Celestial Charger

[cbaidchris]

In the PrC Beloved of Valarian, you gain the ability to summon a Celestial Charger. When I looked that up, I was confused as to what you actually have? Will the summoned creature have those 7 levels of cleric? or how does that work and if you could reference your answer so I can show my DM. Thanks.

[herrhauptmann]

Your unicorn will suddenly have 7 levels of cleric.
A 'celestial charger' is in the unicorn entry of the MM, http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/unicorn.htm#celestialCharger

If you're leveling through beloved, and your unicorn suddenly goes from basic unicorn, to unicorn with class levels, it will be sort of weird. I'd advise roleplaying that out a bit, somehow.

[cbaidchris]

I know that's where the entry is but my DM is saying that the 8 levels of celestial unicorn is what a celestial charger is and that the cleric levels are just an example of what it could be

[Fax Celestis]

I know that's where the entry is but my DM is saying that the 8 levels of celestial unicorn is what a celestial charger is and that the cleric levels are just an example of what it could be

Nope. A celestial charger is an advanced unicorn with eight levels of cleric, as defined by the MM. Note how the entry doesn't say "some celestial chargers are paladins or favored souls or lightning warriors; this is an example of the most typical celestial charger".

[cbaidchris]

is there any place of reference I can point him other than the creatures entry because that isn't convincing him

[Fax Celestis]

This thread.

[cbaidchris]

unfortunately unless I can find any other published evidence or precedence on the matter I don't think it'll fly

[Urpriest]

is there any place of reference I can point him other than the creatures entry because that isn't convincing him

You could point him to other monsters defined in similar ways. For example, suppose the ability said you can summon a Troll Hunter. He wouldn't just give you a normal Troll, and there isn't a template to work off of.

In general, a DM who knows his stuff should have noticed during the 3.0-3.5 transition that WotC started putting up monsters with class levels (and occasionally other stuff, like templates) with unique names, and treating them like their own monsters. He would have seen this tendency occasionally in Dungeon adventures as well. So he should be totally ok with this. Not being suggests that he doesn't really have the breadth of experience with the literature that you need to DM 3.5 well.

[eggynack]

unfortunately unless I can find any other published evidence or precedence on the matter I don't think it'll fly
There really doesn't need to be any. Things do what they do. If he wants precedence, give him the fact that the rules say what the rules are. If the rules said a different thing, then that would happen. If he has support for his argument, then you need support for yours, but if his argument is, "The books are wrong," there's not much we can do to help.

[Zombulian]

>needs published evidence other than the only legal published evidence to be interpreted in 3.5.
What.

[GlorinSteampike]

Just flip to random open pages of the MM to find something with class levels. There's plenty of stuff like vampires, and Yuan-ti and fey creatures and Rakshasa that have sorcerer levels(not just sorcerer casting). In fact I believe the Rakshasa might be a good example because they have 3 or 4 types, and each has different class levels.

Or I could just be totally wrong because I'm AFB but it doesn't say "add the celestial template to a unicorn" it says "Celestial Charger" Right?

[cbaidchris]

Just flip to random open pages of the MM to find something with class levels. There's plenty of stuff like vampires, and Yuan-ti and fey creatures and Rakshasa that have sorcerer levels(not just sorcerer casting). In fact I believe the Rakshasa might be a good example because they have 3 or 4 types, and each has different class levels.

Or I could just be totally wrong because I'm AFB but it doesn't say "add the celestial template to a unicorn" it says "Celestial Charger" Right?

now this could be something I could convince him with.

[Karnith]

Out of curiosity, have you pointed out to your DM this line in the Call Celestial Charger class feature?

At 6th level, a beloved of Valarin can call a celestial unicorn - also known as a celestial charger - to her side. See the Unicorn entry in the Monster Manual for the celestial charger's statistics. If the beloved of Valarin already has a unicorn companion, Valarin transforms it into a celestial charger instead of sending his beloved a new companion.(Emphasis mine)

The bolded line doesn't make sense unless you're intended to use the statistics of the celestial charger in the Monster Manual. If it was a regular celestial unicorn, the description wouldn't reference the celestial charger at all.

[cbaidchris]

again, I've shown him that but his argument is that the celestial charger is just essentially an 8 HD unicorn with the celestial template. he sees the cleric class levels as just an example of what one could take. I think that's obviously flawed but not being the DM the call isn't mine

[KillianHawkeye]

Just suck it up and do what your DM wants. It's his game, his decision. Double the Hit Dice and the celestial template is still a big improvement over the standard unicorn.

[eggynack]

again, I've shown him that but his argument is that the celestial charger is just essentially an 8 HD unicorn with the celestial template. he sees the cleric class levels as just an example of what one could take. I think that's obviously flawed but not being the DM the call isn't mine
Ah, so that's what it is. Point out that the text of celestial charger says, "The celestial charger described here is an 8 HD celestial unicorn with seven levels of cleric." A celestial unicorn is already a thing, and it's called a celestial unicorn. A celestial charger is a celestial unicorn with 7 cleric levels. It has a separate name and everything. For further proof of that formatting, just check out all of the summon monster listings for celestial creatures that just say celestial followed by the creature name.

[Devronq]

Ah, so that's what it is. Point out that the text of celestial charger says, "The celestial charger described here is an 8 HD celestial unicorn with seven levels of cleric." A celestial unicorn is already a thing, and it's called a celestial unicorn. A celestial charger is a celestial unicorn with 7 cleric levels. It has a separate name and everything. For further proof of that formatting, just check out all of the summon monster listings for celestial creatures that just say celestial followed by the creature name.

Actually i went and read it and i actually feel this text is on the DM's side.

"The celestial charger described here..."

This could easily be interpreted as a celestial charger can be multiple things but this one is described as such. Its like saying you summon a wizard not you summon a lv.10 human transmuter.
The problem with thinking like this is that what is a celestial charger then you could never have a spell that says summon a wizard so you would have to use the only example of celestial charger than exists.

There is absolutely zero evidence that a celestial charger is by default a celestial unicorn with 8HD. I do however see evidence that a celestial charger isn't always as the mm stats indicate.

Since this ability summons one you have no choice but to use the example regardless of the less than perfect wording.

Also serious its not going to ruin the game the things good but not overpowered or optimized i mean seriously look at his feats 4 of them are the worst possible feats to have.

Just my thoughts if i was your DM id allow it even in a low OP campaign.

[eggynack]

Actually i went and read it and i actually feel this text is on the DM's side.

"The celestial charger described here..."

This could easily be interpreted as a celestial charger can be multiple things but this one is described as such. Its like saying you summon a wizard not you summon a lv.10 human transmuter.
The problem with thinking like this is that what is a celestial charger then you could never have a spell that says summon a wizard so you would have to use the only example of celestial charger than exists.

There is absolutely zero evidence that a celestial charger is by default a celestial unicorn with 8HD. I do however see evidence that a celestial charger isn't always as the mm stats indicate.

Since this ability summons one you have no choice but to use the example regardless of the less than perfect wording.

Also serious its not going to ruin the game the things good but not overpowered or optimized i mean seriously look at his feats 4 of them are the worst possible feats to have.

Just my thoughts if i was your DM id allow it even in a low OP campaign.
I've been thinking on it, and it doesn't seem like the celestial charger fits the formatting of the type of thing you're claiming. The celestial charger is in an actual stat block, with the formal stylings and everything, while "sample member of the template" creatures tend to be outside of that formatting. For example, right on the same page as the celestial charger is a "sample vampire" with five levels of fighter. For another example of that sort of thing, there is another sample creature listed for greenbound creatures from LEoF. They have a big sample creature heading and everything.

My claim here, such as it is, is that when a creature is a sample, or an example of a template, it is explicitly listed as such. When a creature is listed as just a regular creature, indivisible and unchangeable, it's listed as an unadorned stat block, like the celestial charger is.