ring of danger sense - equipable by all

[Miloch]

There's also a huge difference between unfinished business--stuff planned by the devs and never implemented--and legitimate fixes--stuff implemented by the devs, but with unintended results.

The cloak and ring are the latter. We're not talking about anything unimplemented here... like a ring that exists but was never placed in the game. Nor has discussion of 2H bastard swords or planar sphere ogre gauntlets surfaced until now in this thread (at least the former is an existing tweak, but not relevant here).

If they wanted the ring to actually find traps (still unsupported speculation, btw) the idea was clearly dropped before publication because there's nothing left in the item to suggest that was ever the case.

 

Adding this ability would go so far beyond the realm of a fix that I'm amazed I have to make this point.

Perhaps you're taking something out of context. I suggested it's likely the developers intended to convey thief skills (trap finding and hiding in shadows) to anyone wearing the ring or cloak (not actually *do* the finding or hiding - just allow them). There is enough circumstantial evidence to support this deduction:

a) The descriptions say so (certainly say nothing against it without the GTU)

b) The usability flags indicate anyone can wear the items (except wizard slayers)

c) The effects exist on the items without class restrictions (apart from those imposed by the engine)

d) Veteran forum members here have reported the developers stating this

 

I'm rather amazed I've had to defend this viewpoint so strenuously. But if people keep dismissing the viewpoint or even ridiculing it, I'm going to keep defending it until convincing evidence disproves it.

 

I even said I don't care whether it makes it in as a Tweak, a fix or whatever, as long as it isn't ignored or dismissed. Not just to make me happy - I don't even play BG2 (yet). But I didn't bring this up, and there's enough dissent from others here to justify it. Certainly, correcting a description like "Wearing it makes any person able to hide in shadows with astonishing abilities" to match the item's actual characteristics would be a reasonable change, at the very least. But suit yourself - ultimately you can do as you like (or do nothing) but it'll take more than vague dismissals and oblique examples to change my mind about it.

[Nythrun]

I suggested it's likely the developers intended to convey thief skills (trap finding and hiding in shadows)

 

Good, because that's precisely what the item already does (check it yourself by running a FindTraps() script on a non-thief).

[devSin]

Enough. It's unfortunate BioWare chose to use the ring the way they did, but there's nothing we'll do about it now. As Nythrun stated, it's also extremely rare that an item would have usability issues to the point of having no usability restrictions at all.

 

Even if this does not suggest that the implementation was intended, we're still limited by some designer's decision to equip the ring as default equipment, and no changes will be made at this point. I agree that the implementation makes no sense at all; I don't think anybody disputes this, and kudos for sticking to your guns, but the reasoning behind not changing something doesn't always imply that we think it's actual intent or that we don't consider it a bug on some level.

 

Comparing it to other items accomplishes nothing. Can you make a definitive decision, given the way it's implemented and how it's used, after weighing the solution against the problem? I can't.

[Miloch]

At one time devSin, you expressed a different opinion entirely:

I agree. "Fix" 25StWeap instead of leaving the ring with stupid usability.

I like to be cautious on what gets patched too, but I honestly don't see how making the ring usable by thieves only, and giving the starting mage something they can actually use is any cause for concern.

Then you found out it was on a .chr file and recanted. Indulge my ignorance and tell me what, exactly, is the issue with it being on tobmage.chr? If this was your sole concern, seems to me you could do one of at least three things about it:

a) Fix the item and ignore it on the .chr - either it'd be moved to inventory or be a useless item on the chr's finger until removed (it's useless anyway)

b) Patch the .chr to remove/replace the ring

c) Overwrite the .chr to remove/replace the ring

 

Unless all of those things are either not possible or would cause a crash or other major problem - if so, I understand not messing with the .itm or .chr. But this resistance to even amending the item description slightly to clarify its (non-)use, I don't understand. Unless you buy the fact non-thieves are clearly intended to script its use (I don't - it's interesting though).

 

But then, what would you do about the Cloak of Elvenkind, which is an even clearer-cut example of this same problem and is not (that I can tell) on a .chr file?

 

This debate has been going on over a year - it wasn't settled then and I doubt it'll be settled now. So all we (I and others above) are saying is you'll be faced with it again by doing nothing.

[devSin]

We will not modify CHR files. Period.

[Miloch]

Yes, well I gathered that. I didn't catch the 'why' though. People are more willing to accept things when given a sensible reason rather than a pithy dismissal. Moreover, I mentioned a couple options to do it without messing with the CHR. Also,

what would you do about the Cloak of Elvenkind, which is an even clearer-cut example of this same problem and is not (that I can tell) on a .chr file?

[SimDing0]

I look forward to your argument that behaving dishonorably while using Celestial Fury should invoke a luck penalty.

I think I've already commented on PPG that you don't necessarily know the wielder does not "respect the customs of Kara-Tur and of the samurai who once carried this blade into battle." Unlikely perhaps, but true. Also it says it "could" change one's luck for the worse, not that it will. So any potential incongruence between description and abilities there is arguable.

Quite right. When it comes to item descriptions, the distinction has to be drawn between that which is falsifiable and that which is not. If an item makes a claim which we cannot prove or disprove within the game ("equipping this item adjusts the orbits of three giant space hamsters", "this item will improve the wearer's breakdancing skills") then we have no grounds for claiming it is inaccurate. However, if an item makes a claim which is demonstrably false ("equipping this item will cause three giant space hamsters to fall from the sky and crush you instantly", "this item will cause the wearer to uncontrollably breakdance upon entering combat") then the description is misleading and bugged.