don't think it does.

[master4sword]

Looking through your guide, I can't help but notice that Cursed Fate seems to be rated based on an old version, as the new one is a damage bonus and a d20 penalty for a round, while the rating mentions losing actions.

The initiator must make a successful attack against the target, inflicting an additional 2d6 points of damage and the target must attempt a Will save (DC 12 + initiation modifier) or suffer a -4 to all d20 rolls until the disciple’s next turn.

Considering -4 to a single d20 roll one level earlier was blue, this ought to be at least green (granted, this one offers a save, but lasts a full round and has bonus damage).

[upho]

Finally, here's Live to Ride, Ride to Live - A guide to the Hussar class template!

There's still quite a bit of work remaining, but I believe it's at least helpful rather than confusing in its current state. Please let me know of any errors, missed options, any specific wishes you might have etc. And of course, comments/critique/praise/nitpicking/declarations of your undying love/whatever are most welcome!

[skaddix]

I appreciate the effort even if mounted combat doesn't do much for me.

[Elricaltovilla]

Finally, here's Live to Ride, Ride to Live - A guide to the Hussar class template!

There's still quite a bit of work remaining, but I believe it's at least helpful rather than confusing in its current state. Please let me know of any errors, missed options, any specific wishes you might have etc. And of course, comments/critique/praise/nitpicking/declarations of your undying love/whatever are most welcome!

Thank you very much Upho! I'll get this added to the first post later tonight.

EDIT: Just a note but you may want to take a look at some of your language choices. Kids play this game and we don't need another Devil scare like they had in the eighties.

[upho]

I appreciate the effort even if mounted combat doesn't do much for me.

Thanks! I think the Hussar may actually change your opinion. It certainly did for me.

Thank you very much Upho! I'll get this added to the first post later tonight.

Lovely!

EDIT: Just a note but you may want to take a look at some of your language choices. Kids play this game and we don't need another Devil scare like they had in the eighties.

Ah, yes... I forgot the "Parental Guidance - Explicit Animals"-tag. Sorry. Seems all mounts in my guide grew up in HBO's "Deadwood" or something...

No worries, I've told them to tone it down. EDIT: That goes for my description of the mount feature as well. All hairy mammoth body parts have been removed... /EDIT

[Andor13]

Finally, here's Live to Ride, Ride to Live - A guide to the Hussar class template!

There's still quite a bit of work remaining, but I believe it's at least helpful rather than confusing in its current state. Please let me know of any errors, missed options, any specific wishes you might have etc. And of course, comments/critique/praise/nitpicking/declarations of your undying love/whatever are most welcome!

Interesting! I hadn't considered using Buraq to get an attack veil. What are the rules for that anyway? Can any bipedal dinosaur shape handcannons, for example? That's slightly too delicious a mental image.

[upho]

Interesting! I hadn't considered using Buraq to get an attack veil. What are the rules for that anyway?

AC's manipulating items is yet another one of the many murky rules areas related to mounts, and one which in many regards has been left deliberately open for the GM to decide. Unfortunately I haven't yet had the time to add the related questions to the FAQ chapter in the guide.

Anyhow, the RAW seems much clearer when it comes to Buraq mounts and veils. And generally speaking, a Buraq can shape and use any veil for which it has the appropriate item slots. Some of the very few exceptions are:
1. Veils that create actual weapons meaning the Crimson Totem veil which creates a totem that "can be wielded as a greatclub", and the Loyal Paladin’s Spear Of Light which grants a weapon treated "as a shortspear sized appropriately for the wielder, except that it is a light weapon...". So aside from the fact that the Crimson Totem is normally only accessible to Daevics, and only a primate Buraq would have access to the Spear Of Light, also only a primate with Simple Weapon Proficiency (Greatclub/Shortspear) would probably be able to wield one of these weapons.
2. Hand Cannons which don't require hands per se, but do require an appendage able to meet the "a free hand" criteria, so the Buraq must at least have the ability grasp items. Note that unlike the above exceptions, the hand cannons veil doesn't grant a weapon or anything else treated or wielded as a manufactured weapon; it simply grants ranged attacks which benefit from most ranged combat feats applicable to manufactured ranged weapons.

Can any bipedal dinosaur shape handcannons, for example? That's slightly too delicious a mental image.

Yes, Bazookosaurus Slingum should be totally fine per RAW. Though it should be noted that the Hand Cannons veil is usually a sub-par attack option for most mounts, and only of interest if their rider's combat style is poorly suited for the mount to make melee attacks.