The Red Hand of Doom (Inactive)

Game Master The Dragon

Dot

•••• • •-•• •-•• --- •-•-•

Sorry to bother you again, but I have two questions for how to best fit into the campaign.

First off, when I pick a dragon-type I get a Compulsion, i.e. a thing I must do, or not do, unless I succeed at a scaling will save every time it comes up. It's fun for RP purposes, but my prefered dragon-type for our forrest fortress*, the green dragon (seeing you're avatar, I'm sure you approve) has an unfortunately worded one: I must make a will save to "accept orders or directions from any creature not obviously more powerful than myself". Party members aren't obviously more powerful than me, and "directions" is vague. If you rule that this complusion means my dragon wouldn't like to be bossed around, that's fine. But if it means my dragon would argue against any plan or suggestion that comes from any party member but himself, that'll just annoy the other players and I'd take another dragon type. (Brine, probably.)

And secondly, I have two options to assume human form: The alter self spell of the sorcerer that lasts 1 minute per level, or the Draconic Exemplar's "Humanoid Form" Draconic Gift that does the same thing, minus the stat bonus, but lasts indefinitly. Given that I only get one gift per 3 levels, I'd prefer to get the spell. But if you believe that having only a short-duration human form prevents me from properly contributing to the campaign (say, because we spend a lot of time RPing in small villages where everyone would panic upon seeing a dragon), I'll take the long duration Gift.

*Well, I assume Vraath Keep is near or in the Chitterwood. Maybe I fumbled my RL perception check, but I couldn't find the keep on that map in your first post.

Huh. Aren't green dragons lawful evil?

Anyway, I'll say it goes like this; if it's an off-handed suggestion, and something your dragon wants to go along with, but hasn't been presented with the sucking up you're due(and that's a lot of sucking up) you must make the will save or you have to spend time impressing on the person with the idea that it was really you came up with it, or that you'll go along with their suggestions so long as they remember who's really in charge here, etc.

You won't have to argue that the plan is bad, but you'll be spending a good deal of the time telling the party who's the boss.

If it's someone trying to give you orders (i.e. "I need healing!/Blind those hobgoblins!") then it's save or you have to do something else

Edit: Vraath Keep is supposed to sit on the boarder of chitterwood and the northern foothills of the Aspodell mountains. The line is a little indistinct, as a good bit of those foothills are covored by forest.

Well, Gundancer is as different from a sniper than you can be. I'm all close up and in your face.

I'm thinking of being a hobgoblin. Adopted as a child, he never grew up with the tribe. It may make for some tough times, but also some interesting RP. What do people think?

Also, can I take a revolver as my battered firearm?

You'd have to buy the revolver, sorry. Advanced firearms are still pretty rare, thus they can only be bought in cities.

Okay, I'll just need to start with a pistol and acquire one later. :)

Will I be able to retrain my gunslinger training if I do egt a revolver later?

Okay, I'll just need to start with a pistol and acquire one later. :)

Will I be able to retrain my gunslinger training if I do egt a revolver later?

Yeah, you can do that.

Would we gunslingers be able to (pre)Craft our advanced guns ourselves? Wondering as I'd like to stretch my starting budget as far as possible, of course.

Here's the applicable rules:

Crafting Firearms: You can craft any early firearm for a cost in raw materials equal to half the price of the firearm. At your GM’s discretion, you can craft advanced firearms for a cost in raw materials equal to half the price of the firearm. Crafting a firearm in this way takes 1 day of work for every 1,000 gp of the firearm’s price (minimum 1 day).

I figure if anyone could do it, it would be the gunslinger class itself.

Well, Gundancer is as different from a sniper than you can be. I'm all close up and in your face.

I'm thinking of being a hobgoblin. Adopted as a child, he never grew up with the tribe. It may make for some tough times, but also some interesting RP. What do people think?

Also, can I take a revolver as my battered firearm?

I've never liked to have someone play what's basically one of the main enemies in an adventure. It'll pose a lot of problems for those with it as a favored enemy for example. Also by lore aren't goblins/hobgoblins nearly irrevocably evil in Golarion? Game Master The Dragon is probably best at saying if it fits or not.

@Game Master The Dragon: Would it be possible to play a character that is partially Paladin? Some campaigns it's effortless to avoid falling, while in others it's nearly impossible. I don't want to be spoilered too much, but if it's really hard to play it, I'll just avoid it. Still haven't decided if I actually want it or not.

Sure if you can beat the DCs by taking 10 and have the gunsmith feat.

It follows the same rules I set out for magic item crafting: You can craft as much stuff you like, but you can only gain 2000gp in excess of the 10500gp you start off with.

Example: You're a pistolero//spellslinger and craft a revolver. It costs 4000gp, so you cut that in half, and get it for 2000gp. You want it masterwork, but you've already 'earned' 2000gp, so making it masterwork costs 300gp, even though you made it yourself.
When you go on to craft scrolls with your scribe scroll feat from the wizard side, that too costs full price instead of half.

Example 2: A gunslinger wants to start out with a Double-barreled Shotgun. It costs 7000gp to create, and she can cut the first 4000gp in half with by crafting it with the gunsmithing feat. Thus, she pays 5000gp for it.

Obviously, this only applies to pre-game crafting. You won't have oceans of time in game, but you can probably shoehorn in 10000gp worth of crafting or so.

Aye Aye Dragon. I will build the gnome bard/master summoner. Master of niceties, but has a whole load a pets you DON'T want to offend.

On second thought I have decided to drop out of this application thread because first I would like to play in a simpler non gestalt campaign before attempting a gestalt one.

Philo Pharynx wrote:

Well, Gundancer is as different from a sniper than you can be. I'm all close up and in your face.

I'm thinking of being a hobgoblin. Adopted as a child, he never grew up with the tribe. It may make for some tough times, but also some interesting RP. What do people think?

Also, can I take a revolver as my battered firearm?

I've never liked to have someone play what's basically one of the main enemies in an adventure. It'll pose a lot of problems for those with it as a favored enemy for example. Also by lore aren't goblins/hobgoblins nearly irrevocably evil in Golarion? Game Master The Dragon is probably best at saying if it fits or not.

@Game Master The Dragon: Would it be possible to play a character that is partially Paladin? Some campaigns it's effortless to avoid falling, while in others it's nearly impossible. I don't want to be spoilered too much, but if it's really hard to play it, I'll just avoid it. Still haven't decided if I actually want it or not.

I don't go in for that 'all goblonoids are irrevocably evil' thing. It applies to demons, because their bodies and minds are fashioned from the substance of the planes they come from, and that substance itself is chaotic evil, but all humanoids have capacity to be whatever the hell they want. Except for drow, which have that whole nuclear corruption thing going on.

Hobgoblins might have aggressive and militaristic natures, but that's not to say that they couldn't go and do something else. They thrive with someone telling them what to do, and if you let them blow off some steam on something more harmless like football from time to time, they can make really good paladins, if a little unimaginative. They do what they're told.

Anyway, I don't make paladins fall easily. It requires you to choose to do something evil for your paladin to fall. That said, if I feel you wind up being disruptive (e.g. the standard 'preachy paladin syndrome' where you want to regulate the other players actions all the time) I might boot you from the campaign, but I won't take away your characters powers for going along with the group, so long as you generally try to do the right thing to the best of your ability. Trying and failing is not grounds for falling.

A fall requires you to actively toss away your powers in exchange for something. Maybe you fall for temptation from dark powers, maybe you put a city to the torch to save your country, maybe you torture a prisoner of war so he'll tell you where the sacrificial prisoners are being kept, and so on and so forth.

Philo Pharynx wrote:

Well, Gundancer is as different from a sniper than you can be. I'm all close up and in your face.

I'm thinking of being a hobgoblin. Adopted as a child, he never grew up with the tribe. It may make for some tough times, but also some interesting RP. What do people think?

I've never liked to have someone play what's basically one of the main enemies in an adventure. It'll pose a lot of problems for those with it as a favored enemy for example. Also by lore aren't goblins/hobgoblins nearly irrevocably evil in Golarion? Game Master The Dragon is probably best at saying if it fits or not.

I actually love it when people play (or I get to play) what are traditionally considered evil races, but as heroes. I'm not sure if I see how that would affect someone's Favoured Enemy or anything. It is actually quite historical as well, as in almost every conflict in our world, there have been members of the 'enemy' force working for the other side, for one reason or another, such as ideological reasons, being outcast by your people of origin, or simply turning coat for personal gain.

I find Paizo's attitude in regards to irredeemable evil to be rather immature. It is something that you see over and over again in real world history, that 'they' are somehow irredeemably evil, and therefore capable of doing things that 'we' (the good guys) would never do, when in fact, everyone has the exact same potential for good and evil.

I recall an interesting anecdote from the Know Direction podcast, where the author Ryan Costello did some Monster writing for Paizo on contract. He was writing up the Hill Giant ecology, and told a story about how he came up with an idea that Hill Giants aren't exactly evil, but rather just massive consumers with little or no regard for their surroundings (so, admittedly a little sociopathic). Thus like locusts, they use up all the resources (probably including eating all the local peasantry), and are then forced to move on, which brings them into constant conflict with settlements. After he submitted it and saw the published version, all that was wiped out and the description was just a straight boring, "Giants are irredeemably evil, but for no particular reason."

As a result, I prefer a game setting where the "evil" races are poorly understood by the more established "civilized" races, and that the idea of them being irredeemably evil is merely an in-world prejudice. The only creature actually capable of being irredeemably evil is one that is supernaturally evil, and so only evil outsiders and creatures with the evil sub-type could legitimately be looked upon that way.

Edit: Ninja'd by the GM. I like the sentiment though; looks like we're on the same page in that regard.

Yes, a Green Taninim would've been Lawful Evil. He'd have been motivated to undertake the task for the benefit of claiming (part of) the keep as a nice lair, and would've been lawful enough to keep his word (and possesive enough to defend the keep and not flee).

But under your ruling... I'll go for Brine. LN, and Power-hungry as compulsion (must bully weaker creatures if it's to his advantage). Roughly the same motivations, but I won't be obligated to piss off party members on a regular basis. (Of course, they might not like his bullying of any local populace that annoys him, but that's some character interaction I'm willing to accept.)

@Bifi: There is a feat called extra draconic gift that requires that you have draconic gifts, and has no other prerequisites. You can then move on to picking up those with dearest your heart's content. I think there's one for defenses and weaponry as well.

Before you go for it, though... let me get home (soon) and double check the wording. :)

The adventurous one was amazing to play. My compulsion is to go down the hall! :)

All that said, I'm still looking for heroic characters, and this will be a game about heroes conquering evil, more than anything else. The heroes may or may not be a little grubby, depending on who get chosen and how they act, but on the whole the party is going to be saving the people of Isger from death and dismemberment at the hand of the Red Hand.

Philo Pharynx wrote:

I'm thinking of being a hobgoblin. Adopted as a child, he never grew up with the tribe. It may make for some tough times, but also some interesting RP. What do people think?

I've never liked to have someone play what's basically one of the main enemies in an adventure. It'll pose a lot of problems for those with it as a favored enemy for example. Also by lore aren't goblins/hobgoblins nearly irrevocably evil in Golarion? Game Master The Dragon is probably best at saying if it fits or not.

Favored enemy is not necessarily undying enmity. It can be flavored many ways. I had a human urban ranger whose main favored enemy was human. He lived in cities most of his life and he understood how humans think and react. He probably used the skill bonuses as much as the damage.

If it is hate in your case, then it can make some good roleplaying. I could see this being a good point of party friction. Though I suggest we make sure to touch base in OOC to keep things in control.

Hobgoblins might have aggressive and militaristic natures, but that's not to say that they couldn't go and do something else. They thrive with someone telling them what to do, and if you let them blow off some steam on something more harmless like football from time to time, they can make really good paladins, if a little unimaginative. They do what they're told.

Being raised in a monastery, Gundancer turns his regimented nature into discipline. He uses that to focus his aggression against enemies. He takes a little more initiative then most, but he's LN/LG*, and so would work well with a team. *either lawful neutral with good tendencies or lawful good with neutral tendencies.

I find Paizo's attitude in regards to irredeemable evil to be rather immature. It is something that you see over and over again in real world history, that 'they' are somehow irredeemably evil, and therefore capable of doing things that 'we' (the good guys) would never do, when in fact, everyone has the exact same potential for good and evil.

Perhaps the best point against inherent evil that I've seen.

All that said, I'm still looking for heroic characters, and this will be a game about heroes conquering evil, more than anything else. The heroes may or may not be a little grubby, depending on who get chosen and how they act, but on the whole the party is going to be saving the people of Isger from death and dismemberment at the hand of the Red Hand.

His heroism is not based as much on good as on order. We have a society, and it must be protected. It's wrong to simply go out to conquer other people.

All that said, I'm still looking for heroic characters, and this will be a game about heroes conquering evil, more than anything else. The heroes may or may not be a little grubby, depending on who get chosen and how they act, but on the whole the party is going to be saving the people of Isger from death and dismemberment at the hand of the Red Hand.

I'll make a Paladin then. Certainly won't be too preaching.

@Philo: I won't pick a hated favored enemy so your hobgoblin will be fine with me.

Rigor Rictus wrote:

I find Paizo's attitude in regards to irredeemable evil to be rather immature. It is something that you see over and over again in real world history, that 'they' are somehow irredeemably evil, and therefore capable of doing things that 'we' (the good guys) would never do, when in fact, everyone has the exact same potential for good and evil.

Perhaps the best point against inherent evil that I've seen.

More people know about the Stanford Prison Experiment, and how it can bring out surprisingly cruel behaviour, though there have been questions in recent years as to whether it was really as telling as it seemed at the beginning, as there have been theories/allegations that the Prof running the experiment encouraged the behaviour, and tried to amplify it (which is far from the modern double-blind kind of mentality that goes into study design).

The other one I referenced, The Milgram Experiment, is actually a much more interesting one. It was actually set up after WWII was over, and the news about the concentration camps became public knowledge. The initial premise was actually to study if people of German decent were inherently more evil than other ethnic groups (a rather silly concept by modern sensibilities, but at the time they thought it was a genuine possibility). If you've never heard of the experiment, it is fascinating, particularly since you could never do such an experiment these days (for ethical reasons - many of the participants of this study were traumatized by the realization of what they had been induced to do). Basically what they found was that as long as there was a guy in a white coat with a clip board that said he was in charge, and that he was responsible, people would do whatever they were told, even if it might be killing someone. They were just ordinary Americans, yet they were in affect, "Just following orders." Brilliant study.

Still working on my character, just wanted to let you know I'm still interested and I will hopefully have it done by tomorrow.

@Hotaru: Thanks, but I have the book. And I knew about the Extra-feats. It's just I have a rather limited selection of those as well. Hence why I'd prefer to use a spell. And since my char will be a bit arrogant with respect to humanoids (don't worry, he doesn't approve of rampant death and dismemberment of them) I'll give him the spell. If, in the course of this adventure he learns to value humanoids a bit more, he may pick up the Gift.

I have this character that submited to a counciel of thieves, and before heavily modify its stats and class, I want to ask your opinion about this class.

If you don't totally like it, I'll take cleric, as it fits perfectly, so no problem. :)

For the other half I'm thinking standard sorcerer with arcane bloodline.

Guess that being sended to a far away mission to finally get rid of him fits nicely with his tragic destiny :D

still working on his full background but.

personality: cheerful, confident, lazy yet surprisingly disciplined and hard working on some things. He follows orders as long as they don't conflict with his ideals/views (he has disobeyed an order or 3), Has a strong sense of right and wrong, yet isn't above fighting, or even playing, a little dirty to get to the good ending. (very much, if I must become a monster to protect others/my Ideals, then I will type) trains daily, but doesn't follow any sort of "regiment", mostly just does what he feels like that day. While he follows orders most of the time, he is known for giving smart ass comments about the job/work.

I have this character that submited to a counciel of thieves, and before heavily modify its stats and class, I want to ask your opinion about this class.

If you don't totally like it, I'll take cleric, as it fits perfectly, so no problem. :)

For the other half I'm thinking standard sorcerer with arcane bloodline.

** spoiler omitted **...

Hmm. You're written as if you're supposed to work inside Cheliax. I suppose that'll be changed to fit, so you end up working for Andoran instead. I think there are several things about that character that could be really interesting to see work out, you're welcome to apply with him.

That said, I'm currently seeing a lot of pitches for borderline monstrous and / or morally ambigous or outright evil guys. While there will be room for that on the team, I didn't originally envision for it to be the norm.

That's not to say you shouldn't apply with whatever you want to. You should. But if someone has a giant hunting dwarf down from Varisia, or an ex-slave halfling from cheliax with a rogue/sorcerer build they want to try, and they're not posting it because this looks like a grim-dark anti-hero game, well, I'd love for you to apply with those anyway.

Allow me to un-grim-dark the submissions a bit. :P Submitting a Stalker/Fighter who is essentially a ronin type character.

I wanted to post it yesterday but I had some trouble finding something to mesh with Stalker. In the end I decided to just bolster up my attacks. I'm still on the fence on whether I should have gone with Warpriest instead, but it just felt like there wasn't enough synergy.

Ah well. At any rate, I'm happy with him ,and would love to hear feedback!

Well, I'm certainly not playing a dark hero :).

Would you allow me to use nearly all my gold on a Ring of Revelation? Sadly I can't craft it, well unless you allow me to craft it as a wondrous item in a different slot at +50% cost, which would still reach my maximum savings. I've also seen some differing opinions on whether a UMD check would allow an oracle with a different mystery to use it. It would allow me to change my stats around a bit, though it's certainly not essential to my build.

War is hell. Gundancer can work with heroes or anti-heroes. I'll post him tonight.

Allow me to un-grim-dark the submissions a bit. :P Submitting a Stalker/Fighter who is essentially a ronin type character.

I wanted to post it yesterday but I had some trouble finding something to mesh with Stalker. In the end I decided to just bolster up my attacks. I'm still on the fence on whether I should have gone with Warpriest instead, but it just felt like there wasn't enough synergy.

Ah well. At any rate, I'm happy with him ,and would love to hear feedback!

You could also do cleric, if you want. Or even gunslinger. Warpriest is a bit iffy, in that it eats up swift actions, which the stalker usually need a lot of, but you could easily build a stalker that avoids boosts and swift action arts.

I have a half-elven stalker//warpriest archer build floating around somewhere that I'm pretty fond of, myself.

@oyzar, you can buy whatever you want with the starting money. No mucking about with item slots, please.

As for UMD, I'm of the mind that it lets you count as if you're an Xth level oracle, not an oracle of a particular mystery, so UMD wouldn't do you any good if you don't have the mystery in question.

Ok, I'm still not applying... but if i were going to pitch a gunslinger [musket master]/alchemist [grenadier] would a tiefling be an easily accepted race or is it one that a fair number of people would harbor prejudice against?

Ok, I'm still not applying... but if i were going to pitch a gunslinger [musket master]/alchemist [grenadier] would a tiefling be an easily accepted race or is it one that a fair number of people would harbor prejudice against?

Mhm. ok kappa ;)

Quick questions: Do you allow the Stamina system from Unchained, and the Master of Many Styles archetype on the Unchained Monk?

Ok, I'm still not applying... but if i were going to pitch a gunslinger [musket master]/alchemist [grenadier] would a tiefling be an easily accepted race or is it one that a fair number of people would harbor prejudice against?

Tieflings are percieved as synonymous with Cheliax to the people of Isger, so it depends on the people in question. Varying between indifferent and mildly unfriendly, I'd say. Sometimes you get people who want to suck up to you for no apparent reason.

In Andoran, you're a free person, as much citizen as everyone else... In theory. In practice, people dislike you, and regard you with instinctive mistrust, "just in case."

Even if tieflings aren't always thugs and criminals, most of them are, so you'd better keep an eye on them and your sword within reach if they're around, is the mentality.

Stamina is allowed by taking the combat stamina feat.
No on the Master of Many Styles Unchained.

You could also do cleric, if you want. Or even gunslinger. Warpriest is a bit iffy, in that it eats up swift actions, which the stalker usually need a lot of, but you could easily build a stalker that avoids boosts and swift action arts.

Good point. Hrm. Are we allowed to Multiclass on one side of the Gestalt, or will that muck things up too much?

Multiclass away, if you want.

I think Inquisitor is an obvious choice for one side of my Sniper, as has been suggested a few times in this thread. However, I get frustrated a bit with the Inquisitor class, not because it's not good, but because of how frustratingly close it is to being great. It's this wonderfully versatile class, but one that ends up spread too thin to be any good at any of the things it just might excel at (or to be good in a range role, which at first glance it always looks ideal for). It is a class that is just desperate for the right couple of Archetypes to come along and give it the focus it needs (particularly for range builds). Unfortunately, those archetypes have just never arrived. I'm looking around to see if I can find any 3pp range Archetypes for it; if anybody knows one, let me know.

Trask was found as a toddler wandering the mountains. There were no goblin lands nearby, so they figured is was a family travelling who ran into trouble. The only one who knew the child's language was the head of the Monastery of Fire and Steel. Master Stephen had seen war. Firearms had changed the way people fought. The old ways had an ancient tradition, but understanding the new ways meant understanding guns and machines. Incorporating them into their arts. Master Stephen left to find a new way and teach it. They were a small group, but committed to the new way.

Master Stephen was not prepared to become a father, let alone to a monstrous child. But he could not abandon the child. So he taught young Trask as best he could, raised him with the oldways and new. Taught him to shoot as soon as he could hold the gun straight. The child took to discipline. He grew strong and skilled. But something was missing. He knew the ways of flesh and steel, but he did not know the world. He asked for permission to wander the planet, to understand what was out there and find his place.

Master Stephen told him that his kind was not welcome among men. He told of the armies of hobgoblins and their implacable nature. He told him of the wariness of human settlements. He told Trask of the evil in the world. Trask nodded and asked again to go forth. master Stephen asked why. "Because of the evil in the world."

Speaking of things recently nerfed into the ground: Can I be a Con-based Scarred Witch-Doctor? I have some fun ideas.

I'm not really feeling my shot-gun toting beguiler any more, the flood of gunslayers might have spoilt the broth.

GM Dragon: Would you be OK with the use of the Guided magic weapon property?

Don't count me as a gunslinger... I really probably might not apply at all, and even if I do there's a fair chance I'd apply as something else (I have an idea for a paladin/swashbuckler, and another for a slayer/magus... and another for a Varisian cartomancer/bladed scarf dancer...)

Speaking of things recently nerfed into the ground: Can I be a Con-based Scarred Witch-Doctor? I have some fun ideas.

I'm not really feeling my shot-gun toting beguiler any more, the flood of gunslayers might have spoilt the broth.

I'll denote that while we've seen pistol-slingers, there's yet to be a sheet with a longarm posted. Regardless, Con-based SWD is a go. :)

@Rigor Rictus: Guided is allowed.

@nate: You've a lot of concepts for this I see.

Got my crunch done, and am working on the fluff. I went with an Infiltrator Investigator/Spy Unchained Rogue. Kristo Markeen is a human who works for the Aldoran government as a problem solver. He is the guy they call upon to learn what he can and fix things.

(Or maybe a cavalier/bard about to switch over to golden legionnaire or steel falcon/bard...)

GM Dragon:. Another rules question for you; I'm looking at Myrmidarch (of all things) as a possibility for one side of my Sniper. Myrmidarch actually works perfectly with guns, as all the abilities apply to a non-specified ranged weapon. The Archetype receives Weapon Training at level 6 (identical to the Fighter ability of the same name). Gun Training is the direct equivalent of Weapon Training (received at the same levels) received by the Gunslinger (though it is not exclusive to the Gunslinger - as the Fighter can get the same ability through the Trench Fighter archetype). Wondering if when I would get Weapon Training at level 6, I could swap it for Gun Training instead.

obviously, this would not function with the Guided weapon, since that quality replaces your damage bonus, so this would be an alternative, not in addition to.

I have an idea for this campaign that I intend to submit but I am way too tired right now...
The basics (if I dont butcher this too badly) is that Smaug is a wandering prophet spreading the word about the impending doom that is to come at the hands of the dragons, and since no one is actively trying to prevent it or defend others for when it inevitably happens, well then he must be the one to do so.

Then the thought was: How cool would it be if he was actually right?

Smaug is a Human Summoner on the one side with a really high con score (he is tough as old boots!) and the Umbral Unmasking drawback (his shadow is his dragon that he talks to while it is not out).
Nico Bolas is his eidolon, built up to look as much like a Chromatic Red dragon as possible, and hides within Smaugs shadow when he is not around.
He is obviously not built to your standards yet, but I can get his idea across

Ill get more down, and make it sound significantly better once I have had a bit more sleep!
quick question. Can Nico Bolas (the red dragon) take the Firesight feat? Pretty please?

GM Dragon:. Another rules question for you; I'm looking at Myrmidarch (of all things) as a possibility for one side of my Sniper. Myrmidarch actually works perfectly with guns, as all the abilities apply to a non-specified ranged weapon. The Archetype receives Weapon Training at level 6 (identical to the Fighter ability of the same name). Gun Training is the direct equivalent of Weapon Training (received at the same levels) received by the Gunslinger (though it is not exclusive to the Gunslinger - as the Fighter can get the same ability through the Trench Fighter archetype). Wondering if when I would get Weapon Training at level 6, I could swap it for Gun Training instead.

obviously, this would not function with the Guided weapon, since that quality replaces your damage bonus, so this would be an alternative, not in addition to.

I'd prefer you didn't use guided ranged weapons.

However, I'll allow you to make the swap.

A general homebrew rule: The base Weapon Training, Gun Training and Swashbuckler weapon training abilities may be exchanged for one another, advanced at the speed you would normally get it. If you trade out the firs step, you can't go back to the normal version at later steps. So if your Myrmidarch 'slinger wanted Gun Training, he couldn't pick up Weapon Training at level 12, for example.

Special: The Sohei monk isn't allowed to make this trade, however.

@Smaug, yes, I'll allow the eidolon to do that. As an aside, having him called Smaug causes a lot of mental dissonance in my head, breaks the fourth wall, so to speak. Could you grab another name for him?

Sounds fair, and will probably work better for what I have in mind.

In regards to Guided, I see that PFSRD recently added a note that the feature was intended for melee weapons (though RAW sticklers will note there is nothing in the write up to state it might not be applied;of course given that it is a 3.5 feature, allowing it at all remains optional...). The funny thing about that as that while I have seen numerous GM's allow the feature in Pathfinder games, I've never actually seen it applied to anything other than a range weapon.

Sounds fair, and will probably work better for what I have in mind.

In regards to Guided, I see that PFSRD recently added a note that the feature was intended for melee weapons (though RAW sticklers will note there is nothing in the write up to state it might not be applied). The funny thing about that as that while I have seen numerous GM's allow the feature in Pathfinder games, I've never actually seen it applied to anything other than a range weapon.

Huh. I've mainly seen guided on monks with Amulets of Mighty Fists myself. That's kind of what I thought it was for. I haven't played with that many different people though, so that's probably why I haven't encountered using guided for ranged weapons yet.

Anyway, It's from back when paizo was 3pp for 3.5e, and probably had worse editors - there really should've been language in there describing what happens when you aren't allowed to add your strength bonus to damage with the weapon in the first place.

Remember the editing quality of the Dragon Magazines?