PDA

View Full Version : [3.5]Dvati: Playing Twins



CockroachTeaParty
2010-02-01, 05:06 PM
I just recently learned of this race's existence. For those of you wondering, the Dvati are a LA+1 race from the Dragon Compendium that lets you play as a pair of identical twins.

I'm... having trouble wrapping my mind around this. They share spells, initiative, a single soul... Only one of them can cast a spell at a time, they get extra bonuses for flanking enemies, and they can telepathically communicate between each other over any distance (and even across planar boundaries).

Have other people used Dvati in their games? Does anyone have experience playing a pair? They strike me as interesting, but risky: each twin has roughly half the hp of a normal character, and if one of them dies, the surviving twin slowly dies and goes insane as well.

What would be a good build for them? A pair of flank-happy rogues? A bardic duo (their favored class)? The restrictions upon their casting ability seem to make them poor dedicated casters, but I could be wrong.

What sort of tricks could one play with a pair of Dvati? I'm having trouble thinking of the possibilities, so alien is the concept to me. What are people's thoughts on them, or the concept of playing a pair of identical twins in general?

More thoughts:

This race must wreak havoc on the Wealth by Level guidelines, especially for a more martially inclined character. You'd either have to split the gold and treasure you receive between your twins, or have the DM increase the treasure available...

Starbuck_II
2010-02-01, 05:16 PM
I just recently learned of this race's existence. For those of you wondering, the Dvati are a LA+1 race from the Dragon Compendium that lets you play as a pair of identical twins.

I'm... having trouble wrapping my mind around this. They share spells, initiative, a single soul... Only one of them can cast a spell at a time, they get extra bonuses for flanking enemies, and they can telepathically communicate between each other over any distance (and even across planar boundaries).

Have other people used Dvati in their games? Does anyone have experience playing a pair? They strike me as interesting, but risky: each twin has roughly half the hp of a normal character, and if one of them dies, the surviving twin slowly dies and goes insane as well.

What would be a good build for them? A pair of flank-happy rogues? A bardic duo (their favored class)? The restrictions upon their casting ability seem to make them poor dedicated casters, but I could be wrong.

What sort of tricks could one play with a pair of Dvati? I'm having trouble thinking of the possibilities, so alien is the concept to me. What are people's thoughts on them, or the concept of playing a pair of identical twins in general?

More thoughts:

This race must wreak havoc on the Wealth by Level guidelines, especially for a more martially inclined character. You'd either have to split the gold and treasure you receive between your twins, or have the DM increase the treasure available...

Duskblade + Arcane Strike?

You can only cast 1/rd, but nothing about nothing about expending a spell slot for Arcane strike.

d13
2010-02-01, 05:34 PM
You could cause some damage with spells with Duration: Concentration, having one twin hold concentration on a current spell, and keep the other one casting.

Claymore Manga spoiler:
Sort of Alicia and Beth. One concentrates in keeping the other's mind sane, while the first one awakens on purpose.

arguskos
2010-02-01, 05:36 PM
Yes, I'm the big Dvati dude around these parts and I'm here to tell you that, as written, they are NIGH USELESS mechanically. They share actions, so between them, a Dvati character gets 1 full-round worth of actions each turn. This means that they can either both move or 1 moves and 1 uses a standard (unless it's a spell, meaning the other stands there like a lump and doesn't do squat).

I highly recommend you petition your DM to let you rewrite their action rules to not complete shaft you. I mean, you get half+con hp on each one, if either dies you're basically screwed, you get half WBL, AND you can't take more than 1 round of actions? For LA +1??? That's practically a CRIME.

My suggestion to you is this: keep everything, but change it so that dvati can take up to 2 moves and 1 standard, or 2 standard actions a round. Only 1 may be a spell, but moving during spell casting does not auto-lose the spell. This makes all your other disadvantages almost worth it.

As written, I recommend you play a Bard, just because then you can just take a standard action each round and do nothing but support. Of course, you can't maintain Bardic Music while you cast spells, since ANY action (even a free one), breaks spellcasting. :smallsigh: I want to slaughter whoever wrote the race, since it's awesome thematically.

With the change I suggested above, well, basically everything opens up. Don't play a Meleer though, your HP is pathetically light.

EDIT: d13, that doesn't work. ANY action breaks the new spell. :smallsigh:

Reaper_Monkey
2010-02-01, 05:37 PM
I cant really comment on the fun of playing them as written, as I took one look at the rules and threw em out the window. Seriously, their fluff is awesome and alluring for RP heavy fun... but the crunch make them unplayable on almost every front, they're either painfully crippled, or dangerously overpowered.

If I were you, I'd ask your DM to chuck the rules and replace them with something more playable. The simplest edit is a racial feature that allows communication with their birth twin and the inability to live when you twin dies. Then just make it as you would any other race and have any player using them play two characters instead of one.

Otherwise there are many issues which have to be dealt with, namely:
Loot calculation and distribution: Do you count as one character or two? Does your party think of them as one person or two?
XP calculations: Same as above but mostly becomes an issue when the twins are separated significantly.
Shared debuff effects: My standard rules this is overly complex and convoluted, it gets no easier when doing it yourself. Also, what happens if one twin is asleep and the other isn't? What happens if one twin never sleeps??
Saves and Skill checks: Do both get a save if things are targeting both of them? What if its only targeting one of them? Do both get a chance at failure of a use once skill check or just the first one to attempt it?

There are many many more, but most are also RP based or logic based, ie, muscle memory vs knowledge and the like, but those apply regardless of the backing mechanics.

Whatever you do, I hope you get something you're happy with playing with, they're a very cool race (its just a pitty they suck a fair amount when it comes to actually trying to play them).

d13
2010-02-01, 05:42 PM
EDIT: d13, that doesn't work. ANY action breaks the new spell. :smallsigh:

Well... Crap.

Never seen a Dvati before (don't have the Compendium), but a pair of Dvati summoners looked like would be worth the LA :smallannoyed:

Oslecamo
2010-02-01, 06:08 PM
Yes, I'm the big Dvati dude around these parts and I'm here to tell you that, as written, they are NIGH USELESS mechanically. They share actions, so between them, a Dvati character gets 1 full-round worth of actions each turn. This means that they can either both move or 1 moves and 1 uses a standard (unless it's a spell, meaning the other stands there like a lump and doesn't do squat).

I highly recommend you petition your DM to let you rewrite their action rules to not complete shaft you. I mean, you get half+con hp on each one, if either dies you're basically screwed, you get half WBL, AND you can't take more than 1 round of actions? For LA +1??? That's practically a CRIME.


Actualy, from what I understood, both dvatis get full round actions each turn, but still only one spell per turn.

What you share is expendable resources.

So it's actualy pretty good for melee builds, allowing you for two full attacks. Focus on agile characters to make up for the lack of Con.

EDIT:Notice how one twin can use the aid action to help the other twin. That's two standard actions right there!

Wabbajack
2010-02-01, 06:08 PM
Keep in mind that the whole "share actions" is errata, and they only need to cast a spell together according to the Compendium.

One way would be to just not tell the DM about the errata...

Reaper_Monkey
2010-02-01, 06:23 PM
Keep in mind that the whole "share actions" is errata

Keep in mind that the "errata" was not an official errata, and was made on a forum by a different designer who just happened to make something else in the same Dragon edition. It is by no means needed to be used, and is by no means an improvement or fairer or in any way a sensible change to be made. If you use this so called "errata" I will get a large heavy axe, name it 'errata', and come to you house to teach you a new houserule where erratas are by no means required to be used in a game...

arguskos
2010-02-01, 06:27 PM
Actualy, from what I understood, both dvatis get full round actions each turn, but still only one spell per turn.

What you share is expendable resources.

So it's actualy pretty good for melee builds, allowing you for two full attacks. Focus on agile characters to make up for the lack of Con.

EDIT:Notice how one twin can use the aid action to help the other twin. That's two standard actions right there!
It was clarified by a post from the designer on the Paizo forums, since the text is UTTERLY unclear. :smallsigh: It's not errata, since Dragon doesn't issue errata, but it IS the intended design, and it makes them unusable.

Here's (http://paizo.com/dragon/messageboards/compendium/twoCharactersForOnePlayerIsItBalancedTheDvati&page=1#31) a guy who quotes Mike McArtor about the Dvati, and makes it ABUNDANDLY clear what actions they are intended to get. Since the text basically makes you guess at it, this is about as official as it gets.

Between you and me, I obviously wish it wasn't the case (and it shouldn't be dammit).

EDIT: Indeed, it's not actual errata, but it's the only clarification on how they were intended to function. I don't agree with it, but a stickler DM might. Thus, my suggestions above on how to grant them actions, since two complete rounds is a bit much honestly.

Oslecamo
2010-02-01, 06:45 PM
EDIT: Indeed, it's not actual errata, but it's the only clarification on how they were intended to function. I don't agree with it, but a stickler DM might. Thus, my suggestions above on how to grant them actions, since two complete rounds is a bit much honestly.

Let's check the basic facts again, shall we?
-It's not an official errata.
-Two fullround actions per turn is very far from broken when you have +1LA eating class levels, half WBL, low hp and can still only cast 1 spell per round.
-That "sugestion" from a random designer, as you pointed out, makes the race plain unplayable.


So, really, why do you keep insisting? It's this kind of thing that gives bad name to D&D! You're trying to enforce an interpretation NOBODY would enjoy just because someone said it should be so!

That, or you're a NONCASTERS CAN'T HAVE NICE THINGS! supporter. Any caster can get dual actions per turn with quickened magic. Why can't a martial dude get some fun as well?

arguskos
2010-02-01, 06:50 PM
Wooooooow, Oslecamo, you are really not getting what I'm saying at all.

Yes, every single fact you listed is either true, or has basis in truth. No, I do not disagree at all. No, I am not a supporter of "melee can't have nice things". The Dvati are my favorite race printed in any source, official or not. And, I posted a reasonably balanced interpretation of the action rules in my VERY FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD. :smallsigh:

That all stated, the reason I brought it up and continue to mention it is because the actual rules are unclear, meaning that all RAW can rely on is the designer's stated intent. That is all I have been saying. I have not ONCE ever said that I agree with that intent nor that anyone else should. So, will you lay off please? I'm happy to let this lie, now that we've aired it and I've explained my actions (even though I shouldn't have had to do so this many times).

T.G. Oskar
2010-02-01, 06:53 PM
It was clarified by a post from the designer on the Paizo forums, since the text is UTTERLY unclear. :smallsigh: It's not errata, since Dragon doesn't issue errata, but it IS the intended design, and it makes them unusable.

Here's (http://paizo.com/dragon/messageboards/compendium/twoCharactersForOnePlayerIsItBalancedTheDvati&page=1#31) a guy who quotes Mike McArtor about the Dvati, and makes it ABUNDANDLY clear what actions they are intended to get. Since the text basically makes you guess at it, this is about as official as it gets.

Between you and me, I obviously wish it wasn't the case (and it shouldn't be dammit).

EDIT: Indeed, it's not actual errata, but it's the only clarification on how they were intended to function. I don't agree with it, but a stickler DM might. Thus, my suggestions above on how to grant them actions, since two complete rounds is a bit much honestly.

As it stands:
--One move action (but both can move, and quite probably on different locations)
--One standard action (so either one attacks or the other attacks)
--One swift action
--Several free actions
--One readied action

The only thing that makes unplayable is the idea of Aid Another, since they can't aid one another (that's one action). They can flank between themselves, tho (still uncertain and probably won't be in that case).

Now, I understand it kills the concept of "one mind, two bodies" since you can't get more than one attack from them (only the odd instance in which both bodies do a beating between themselves and applying flank bonuses.

The main concept was that a Dvati would count as one character for mostly mental actions or primarily mental actions (such as talking, psionics, spells, mind-affecting abilities, etc), but as two for purposes of physical actions or effects (attacking, moving, taking damage, aiding one another or flanking between themselves, etc.) It's at least the clearest concept based from RAW, which was mostly shot down by the extraofficial "errata".

Heck, couldn't they at least do like other games do and share the pool of attacks? Such as: one Dvati pair of martial warriors splits their pool of extra attacks through iteratives + any extra attack ability between two creatures. They would have to split the iteratives, but Haste would treat them as separate creatures (much as they apply Con bonuses separately and not as part of the pool).

Alas, it's either running it as Dragon Compendium intends, or as that malformed "errata" suggests.

Runestar
2010-02-01, 07:14 PM
Dvati warblades with white raven tactics? :smalltongue:

CockroachTeaParty
2010-02-01, 07:32 PM
Wow, I didn't realize how crappy they are by that logic.

Hmm... I understand the desire to keep them from casting two spells at once, and I think arguskos' suggestion of 2 moves 1 standard // 2 standards, etc., is a decent step in the right direction.

To add further confusion:

How would Dvati work with a system such as Incarnum? Would they share an essentia pool? Would they have to split their soulmelds between them? What about the swift action to reallocate essentia? What of chakra binds? @_@

What about binding vestiges? Using supernatural or spell-like abilities (warlock and factotum come to mind)?

If you really want to get into some spell-sharing confusion, could both twins have a familiar? An animal companion? Two dvati druids could conceivably have a small menagerie of creatures following them...

arguskos
2010-02-01, 07:37 PM
Dvati are treated as one character for all purposes, save for splitting hp, gear, and active spells. So no, they only get 1 familiar, they get one essentia pool, they probably have one shared set of chakra (since it binds to your essence, not your body), one bound vestige (or however many your EBL says you can bind), etc. They just have two bodies, meaning gear splits, hp splits, and active spells are only on one or the other.

Darrin
2010-02-01, 07:46 PM
That all stated, the reason I brought it up and continue to mention it is because the actual rules are unclear, meaning that all RAW can rely on is the designer's stated intent.


I think it's important to point out that Mike McArtor is not the designer. He's the associate editor that may or may not have had some input in updating the Dvati to 3rd edition. If you really want to go by the designer's intent, then you should probably ask Talon Dunning (http://www.talonart.com/). He has a 2nd edition article on them available here (http://www.talonart.com/Dvati-2ndEd.pdf), although unfortunately it doesn't clarify the actions per round issue.

T.G. Oskar
2010-02-01, 07:46 PM
To add further confusion:

How would Dvati work with a system such as Incarnum? Would they share an essentia pool? Would they have to split their soulmelds between them? What about the swift action to reallocate essentia? What of chakra binds? @_@

What about binding vestiges? Using supernatural or spell-like abilities (warlock and factotum come to mind)?

If you really want to get into some spell-sharing confusion, could both twins have a familiar? An animal companion? Two dvati druids could conceivably have a small menagerie of creatures following them...

Since Incarnum works mostly as a surrogate for magic items (a very, very, much too VERY broad concept for it), they'd have a split essentia pool, but the maximum essentia capacity is not split between the two. They could shape one soulmeld per chakra per body, but since they're one soul, they can only bind one of the two. Swift action would be used once, but they can reallocate their essentia between bodies (so one half of the Dvati twins would shift essentia to its partner)

Vestige-wise, the twins would be treated as one "contractee" for purposes of the binding. They'd both manifest the traits and whatnot, but the active abilities can only be used as if spells (both have to work to use it). It would be unnerving, since the Dvati would manifest the trait exactly at the same time, so you'd see two almost exactly alike people doing the same action at the same time.

Spell-like abilities obviously behave like spells in regards to activation, and by extension so does supernatural abilities.

As for animal companions, only one per pair of Dvati twins. No two. Same with familiar: however, you could work out that a familiar tends to act as if it had a partner.

Then again, you could have a "Dvati-ish" familiar...the female mage in the cover art of Complete Mage has two rats, not one. However, the familiar would effectively act as one creature even if it were a pair. And...just the nerve of being shared by partners would make them perhaps unable to handle familiars, so...DM's choice in this one.

lvl 1 sharnian
2010-02-01, 07:59 PM
Why not just make them both Lockdown Crusaders then? They can still use stances and slap on half-minotaur or something and give them a spiked-chain and their good to go.

Think about it... double reach, double AoO (needs Combat Reflexes), double damage, the extra hit points are gonna be good, the damage pool is good for survival...

arguskos
2010-02-01, 08:04 PM
I think it's important to point out that Mike McArtor is not the designer. He's the associate editor that may or may not have had some input in updating the Dvati to 3rd edition. If you really want to go by the designer's intent, then you should probably ask Talon Dunning (http://www.talonart.com/). He has a 2nd edition article on them available here (http://www.talonart.com/Dvati-2ndEd.pdf), although unfortunately it doesn't clarify the actions per round issue.
Fair enough, I misread it obviously. Still the only official clarification, but since no one really uses it, since it's moronically thick, it's no matter.

T.G. Oskar
2010-02-01, 08:25 PM
Why not just make them both Lockdown Crusaders then? They can still use stances and slap on half-minotaur or something and give them a spiked-chain and their good to go.

Think about it... double reach, double AoO (needs Combat Reflexes), double damage, the extra hit points are gonna be good, the damage pool is good for survival...

How that would work:
--First, the Lockdown Dvati Crusaders would be under the effect of one stance, not of two.
--It would be two separate beacons: you could place them at different points, but that would only artificially deal with the reach.
--As you mentioned, the "pool" of Combat Reflexes is split apart.
--Even if the target enters an area threatened by both Dvati twins, you'd still get one AoO from them. Think of it as a synched attack, but their lack of skill makes them deal such damage so that the full amount of damage is as if a single character had done it. So you don't get 2 attacks, just a single one.
--One of the main differences is that, in terms of the Dvati, Con is counted twice. That's about the extra HP you get: doesn't seem to be very helpful on that matter.
--The delayed damage pool is something that will cause some concern. Effectively, the damage pool would be handled separately, but that would imply that the bonuses would be also specific to each Dvati: you wouldn't get a pooled amount of damage, have both characters benefit from the result with Furious Counterstrike, and then both take a divided amount of damage. It would be like...enchanting one weapon with GMW and one with MW. One Dvati half would probably have a higher delayed damage pool, and hence a bigger amount of bonus to attack/defense than the other half.

So...it's mostly as effective as a Two-Weapon fighter going lockdown and somehow having range, a trip-worthy weapon and extra HP. You need to think well for it in order to be successful with it, otherwise, you're risking a tad too much.

lvl 1 sharnian
2010-02-01, 09:14 PM
Hmm that reminds me, how does an effect along the lines of "You must attack the caster of this spell, ignoring the others?"* work when used by both Dvati?

Would it work like that angel in Magic: The Gathering, where if you had two of them on the field, nothing on your side could be attacked?

*Heavily paraphrased, but I know there's a spell like that somewhere, but I can't remember

Runestar
2010-02-01, 09:32 PM
Even if the target enters an area threatened by both Dvati twins, you'd still get one AoO from them. Think of it as a synched attack, but their lack of skill makes them deal such damage so that the full amount of damage is as if a single character had done it. So you don't get 2 attacks, just a single one.

Why won't they trigger AoOs from both dvatis? It would use up 2 AoOs, but you would get 2 attacks...

Good idea, using non-actions to make up for their lack of actions. :smallsmile:

Grumman
2010-02-01, 09:51 PM
I have made a Dvati character for a game that didn't get off the ground.

They were a pair of Ranger 4 / Trickster Spellthief 4 / Cragtop Archer 2 snipers that were going to sit up in the crow's nest of the ship they were stuck on, laying down a withering hail of fire (that provides flanking from Distracting Shot) once they closed with the enemy.

Just to repeat what others have said: the "errata" ruins an interesting, balanced race. Do not use it, and do not expect your players to use it.

Thurbane
2010-02-02, 12:38 AM
I was intrigued by the Dvati when I first read them, but the mechnanics of them being twins are not the greatest. At a glance, the only thing they are good at is being flanking Rogues. I was trying to find a way for them to use the Multivoice feat from SS so they could cast two spells per round, but the feat investment was insane. It even involved a dip into Dragon Disciple! :smallsigh:

...now, even though the LA is pretty horrendous, I'm very interested in the Vestigial Twin trait from DMG2. This does give you an extra action per round.

FlamingKobold
2010-02-02, 12:49 AM
Dragonfire Adepts are nice. Double the breath weapon and a focus on con means that they're useful and they have a decent amount of HP.

Biffoniacus_Furiou
2010-02-02, 12:51 AM
A Dvati Crusader is practically unkillable. They have identical class levels, and must both use an action to cast spells, but otherwise act as separate creatures in combat. Their dice-based HP are split between the two, but both get their Con bonus to HP as normal. Each would have a separate pool of delayed damage from Crusader, an injured one could full-attack with Stone Power while the other uses Crusader's Strike and both would benefit from Martial Spirit. The character would get twice as many attacks/round and you'd have two bodies to stick in front of squishier characters. It makes for a great cohort, especially in a party lacking frontliners.

KitsuneKionchi
2010-02-02, 03:42 AM
I play a Dvati, but my DM has heavily nerfed me. I wanted to try using them with Void Points from Rokugan (adapted for 3.5). Void Points are basically a pool of points you spend to get +2 to any saving throw, attack roll or skill check. You get 2 for having the feat and 3+X for every feat you take afterwards (where X is the number of times you take that "bonus void" feat; note: I'm using the phoenix clan bonus void feat from secrets of the phoenix). I got the +8 req. void feat that gives me tons of rerolls per day (it doesn't cost rerolls if my roll is 5 times higher than the previous roll, so I use it when I roll less than 10 and hope my luck doesn't completely suck). I use some power attack (ladies gambit since high con actually gives me a larger HP pool than the rest of the party if I transfer damage via the shackles from Book of Vile Darkness). And the Way of the Samurai kata that lets me dump all my void points for that many attacks for a round...but that's not till much later.

He made the following rulings (most of which make me mad...):
->You share void point and action point pools.
->You cannot target one another with your bodyguard prestige class as "charges" since you are the same character, just in different bodies.
->You count as one character for loot, even though your a melee fighter and need double the gear to outfit yourself while the rest of the party are casters.
->If one twin gets a template, the other one gets it too. (This issue came up where one got involved in this culty ritual and I wanted only one sister to get the template.)
->You can't use void points on knowledge, craft, or any other "long term" skill checks (yeah, not a dvati thing I just wanted to post it).

However, there are some advantages:
->You are the group walkie talkie for when the group splits up.
->You get double skill checks.
->You get double attacks per round.
->You are twins. And therefore the cutest things ever!

RMS Oceanic
2010-02-02, 04:35 AM
I haven't played a Dvati, but was talking about them with my DM, and he ruled that they each get a full action, but they're limited to the One Spell + One quickened spell everybody else gets. Other than that, it's all gravy.

With this set of rulings, I figured it would be fun to play a Swift Hunter Scout/Ranger Dvati: They both run round the target in a circle pegging it with arrows. If gestalt were thrown in, the other side would be a Soulknife/Mindbow for even more fun.

Oslecamo
2010-02-02, 05:27 AM
He made the following rulings (most of which make me mad...):
->You share void point and action point pools.

Well, that's how it's suposed to work. Void points and action points are both limited resources.



->You cannot target one another with your bodyguard prestige class as "charges" since you are the same character, just in different bodies.

Altough that would be a fun combo, you can't count yourself as your own ally, or we have White raven tactics madness.



->You count as one character for loot, even though your a melee fighter and need double the gear to outfit yourself while the rest of the party are casters.

Hmm, make cute eyes to the casters and ask them for buffs and crafted items? The good point of being the only noncaster is that you can hoard all the goody martial buffs!



->If one twin gets a template, the other one gets it too. (This issue came up where one got involved in this culty ritual and I wanted only one sister to get the template.)

Meh, twins and stuff. I would say it would be quite off character for one twin to take a life-changing ritual and the other just stand watching. Plus they share buffs and negative levels. A template spilling over isn't that far-fetched.



However, there are some advantages:
->You are the group walkie talkie for when the group splits up.
->You get double skill checks.
->You get double attacks per round.
->You are twins. And therefore the cutest things ever!

Indeed, those are all cool advantages, that I belive more than make up for the disadvantages.

Not saying you're wrong or anything, just that the decisions your DM made would be pretty much the decisions I would make if I had a dvati at my table.

Killer Angel
2010-02-02, 05:35 AM
I just recently learned of this race's existence. For those of you wondering, the Dvati are a LA+1 race from the Dragon Compendium that lets you play as a pair of identical twins.

I'm... having trouble wrapping my mind around this. They share spells, initiative, a single soul...

I wonder if the designer was a reader of the paratwa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liege-Killer) saga...
(I highly recommend Liege Killer)

Darrin
2010-02-03, 06:39 AM
In an attempt to put this issue to rest, I found Talon Dunning's facebook page and asked him directly if he knew anything about how Dvati should work under 3.5 rules.

As it turns out... Talon had no involvement with adapting the Dvati to 3rd Edition. While he does seem inclined to agree that each twin should get his own set of actions, he didn't exactly endorse it either. He also pointed out something I missed in Mike McArtor's email, that the twins move simultaneously on the same move action. So what we have here is three interpretations:

1) The twins get only one set of actions, and must divide either one full-round action or one move + one standard action between themselves. The biggest drawback (other than the unplayable stupidity of such a restriction) is their signature Echo Attack just doesn't work: two move actions takes up an entire round, after which the target can just move away. On the next round, assuming the target is still close enough to attack, with only one standard attack or full attack per pair, it's impossible for both twins to attack the same target.

2) The twins get only one set of actions, but each action is performed simultaneously by both bodies. So, yes, they only get one move and one standard action a round, but they *both move* on that same move action, and *both attack* on that same standard action. Likewise, if the Dvati used one full-round attack, both bodies would full-attack simultaneously. In other words, this is a somewhat confusing way to say, yes, the twins each get a set of actions, but they must be identical actions. If one twin wanted to do something different than the other one, the first one would take actions while the second one couldn't act at all. Either that or they would have to divide up as Option 1): the first twin could take a move action while the second took a standard action. While this interpretation may make them playable (including the Echo Attack), it seems to me the "identical" requirement would get really, really annoying.

3) Each twin gets its own separate set of actions. The first one could use a move action + standard action, and the second one could full-attack or do something else. While this is perhaps a lot more powerful than Option 2), it's the least annoying and most playable. Talon and I differ a little on whether +1 LA would be enough to offset such an ability. Some playtesting in that regard might definitely be worth pursuing.

Anyway, with Talon's permission, I'm reposting two of his email responses:

Email #1






I'm hoping you can help clarify something that comes up every once in a while in various D&D forums. You're the original creator of the Dvati race, which was first printed in Dragon #271.


Yep. That was me. ;-)



When Paizo printed the Dragon Compendium volume 1, they updated the Dvati to 3rd Edition and provided rules for using them as player characters. I'm not sure if you had any input in the update or how much you are familiar with 3rd Edition rules, but the description in the Dragon Compendium isn't entirely clear on how many actions they get per round. Mike McArtor, an associate editor for Dragon (who may or may not have been involved with updating the Dvati to 3rd Edition, we're not sure), did responed to an email way back when and answered some questions about the Dvati, but the general consensus seems to be that he has no bleepin' clue what he was talking about. Here's a link to the discussion, if you're interested:

http://paizo.com/dragon/messageboards/compendium/twoCharactersForOnePlayerIsItBalancedTheDvati&page=1#31


I had nothing to do with the conversion to 3.5 rules. I didn't know about them until after they had been published. I have read through the rules and commented in the forums before regarding their version of the race. Generally speaking, I think they did an pretty decent job. My problem with them is one that I think makes them virtually unplayable, and that's the fact that they share a single character's hit-points, making them incredibly fragile. If I ever ran a set of Dvati, I'd waive that rule and give each twin his own full hit-points. But then, that's not what you asked about.



Anyway, as the original designer, I was hoping you could settle this issue about how many actions they get per round. Mike's take is the pair must share whatever actions a single character would get, hence the pair gets one full round action or one move action + standard action per round to divide between the two.


By the rules they set up, that's correct. As I understand it, they took the "two bodies, one soul" thing and ran with it. When you play a Dvati pair, you're literally playing a single character who just happens to be able to be in two places at once. But in all respects, a Dvati set represents a single character and gets no more actions, hit-points or anything else that any other PC gets. This is all in the name of game-balance, of course, and has nothing to do with logic (much like most of the design of 4th edition, I might add).



The main argument against this is it makes them pretty much unplayable.


I think this is a much smaller issue than the hit-points. Consider a first-level fighter. A first-level human fighter gets 10 hp, making him a very tough hombre for his level. A first-level dvati fighter also gets 10 HP, but those hit-points are split evenly between two bodies, meaning that each Dvati twin has FIVE hp, making them only one hp tougher than a wizard. A fighter with a wizard's hit-points is a dead fighter no mater how you slice it. This alone makes them unplayable. getting only a single set of actions... That's almost reasonable. It's unrealistically illogical, but it's not a death-sentence.



Dvati have to split their HP, if one of them casts a spell the other one can't take any actions, and they already have a +1 Level Adjustment. On top of that, if we go with Mike McArtor's interpretation, their signature "Echo Attack" is almost unusable: Since each twin would have to spend a move action to activate it, they no longer have a standard action to attack that round, and would have to wait until the next round to attack... allowing their target to just move away if he were so inclined.


Don't they move in unison? It's been a while since I read it, but I was thinking that if both twins moved in unison, it still only took a single move action, and that it only took two if they moved separately (or in different directions). If that's the case then the Echo Attack can work in a single round as long as both dvati use their shared move action to encircle their foe. If only one moves, then it doesn't work as the other must move to catch up.



The other interpretation, which I hope you'll endorse, is that each Dvati gets a full complement of actions every round, so each twin gets a full round action or a move + standard action. This also allows their Echo Attack to work on the same round. Would you happen to have any strong opinions on this, one way or the other?


Well, it's not my place to directly contradict the rules that the guys at Paizo have put together. I can only tell you what *I* would do if this were *MY* game, and that is to do what you have said. I would give each twin a full set of hit-points at the very least. The reason for this (besides keeping the characters alive past the first encounter) is that hit-points represent the general condition of the BODY, not the person. Even with a dvati set sharing the same soul, they do not share the same body. Physically, they are like any other normal set of twins. If you were playing human twins, you wouldn't split their hit dice and there's no reason to assume the dvati do either. As for actions per round, that one's a little more tough. My inclination is to say that each twin gets a full set of actions, but I can understand what some people would have a problem with that. That basically means that the dvati's player's character gets twice the actions of everyone else at the table and that can be annoying. A good compromise might be to say that a dvati set gets the same actions as everyone else (one move, one standard or two moves), plus a single extra move or standard action of their choice per round. I would also make sure to say that this extra action cannot be used for spellcasting, as to prevent them from casting two standard-action spells per round, which would be broken. But they could, say, cast a single spell and then stab a guy with their sword or make a standard move. I will say that if both twins get a full action separate from the other, then the level-adjustment should probably be at least a +2. Getting two full actions a round is HUGE.

But that's just a suggestion. In the end, it's really up to every DM to make his own ruling when changing the published rules. If your DM is okay with both twins getting full actions, then do it that way. If not, then go with what's in the book and hope for the best.

Interestingly, I ran a 3.0 game with a set of dvati in it long before the "official" version was released and it never occurred to me to treat the set like a single character. I, instead, treated them like two completely separate characters, just as I designed them to be in 2nd edition. They had identical starting ability scores, but other than that I treated them like normal siblings of any other race. They were developed individually and treated individually in the game (although, for the sake of ease, they shared initiative as long as they kept the same bonus). I was shocked when Paizon introduced the idea of treating them as a single, collective character split into two bodies. That had literally never occurred to me and was a beautifully elegant solution to the biggest obstacle I always faced with the race in previous editions, which was how to justify allowing a player to have two characters. I really have to give Paizo props for that solution. I only wish they'd worked out the kinks a little better. You're not the first person to approach me with this question.



Either way, thanks for such a creative and interesting idea.


Thanks for liking it! I've created quite a bit of game material over the years and the dvati have always been one of my favorites. I was really happy when they earned Honorable Mention in the Dragon magazine Design-A-Monster contest and was honored as hell when Paizo chose to resurrect them for the compendium. I mean out of all the material they could have pulled out of all those years of Dragon magazine articles, they chose my humble creation to be in their book. I may not have won first prize, but it's my creation that stood the test of time and that's just super cool. :-)

Good luck with your games! if you'd like to see some more of my more recent creations, visit my website, http://www.arcane-marks.com. It's still a little sparse at the moment, but I'm slowly getting new material created and uploaded. I hope you enjoy it.

Talon



Email #2






The split HP wasn't so much of a concern for me, since each twin gets their full Constitution bonus, and there are other ways to boost HPs. A high Constitution bonus would be a must, though... and a Constitution penalty would pretty much be a death penalty.


Even a high Con wouldn't be enough to save any character relying on hit-points, such as a fighter or barbarian. Spellcasters might have a better shot, but then again, spellcasters are almost always targets.



Hmm... I'm not inclined to think of two 5 HP fighters as being more fragile than one 10 HP fighter. First, in both cases it takes 10 HP to remove them from the combat, and second, a 5 HP fighter isn't all that much different than a 6 HP rogue/bard/monk. A fighter with only 5 HP that charges up to the front line and doesn't think tactically, or doesn't coordinate with his twin to minimize his risks, or just plain acts like a fighter with 10 HP... well, they deserve to get cut down quickly.


Tactical thinking could, indeed, be the savior, but if they had the full compliment of hit-points, they wouldn't need to compensate.




Getting only a single set of actions... I can't see how that's reasonable in any way shape or form. One twin moves up to engage in combat, leaving his twin with only a standard action... which he can't use because he's not in melee range, forcing his twin to stand there and do nothing while the first one attacks. Next round, his twin moves up, and one of them gets an attack, or the first one can full-attack while the second one again does nothing. I guess my main point is what is the point of having two bodies and paying +1 Level Adjustment for it if both twins can't move and attack independently? If you're going to be penalized with a +1 LA, shouldn't there be some sort of benefit? With only one set of actions to divide between the two, there's no benefit to playing a Dvati.


I agree, for the most part, but I can also see the naysayers' POV as well. Handing a player two full actions a round smacks of being highly unfair. There are those who would make a stink about it (and obviously are). plus, as you say, it's a tad unrealistic, but as D&D4 certainly proves, sometimes realism must be sacrificed in the name of the balance and playability.

But for the most part, I agree. Restricting them to a single set of actions makes them very difficult to play accurately and takes away the advantage of playing a set of twins.



"Moving in unision" would be a new ability.


Well, I re-read some of that thread you linked (which I posted to back on '06, actually), and the Paizo guy clearly states that they share their movement by moving in unison. Making it a specific racial ability, or at the very least detailing the rules regarding their movement would have been very helpful. I have a feeling that Paizo didn't playtest their version or they would have realized that.



Actually, the Echo Attack text says each Dvati must spend a separate move action to activate the ability. This is my main support for arguing why the rules *imply* each twin gets a separate set of actions, because this is the only way that Echo Attack can be used in the same round that both twins move. But it's not a particularly strong argument, unless you want an Echo Attack that takes two rounds to activate and is thus almost impossible to pull off against a foe that can just move away.


Yeah, that's pretty difficult to get around.




I don't see how it would be any more annoying than a Druid with an animal companion, a Paladin with a mount, or some other PC that takes the Leadership feat to pick up a cohort. Extra actions for a melee character doesn't bother me so much, particularly at higher levels where the wizards, clerics, and druids can pretty much pwn the game just by casting one spell. Fortunately, the rules for Dvati spellcasting prevents too much spellcasting abuse, since either both twins have to spend the same actions on spellcasting, or one twin can't take any actions at all while the other concentrates on casting.. In that respect, I would expect a Dvati spellcaster would play very much like any other spellcaster.


Support characters are usually considerably weaker than the main characters, being of significantly lower level and often go on their own initiative. It wouldn't be a problem for me, but I can see how it could be for some people.



Yes, two standard actions to cast spells would be broken, but the rules for spellcasting Dvati prevent this. If one twin is casting a spell, the other either has to spend the same actions to cast it or can't take any actions.


That's a good rule, I think, even if both twins get full actions.



Two full-round actions as a pure melee character...? I'm more inclined to think the +1 LA covers that. Extra melee attacks don't bother me so much from a balance standpoint, and is easy to fix (4 orcs not enough? Ok, 6 orcs show up next time). At any rate, a little playtesting would probably straighten that out.


Indeed. I've never gotten the chance to try it out myself, mostly because the folks in my own gaming group are... touchy when it comes to the subject of things like balance and stubborn with their labels. The Paizo dvati have already been branded as "unplayably broken," so chances are good that I would never be allowed to play a set. Which is a shame because a dvati set of Sisters of Rapture (see Arcane-Marks.com <http://www.arcane-marks.com/> ) could be really fun. ;-)




Thank you for taking the time to respond. May I have your permission to repost your responses to the Giant In the Playground or Brilliant Gameologists RPG forums?


Sure, as long as you don't edit them too much. I'm hesitant to bee seen as speaking out against the good folks at Paizo, especially since I hope to work for them one day. I feel a great sense of gratitude toward them for choosing my creation for their book and I'd hate to be seen as anything other than humbled by the honor. As long as you don't make it seem like I'm bad-mouthing them (or anyone else), then I'm fine with it. Just make sure everyone realizes that despite my being the guy who created the original version, that I should not be seen as the ultimate authority on the 3e version as I had nothing to do with its creation. In the end, each DM should be the ultimate authority over his or her own game and, barring that, the developers of the Dragon Compendium certainly have more say over the "official" rules than I do. Like all of you, I can only speculate as to what I would do in my OWN game.

Also, I would appreciate it if you would thank all the fans for me. I'm continuously flattered by the knowledge that after all these years, people still care enough about the dvati to debate their playability. The fact that anyone even remembers them, much less still wants to play them, just blows my mind. So thanks to you all.

Talon

Reaper_Monkey
2010-02-03, 08:47 AM
Anyway, with Talon's permission, I'm reposting two of his email responses:

Thank you very much for this! :biggrin:

I'm a big fan of the race, but have always had to homebrew them for 3.5 and it's good to hear the views of the original designer. I feel that the choices I've made are in keeping of at least the original source of the race and very similar to how he himself has or would handle it and that's good enough for me :smallsmile:. Also, he seems like a really decent bloke, I'm glad you've reposted the responses in their entirety to preserve that.

magic9mushroom
2010-02-03, 09:22 AM
This is all in the name of
game-balance, of course, and has nothing to do with logic (much like
most of the design of 4th edition, I might add).

:smallamused: