Boots of Speed

[Nythrun]

Honestly, the manual's description of bard song is so vague and self-contradictory that there really isn't anything that satisfies the requirements of "making it match". It's still heavily leavened with educated guessword - and I certainly wouldn't cry if it's pulled.

 

On the other hand, if all the resources for IWD style bard songs are already in the game and I wasted all those hours drawing new bams and building new spls, I might just cry, at that.

 

In any case, in the interests of excessive clarity, no one who's ever been involved with the fixpack has suggested reducing the tally of Boots of Speed.

[Ardanis]

My suggestion might be to create a OBC component that would take care of the problem in one of these two ways: correct the descriptions or reduce the quantity of unique items to one and one only (I believe it is even nice that a player might end up with not getting everything that is in the game).

http://forums.spellholdstudios.net/index.php?showtopic=22887

[Miloch]

In any case, in the interests of excessive clarity, no one who's ever been involved with the fixpack has suggested reducing the tally of Boots of Speed.

And just to be even more excessively clear (and for those who don't want to read my initial post), neither am I. To repeat the crux of the OP:

So what we're really talking about here is a quality assurance issue that a Fixpack should be well-placed to remedy. The bottom line is you could change even just a couple words in these descriptions to account for their "non-uniqueness" in BG2.

Or perhaps Salk says it better:

Changing the description of the Boots of Speed to reflect that they are not unique in the game is the least that can be done. And this should apply to all those items whose description and representation in game do not match. This is called consistency.

I realise that many of you Fixpackers (and others) don't care about descriptions. That's fine. But some folks do care.

Of course, an alternative (but more time consuming) method would be to write new descriptions for each of the duplicate items. Perhaps start the descriptions with things like "this particular pair of boots of speed..."

I just did as I liked, no more, no less. Writing new descriptions seems to me as if you suggest to bg2fixpackers change descriptions to match items rather than change items to match their descriptions.

Hmm. So someone's done a mod to make "unique" items truly unique - but it's interesting what he'd consider a textual change (and perhaps more interestingly, who he'd consider doing it).

 

Also, just to stay clear (and repetitious), I'm not talking about writing new descriptions either. Rather, I'd consider these things typos, and just correct what needs to be corrected in the text.

[Guest Guest]

To fix something is to mend what is broken. The BG2 Fixpack is an excellent mod for fixing and everything that is indeed broken should be restored to its full effect (unless it is clearly opposing what seems it was the developers' intention).

 

But the OBC should be more flexible. Components like the above mentioned ones are perfectly fine because are presented as optional add-ons. Their place is not the BG2 Tweak Pack simply because their extrema ratio is different from what at least I intend as tweak material.

 

They can't be considered fixes tout court but have valid reasons to exist because they make the game more consistent or restore some P&P variables (ex. Giants Receive Penalties When Attacking Halflings, Dwarves, and Gnomes).

 

To dictate the presence of what is a pure fix (whose definition is somehow a matter of semantics more than a widespread concept) into the Core fixes is reasonable. To require that other important modifications like the ones above should just be swept away would call to fanatism.

 

The OBC components have a valid reason to stay and even a more valid reason to be expanded when people like Miloch suggest that it would be proper to take care of inconsistencies like the presence of several supposedly unique items. It is enough that you go around looking for some WeiDu logs of people installing the BG2 Fixpack and check how many of them install at least 50% of the OBC components to understand their appreciation.

How do you know something is broken? First, there should be at least hint that developers intended to do it in other way. What makes you think they wanted to make items really unique (or make them non-unique by descriptions)? Their descriptions would be an argument if there were 1 such item, or 2, or 3... but there are plenty of them!

 

"making the game more consistent" - there are too many ridicilous inconsistencies. It is a game, after all. How about a warrior with 10 full plates in his backpack? Not even talking about weight (since there are magical items increasing strength), do you imagine its volume?

P&P rules also can't be considered as example, because many of them were altered intentionally in the game. I suppose "Giants Receive Penalties..." component is mentioned somewhere in game, although I'm not sure. If not, I'd rather remove this component.

And amount of people using OBC components is not an argument. People just like them, that's all. Even if all of us liked some mod, it does not mak that mod "fix" by itself.

 

In general, I think fixpack itself should do only fixing work. And OBC components should change unclear cases, where you cannot tell for sure if it's bug or not. But there has to be a reason why do you think it is a bug. Not just "maybe it is a bug?". I don't see such a reason in this topic.

[Miloch]

But there has to be a reason why do you think it is a bug. Not just "maybe it is a bug?". I don't see such a reason in this topic.

Well, Guest, to answer your question, I'd like to refer you to the post before yours wherein I "repeat the crux of the OP" two different ways. But it seems *both* those statements are unclear, so I'll restate it once again.

 

The bug here is "item > description mismatch." Specifically, this covers descriptions suggesting items are unique (occur only once in the game) but aren't (occur more than once). The same bug also covers item descriptions that don't match their characteristics.

 

The solution IMO (to repeat myself again) is to treat the erroneous data in these descriptions as typos and correct them accordingly, unless there is evidence suggesting a contrary solution (to correct the item characteristics or placement).

 

If you don't care about descriptions, that's fine. You're not reading them anyway, so this (completely hypothetical at this point) component wouldn't affect you, if you even chose to install it. And if you think the items should truly be unique, install Gort's Unique Artifacts mod instead (if you're the same "Guest" as in the second post, that seems to be your preference).

[Guest the_same_guest]

The bug here is "item > description mismatch." Specifically, this covers descriptions suggesting items are unique (occur only once in the game) but aren't (occur more than once). The same bug also covers item descriptions that don't match their characteristics.

I believe it isn't the same bug. When item description doesn't match its characteristics, it is clear enough that it is not according to developers' intention. But, as I said (yes, I said it previously), multiply copies of the same items are too widespreaded to say so. IMHO, of course.

I think I put too much effort in proving you wrong=). Anyway, I'm not the one who is going to actually do it (or use it), so I'm falling silent.

All of it would be easier if somebody contacted the developers.

[Miloch]

Well, they're two different manifestations of the same bug description - I didn't mean to suggest they were the same bug. And yes, you are right, no one can prove anything and it would be easier to get confirmation from the developers (though some would argue against that). But if you read the OP about how BG1 unique items were copied over wholesale to BG2 and became non-unique in the placement by design, but not the descriptions, it's pretty plausible the designers simply overlooked something there (IMO of course).

[devSin]

The giant penalties are some EFF files that give giants a minor THAC0 penalty when fighting dwarves, halflings, and gnomes. I strongly doubt they're "P&P rules penalties"; the files already existed, and I believe they were used for the one or two ettins actually in the game. Extending them to the fire giants was just for fun; it's OBC, so don't install it if you don't want to.

 

I'm strongly opposed to making stealth changes to item and spell descriptions. The GTU is bad enough that I don't really care, but we should try to stick to necessary edits. No, you may not like the fact that the description for a particular item implies that it's unique, but unless it says, "This is the only pair of Boots of Speed in BG2:SoA! Now, you can RUN!!!" it's just not something that should be considered a candidate for change.

 

And I read every single goddamn description in the game when I play, thankyouverymuch. It's wonderful to dismiss everything with a blanket "But you guys don't care!" but it's not actually accurate. I do care; I just disagree.

[Miloch]

I'm strongly opposed to making stealth changes to item and spell descriptions.

Who said anything about stealth? These boots don't affect stealth - maybe you're talking about BOOT02 instead of BOOT01?

 

And if you're talking about stealth as in "under-the-table, sneaky, shifty" sort of changes, these don't fall in that category either, or we wouldn't be discussing them publicly.

 

And finally, you have the right to disagree, as can Guest and anyone else who wants to. Put it in an OBC then. Or actually, don't do anything about it. I'll put it in an OBC, and Cam can decide whether to do anything about it, and if it doesn't fly, I'll stick it in my BG2 Game Text Update: The Unauthorized Renegade Version (yah right after I get done with the BG1 GTU and everything else). Frankly, I don't even care that much, since this seems to be a BG2-specific issue. Except if we restore Lothander's "B00T01" to BOOT01 in BG1, we'll have to make a call on either the description or the boots.

And I read every single goddamn description in the game when I play, thankyouverymuch.

Riighht. That includes all umpteen editions of the History of Shadowdale too? [I need to chill out? ]

[Guest erik]

Riighht. That includes all umpteen editions of the History of Shadowdale too? [I need to chill out? ]

 

Ah-ha! Something for Finch to do in BG2 - the Quest for the Rare First Edition

[devSin]

Riighht. That includes all umpteen editions of the History of Shadowdale too? [I need to chill out? ]

When I'm actually trying to play through the game, it absolutely does include every single book available in the game. (I only read each unique book once, of course.)

 

Luckily, most are in Irenicus' library and the Adventurer's Mart, so I can settle in and read the books at the beginning of the game and not have to worry about them so much later on. It does take me a full day of gameplay to get out of the Promenade, though (yet another reason why I never play the game anymore).

 

In any case, almost all changes to dialog.tlk are "stealth" changes. We don't detail the damage the GTU does to the default tlk to any end-user.

[Guest the_same_guest]

just one more thought... you say they hadn't enough time, but I suppose a lot of time passed between first release of BG2:SoA and the latest patch for BG2:ToB. And this "inconsistency" is very easy to notice. And very, VERY easy to fix. It can be done by one man in.. I don't even know...one day? Yet their descriptions are what they are, and I see only one possible conclusion: developers never intended to do it otherwise. And thus it shouldn't be adressed by the fixpack.

I'm talking about changing their description, of course. Changing number of available items clearly goes against developers' will.

[Nythrun]

That same argument could be applied to the vast majority of the Fixpack's content.

 

The devs themselves have confirmed, however, that they did not in fact have time to fix every error they knew about, and they were never so hubristic as to say that they knew of every error.

 

Grep David Gaider's posts for "word count limitations" in ToB, for starters.

[Guest Guest]

Yet their descriptions are what they are, and I see only one possible conclusion: developers never intended to do it otherwise. And thus it shouldn't be adressed by the fixpack.

 

I found this logic weak and the conclusion a mere assumption. If we followed your principles then the fixpack should never address mismatches between text and effects because the same might apply to any of them. The developers stated (see Nythrun above) that they are aware of several errors never corrected because of time restraints.

 

If Fireball is indicated to do 6D6 of damage but then the effective amount is 8D6, what should we do ? Leave it like it is ?

 

And the argument "It's not the same thing!" does not work because instead it is: a mismatch between a description and the ingame counterpart.

 

There is no way around this because there are two factors that are on this logic's side: 1) consistency and 2) coherency.

[Salk]

The one above was me, sorry.