Female Gnome Avatars

[icelus]

I've always thought of gnomes as just little, little people--in general not as bulky as dwarves or halflings. The beard is just too off-putting for a female gnome, though. While I agree that a female elf is not ideal, it is much better than a bearded woman. I think the hooded halfling would be ok as a second choice.

 

Where's Moinesse when we need her?

[Domi]

I really, really hope she is well.

[berelinde]

Here, they all would have them, every single one! With the one, it's a necessity, because the human male bearded avatar would be unsuitable for a number of reasons. With two of the others, it's only natural, because they're elven or half-elven. But four out of four looking like elves...

 

I am not sure what you are talking about here. Besides, you are suggesting that all three small races looked the same, ie used the same avatar if I understand you correctly, so how much better is that in terms of generalization? At least on that picture, dwarves look different than Halflings and Gnomes, though I am quite in agreement that Halflings should look different as well. But I am guessing that the Halflings looking nothing like Tolkien's Halflings is the nod to Tolkien's heirs so they don't sue.

 

My quote was in reference to the fact that if you have Peony use the elven avatar (despite the fact that she refers to herself as "well-rounded" and "plump" on several occasions), all 4 IWD2 NPC romances would be with NPCs using elven avatars. I would have expected BioWare to do something like that, because they quite frankly had no clue about what people wanted to see or wanted to play, but I know you are just as dissatisfied with BioWarian railroading as I am. I mean that in a good way. That is one area where differing from BioWare is a virtue, not a vice.

 

I brought it up as just another reason I liked the "something not elven" option, apart from the just ones I've been harping on rather monotonously for the last few days. I'm just explaining my reason for putting that up. Sorry if it was confusing.

 

Just making an observation. I do know you have to draw the line somewhere.

 

And I think you said that you'd allow alternatives to that, anyway, so at this point, I'm content to shut up and wait for you to do what you do.

[Miloch]

Here's the picture and description from the Forgotten Realms Campaign Supplement 2nd edition:

Gnomes

The gnomes of Faerun are a small, friendly race of humanoid creatures common in most regions of the Realms. They are smaller and less stocky than dwarves, and are thought to be distant relatives of dwarves (though only gnomish men have beards).

 

The faces of gnomes, regardless of age, are lined as if with centuries of smiles and frowns, making these people appear to be carved from wood. Their natural coloring, from a light ash color to maple to the color of varnished and buffed oak, increases the tendency to think of gnomes as a woods folk - when they are thought of at all.

 

The gnomes are called the forgotten folk of the Forgotten Realms, for despite the fact they are an everyday sight in major cities and have good-sized communities of their own, they seem unbothered by the world and similarly only rarely become involved with it. Gnomes have no history beyond the memory of the eldest clan member and the songs of legend. They have never developed their own written tongue, acquiring the written language of those they live among for everyday use. Unlike the elves, they have no millennial heritage, and unlike the dwarves, no death-knell tomorrow. As a result, they tend to take life as it comes, one day at a time.

 

Gnomes are among the most common-sense beings of a world filled with all manner of magical things. Their natural tendency towards illusioncraft has given them a wisdom to look beyond the fancy trappings of speech and appearance to find out what is really there instead of making them more crafty and cunning. Gnomes value their families first, then whatever other relatives they encounter, then other gnomes, then the world, in that order.

 

Gnomes have no subraces, but since the Time of Troubles a different sort of gnome has appeared in the Realms, coming primarily from the South. These gnomes are particularly interested in craft and artifice, including all manner of sciences and invention. This new breed of gnome is relatively rare, but counts among its numbers primarily younger gnomes who venerate the god Gond Wonderbringer (who resembles a gnome in their version of the faith). Such gnomes are currently found as apprentices to smiths, craftsmen and wizards, and are eager to learn as much about the world around them as possible. What they will do with this knowledge is as yet undetermined, but given the legendary wisdom of the gnomes, everyday humans have little to fear.

[Domi]

Well, I prefer 3rd edition picture to that cartoon, sorry. When I adventure in FR, I don't want to feel like I am in the Disneyland. Not to mention that FR is as usual contradicts itself:

Gnomes have no subraces

while we all know that there are gnome subraces. IWD2 is not 2nd edition game anyway, it strives to be 3rd edition, so I'd rather not be relying on the outdated materials.

 

My quote was in reference to the fact that if you have Peony use the elven avatar (despite the fact that she refers to herself as "well-rounded" and "plump" on several occasions), all 4 IWD2 NPC romances would be with NPCs using elven avatars.

 

This is simply incorrect. They all use default avatars for their race, except for Peony. Jaemal is aasimar, so he uses human male mage avatar. Every character uses whatever avatar the game assigns to him/her. If half-elves were defaulted to humans, Salomeya would have had human avatar. Moreover, most of the characters that have partial romances have the default avatars, that are not elven, such as Nikosh, Hildury and Prachi. Only Diriel from partial romances has an elven avatar, because he is an elf. So, there are plenty of the opportunities to romance characters with various avatars.

 

Peony's is the only one that caused troubles, the avatar being blatantly inappropriate for the character. The only reason I don't like the hooded avatar is because it doesn't show hair and doesn't have mage-appropriate animations. If it did, I'd used it as a default for Peony. I have no problems with using it for my PC, except that then it will be diffrent from Peony's. So, that's why I will be including a choice, and I will be keeping the option to use the elven avatars there as well, because theyhave all the animations and show the hair, and can be altered by Moiness avatars to have longer hair. The elven avatars just happen to provide the most versatile options for female mages (and human ones, I assume as well, but hiumans are even taller). If the small-folk had such a well-developped avatar, I doubt we'd have this discussion at all. And, trust me, I wish that they did!

[Miloch]

When I adventure in FR, I don't want to feel like I am in the Disneyland.

Uh... then why do you play 3rd edition (aka "Hasbroland")? Sorry... couldn't resist.

Well, I prefer 3rd addition picture to that cartoon, sorry.

I didn't say it was great, I just put it out there for reference. IMO it's at least slightly less objectionable than the gnome-as-miniature-human/elf, at least if you get rid of the butterflies and the gnome-as-lawn-ornament cap on the female.

 

And... I'm not trying to be facetious or argumentative here, but if you want your NPC to look like an elf... why not just make her an elf? Just wondering.

The only reason I don't like the hooded avatar is because it doesn't show hair and doesn't have mage-appropriate animations. If it did, I'd used it as a default.

In that case, what about the cleric_female_gnome animation? I like the thief because it looks less stocky, and the hood could possibly pass for long rather than short hair (and I think in some frames you might actually be able to glimpse long hair under the hood).

 

Seems I was thinking of Tutufix that changed hooded avatar animations. The readme says "In BG1, unarmoured thieves and bards would have hoods. This component will change that." But I'm not sure how it does/did that, since this component is deprecated in the latest release that I have.

 

It might be worth (*gasp* - dare I suggest it?) looking at BGT too.

I have no words to comment what I have seen...And they even come with different Avatars and relative animations for different races and sex!

I'm not sure how it does this... I've never loaded BGT (as yet) due to its rather draconian-seeming install procedures. I kinda doubt Ascension64 did new animations for (~132 frames*x # BAMs*y # races), but I wouldn't put it past him either.

[Domi]

And... I'm not trying to be facetious or argumentative here, but if you want your NPC to look like an elf... why not just make her an elf? Just wondering.

 

I never wanted her to be an ELF. I wanted her to be a GNOME, but have decent female avatar, with the mage-appropriate animations that showed hair. As I said before, my preference would have been scaled down elven avatar, 'cause it has all the perks and if it was scaled down it would have been different from elves AND halflings AND dwarves, but I am not an animation artist, and I don't want to hire one.

 

So, I switched it to elven avatar, by the reasons I explained before: it was imo the least inappropriate from all inappropriate solutions. I've *never* said that I wanted her to be an elf, or even look like an elf. Just have a decent avatar. Give me a good custom one - and I'll use it in a flash.

 

And for all it's worth, I often wanted to play a gnome myself, and always got stopped by the sight of a bearded dwarf the moment my character appeared in the game.

 

In that case, what about the cleric_female_gnome animation?

 

It's too obviously halfling, and as you noted yourself looks far too stocky. And it has even less resemblence to a mage than the hooded one.

 

In BG1, unarmoured thieves and bards would have hoods. This component will change that." But I'm not sure how it does/did that, since this component is deprecated in the latest release that I have.

 

It would simply replace appropriate human etc avatras from BG1 that had hoods to their BG2 counterparts that didn't. There won't be any new animations or anything for the gnomes, I guarantee that. Andyr for a while did the same thing, only backwards in BG1NPC, repalcing BG2 theives animations with BG1 ones. Then it went into Song and Silence, I think. I don't think that anyone in the community is capable of producing the set of new avatars from scratch. Moiness was the only one who could edit them.

[Miloch]

The only reason I don't like the hooded avatar is because it doesn't show hair and doesn't have mage-appropriate animations. If it did, I'd used it as a default for Peony.

The "short" (halfling/gnome) female thief animation (CIFT) does have a casting animation, BTW, at least in Tutu/BG2. Here are the first few frames (a):

Also, you can see what appears to be her hair sticking out of the hood.

 

For reference, here is the equivalent female elf mage casting animation (b):

Maybe these are different in IWD2 though.

 

You could, of course, recolour the hood in CIFT and crop it a bit so it looks like long hair. That'd be pretty easy... for a single frame or even several frames. But there are ~20 frames in each series, and ~20 BAMs for each race/gender/class, so we're talking about editing several hundred images . And even then, you might not be happy, if your conception of gnome = mini-elf. You could also set the hair colour to the same as the hood (minor?) colour in CIFT, and no one would know the difference, given the low resolution of these things.

 

And for those who aren't familiar with the horror, here is the existing animation, (same as male dwarf mage):

If you're offering a choice of using (a) or (b) [or even keeping the existing animation for the sadists out there], I think that is more than sufficient. IMO it'd be more trouble than it's worth to edit the animation.

[Domi]

It's not the casting animations per se, Miloch, it's also the 4 sequences 1 through 4 that 'dress up' the mage's avatar depending on which robes/cloak she wears, the same way, a fighter for example, is dressed up as she changes from leather armour to full plate etc.

 

And nope, it's not hair that shows up from under the hood, it's iirc a shadow. I think 'hair' is the light-green, and majenta is 'minor' clothes color. I have never seen hair on the hooded ones, and trust me, it's easy to distinguish Peony's blue hair from light clothes.

 

If you're offering a choice of using (a) or (b) [or even keeping the existing animation for the sadists out there], I think that is more than sufficient.

 

Yes, those two and the elven ones. Sorry, but they are the only one that are mage-specific and have decent hair.

 

IMO it'd be more trouble than it's worth to edit the animation.

 

That's a moot point, because nobody can edit animations.

[Miloch]

It's not the casting animations per se, Miloch, it's also the 4 sequences 1 through 4 that 'dress up' the mage's avatar depending on which robes/cloak she wears

Well, the thief by default has a sort of robe or cloak (hence the hood) - another reason I prefer it for a mage over the other CIFx animations.

Yes, those two and the elven ones. Sorry, but they are the only one that are mage-specific and have decent hair.

Uh, the second one is the elven one (in BG2 at least).

That's a moot point, because nobody can edit animations.

Huh? It is possible. I started to edit another sequence (ogre magi) but gave it up as there were just too damn many frames for it to be worth my time. Maybe the originals were done in some sort of 3D modeling sequencer - I can see that making the work somewhat easier.

[Domi]

Well, the thief by default has a sort of robe or cloak (hence the hood) - another reason I prefer it for a mage over the other CIFx animations.

 

Yes, but it doesn't change as you upgrade your equipment to a different looking animations, like the mage one's do.

 

Uh, the second one is the elven one (in BG2 at least).

 

I read what you wrote as hood and the old dwarven nightmare. I'm trying to test the mod atm and keep an eye on my in-laws, so my attention is divided.

 

Huh? It is possible. I started to edit another sequence (ogre magi) but gave it up as there were just too damn many frames for it to be worth my time.

 

That very reason. The amount of work is simply overwhelming for a fan to do it using the available software and current community know-how. If somebody wants to prove me wrong and do the whole suit of gnome mages animations - please, please, please, go ahead!

[Miloch]

Well, too bad you don't still have contact with Moinesse (or do you?). I'd be interested in hearing how she did her avatars. Though I suspect she used IE BAM editing tools that have been around a while, like BAM Workshop, and she edited them frame by frame.

The first one is the original female elf mage - the second is Moinesse's version. As you can see, this would be fairly easy to do something like make hair long (or remove a hood). It'd just be incredibly time-consuming to do it for every frame in every sequence in every BAM. No one said it wasn't for her either, unless she said it was easy (and maybe you can tell this if you still have her original files and their time-stamps).

 

There aren't a whole lot of alternatives to frame-by-frame BAM editing since, as someone above noted, you have to conform your animations to the existing ones anyway, else the weapons and such will be off. And since the animations sequences are hard-coded to some extent, you'd probably have to edit an existing one. So if you edited the default one (male_dwarf_mage/female_gnome_mage) to look more female, you'd be hosing any male dwarf or gnome mages. The female_gnome_thief, as you say, only has the second animation sequence. So I'm not sure if adding 1st, 3rd and 4th sequences to make it more "dressed up" would even work. Though what's interesting is there seems to be an animation missing at 0x6213 for mage_female_halfling. Who knows... with enough hacking, maybe it could work somehow.

 

When's your estimated completion date for this mod? I might take this up, once I'm done with current projects. Which should be finished roughly around, oh, 2010 if I'm lucky .

[Domi]

So if you edited the default one (male_dwarf_mage/female_gnome_mage) to look more female, you'd be hosing any male dwarf or gnome mages.

 

What I would have done is assigned the new set of animations to a header that is not used in the IWD2, ie Sarevok's animations' header, but with the full series of sequences (a-la Vlad's Tutporial that describes how to import IWD2 animations into BG2), and the cast it via spell at character creation. You cannot use the G1 series of animations at CHR creations, as they get repalced, I think, by default G11 (though I am not 100% positive.)

 

You see, in my own game I am using a Monk G1 animations (that does not have G11 through G19 sequences) for Prachi, that makes her look like a robed monk, and I was successful assigning it to her via spell, but I think it did not get assigned when I switched it on CHR via NI. The Inventory appearance for this G1 avatar is the non-robed one, a default avatar for race/class.

[Kulyok]

Just a note: for newbies like me, who only want some more dialogue(and do not want to mess up with frames and stuff), I'll be happy not to install any custom avatars and animations, if at all possible - I do not install "Moinesse's Avatars" for this very reason(i.e. compatibility, replacing existing animations, at times it shows that the quality does not match the original game, possible bugs).

[Miloch]

And adding dialogue never introduces bugs, and always matches the "quality" (?) of the original game .