bug related to 'Exploit to Keep Imported Items'

[CamDawg]

I'm not seeing how the logic train runs from "dwarves and halfings mention a resistance bonus that exists in game and works" to "thus, the resistance to sleep mentioned in the elf description shouldn't exist"?

The problem is that, for example, "halflings are highly resistant to poisons and magic" can be interpreted a couple of ways. Does this mean they should have inherent MR or just better saving throws? I don't think they have either. Also, is their mentioned +1 bonus with slings actually implemented?

 

I'm pretty sure cutting the number available down to one would cause player riots (starting with me).

Please tell me that's a joke I'm too thick to get.

If we removed all but one pair of Boots of Speed in the Fixpack, I'd be the first to disable the relevant bits of code.

[Nythrun]

They have better saving throws (see savecndh.2da == save bonus based on constitution for dwarves and halflings). It works, and they were attentive enough to include that bonus in a surprising percentage of short NPCs (yeah, Bioware got non-joinable NPC saving throws by the book rather a lot )

 

Halfing bonus to missile weapon category is also in (it's applied automatically by the race.ids entry in the .cre, they get it to darts and such also, hardcoded, blahblahblahnobodyelsecaresImshuttingupnow).

 

I suppose I'm playing the token fascist today, but I can't get on board with the latter answer. At all.

 

The thing to do, then, is to present the theory that when the developers wrote a bit of flavor text for a non-unique item, they weren't intending to add flavor, but rather to indicate that the item in question is uniquely instantiated. And if the honest, best estimation is: yes, flavor text is not for flavor, it's for indicating membership in a solition, then it ought to be fixed, because you genuninely believe it's a bug. Hopefully it's obvious from the tone here that I consider this argument specious - but this is a Fixpack we're talking about, not the G3 Popularity Contest Pack (there's not nearly enough permanent improved alacrity/permanent improved haste/+12 hackmasters for that).

 

You can't have "if it's a bug, Fixpack fixes it" as a speed dialed response if you don't mean it. If it's not "Sim's shit he wants changed even though it's a better idea than what was implemented" and it's not "Nythrun's addled obsession with fringe cases no one else on earth cares about" then I don't think it should be "Stuff I could change without provoking whining" either. There are already gobs of people who won't install the official patch because it nerfs monks or prevents laying thousands of traps at a time or disables their favorite userunfriendly exploit. That's perfectly valid. But you lose the right to complain about bugs when you cut yourself off from the bugfixes.

[Salk]

You have such an inebriating effect that I had to put down my beer while I was reading this last post of yours, Nythrun!

 

Seriously, I am with you all the way, as my former post just after CamDawg's speaking of unique items can confirm.

[CamDawg]

My point is that currently we're handling it inconsistently--I agree wholeheartedly that if we're going with the 'one unique item period' then there's only one pair of Boots of Speed. I don't think the descriptive text is in any way binding, as the devs didn't care about it either (and we'll have to listen to Miloch about the Ring of Danger Sense again). In that case, we probably shouldn't care about the umpteen copies of Varscona unless there's another compelling reason to do so.

[devSin]

Sorry, referenced the wrong fix here; Galvarey Stutters if Jaheira Returns to the Harper HQ While Invisible is probably a better example. The best way to fix something like this is really to add dialogue to Galvarey for this situation. I feel we're really forced into unsatisfactory fixes in situations like this, but anything as radical as adding new dialogue is well beyond the scope of a fix. For the assassins in the Planar Sphere, it's just more frustration with the devs--why ambushers would use the slowest possible spawn animations in the game, I don't know. All they're missing are flashing X's on the floor where they'll appear--in about 30 seconds after the spwood animation plays.

The way to fix Galvarey is just to get rid of the dumb trigger stuff entirely -- plain NumTimesTalkedTo(0) is the only thing they accounted for; all the other stuff we do is too much work for zero gain.

 

SPWOOD was faster until I tweaked the animation. But it still sucks ass, yeah.

 

So you're basically drawing the line at items that you can drop, i.e. good berries and other whatnot?

Correct.

 

I don't understand Nythrun's tirade. The day we make Boots of Speed "unique" is the day my involvement with the project ends.

[Guest Guest]

I don't understand Nythrun's tirade.

 

I'm taking a wild guess and say that tirade was more directed at me, rather than either you or Cam (especially her last few sentences).

 

Well Nythrun, I don't understand where this resentment is coming from. I simply asked you two questions. I was expecting you to say yes, and if you had said anything close to what Cam had said (that is, "Yes, those two cases are also bugs/exploits.As they can not be fixed without introducing issues worse than the original ones, they won't be. I'd close every exploit in the game if it were possible, but the hardcoded nature of most of them and/or the hacky fixes required make this an impossibility. That we can't attain 100% doesn't mean we won't settle for a lesser amount."), then that would've been perfectly sufficient, and I would've dropped the issue immediately.

 

But, for some odd reason, you pulled a complete 180 degree turn claiming the opposite and stubbornly went off in the wrong way, which then led me to question the credibility of the fixpack. I was actually expecting you to say pretty much the same thing Cam did, since from reading your posts in other threads, I can tell you're equally as fair as he.

 

 

You can't have "if it's a bug, Fixpack fixes it" as a speed dialed response if you don't mean it.

 

Actually I do mean it. All I was saying is if you consider a loophole/exploit/whatever a bug, then you have to be consistent and apply the same rationale to the other things that can be considered bug/loophole/exploit. Even Cam just said in his last post, "My point is that currently we're handling it inconsistently" referring to the boots of speed issue.

 

 

But you lose the right to complain about bugs when you cut yourself off from the bugfixes.

 

Ouch. If you notice in my reply to Berelinde, I did say I deeply respect the work of the fixpack team (which I obviously know you're a part of). It takes a lot of perseverance and effort to provide continuous support for the game for no financial incentive. Believe me when I say this. My initial negative comments were primarily made to gather attention, and bait and lure people into the argument, and make them see both sides of it. That is all, not meant for personal attacks or such. So again, I apologize for that.

 

 

Peace.

[SimDing0]

It has always been my belief that there is some distinction to be drawn between items which Bioware intended to be unique and distributed wildly (Varscona) and items which Bioware intended to be generic and assigned unique decriptions (Boots of Speed). I would please like to prepare an argument on this topic when I am not drunk. thnx.

[Miloch]

I don't think the descriptive text is in any way binding, as the devs didn't care about it either (and we'll have to listen to Miloch about the Ring of Danger Sense again).

Yeah. It was *just me* bitching about it. Like I was even around when other people brought it up originally ages ago. I was just sticking up for a valid point someone else raised, which I can do without completely disrespecting the other opinions .

 

Is it just me or are there like 20 different things being discussed in this thread? And that's just on this page - I didn't bother paging back since a) it'd probably just confuse me more and b) it looks like another political/party-line debate.