Ursinals as summoner monsters

[Silva Stormrage]

I keep on seeing references that Ursinals (Book of Exalted Deeds PG 174) can be summoned by summon monster.

http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1134896

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=255219

Yet I can't find why this is the case in BoED. Are those guides wrong or did I miss an obscure note in the book?

Any help on clearing this up would be great

[Pluto!]

Check Page 190.

It's really buried in there. :smallsmile:

[Silva Stormrage]

Wow okay I can easily see how I missed that. Thank you.

[Thurbane]

You know I misread that as Urinals as Monster Summoners.

Some kind of nasty magical trap to catch people unawares in the privy :smalltongue:

[ElectricMadman]

I read that as " urinals "

Quickly , someone make an animated object version of urinals!

[nedz]

I read that as " urinals "

Me too


Quickly , someone make an animated object version of urinals!

Better as a Mimic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/mimic.htm) :smallbiggrin:

I mean the Adhesive and Crush abilities don't bear thinking about.

[Blackjackg]

Generally speaking, any Extraplanar Magical Beast or Outsider should be fair game for Summon Monster, provided the caster hits the alignment requirements and the monster's CR is no greater than the one listed below:

Summon Monster I: Up to CR 1/2
Summon Monster II: Up to CR 1
Summon Monster III: Up to CR 3
Summon Monster IV: Up to CR 4
Summon Monster V: Up to CR 5
Summon Monster VI: Up to CR 7
Summon Monster VII: Up to CR 8
Summon Monster VIII: Up to CR 9
Summon Monster IX: Up to CR 11

[Cog]

Generally speaking, any Extraplanar Magical Beast or Outsider should be fair game for Summon Monster...
I strongly disagree. Summoning is already one of the major ways that even unoptimized spellcasting is still significantly more flexible than other character archetypes; jamming a whole bunch of additional toolboxes into that existing toolbox only makes the issue worse.

Allowing the customizing of lists is a step in that direction, but a much smaller one, and I'd have less trouble with that. Just adding chunks of the Monster Manuals wholesale is different.

[Blackjackg]

I strongly disagree. Summoning is already one of the major ways that even unoptimized spellcasting is still significantly more flexible than other character archetypes; jamming a whole bunch of additional toolboxes into that existing toolbox only makes the issue worse.

Allowing the customizing of lists is a step in that direction, but a much smaller one, and I'd have less trouble with that. Just adding chunks of the Monster Manuals wholesale is different.

I actually agree with you on this point. But under RAW the options are largely arbitrary (Why a fiendish raven and a celestial badger? Why not the other way around?) and on top of that many books (like Book of Exalted Deeds) just pile on more options without taking any away. Just throwing open the doors and letting everything count is very nearly a lateral move.

My preference is a smaller list of say 3-5 monsters per spell level, chosen by the player. Hence my figuring out the CR levels for each spell level... I actually have a whole thread on this subject way way back in the forum archives.

But one thing that would be patently ridiculous in almost any variant of the rules is a DM vetoing a perfectly usable Outsider like an Ursinal just because it doesn't appear on any list she's aware of... what's so special about Barbed Devils and Celestial Rocs that they can be summoned but an Outsider of equivalent power can't be?