Jump to content

V.14 bug reports and minor issues.


Ilyich

Recommended Posts

Do you mean a specific immunity to imprisonment?

 

Yes. I never casted the spell in my 10 years bg career because I find it a lil too lame and best left to enemy AI only, but in order to make the component work as intended with those common mods installed, that's the easy fix.

 

Spell Revisions makes Protection from Normal Missiles protect against melfs and flame arrow? Haha how silly, melfs are a +6 weapon unmodded (+2 in SCS II, maybe others too) which is most certainly not a normal weapon. Having it protect against flame arrow is just as bad, its a level 3 spell, not a physical attack with an unenchanted projectile. David should not take this change into account, since it is completely ridiculous imo.

 

In fact it becomes Protection from Missiles ( losing the 'normal' ) under that mod. A lil too much I agree, but afterall nobody uses normal bullets anymore in bg2 and there're very few ranged attackers overall.

So the choice is between a useless lvl3 spell and a lvl3 spell that's used mostly to deflect some magic lvl2 and lvl3 attacks, I opted for the latter.

There was some talk about changing PfNM behaviour under SCS too http://forums.gibberlings3.net/index.php?s...amp;hl=missiles

Link to post

Protection from Missile

Spell Revisions makes Protection from Normal Missiles protect against melfs and flame arrow? Haha how silly, melfs are a +6 weapon unmodded (+2 in SCS II, maybe others too) which is most certainly not a normal weapon. Having it protect against flame arrow is just as bad, its a level 3 spell, not a physical attack with an unenchanted projectile. David should not take this change into account, since it is completely ridiculous imo.

 

In fact it becomes Protection from Missiles ( losing the 'normal' ) under that mod. A lil too much I agree, but afterall nobody uses normal bullets anymore in bg2 and there're very few ranged attackers overall.

So the choice is between a useless lvl3 spell and a lvl3 spell that's used mostly to deflect some magic lvl2 and lvl3 attacks, I opted for the latter.

There was some talk about changing PfNM behaviour under SCS too http://forums.gibberlings3.net/index.php?s...amp;hl=missiles

Raj already explained the reason behind the change quite well but just that I'm here I might add a couple of things.

 

Acid Arrow and Flame Arrows are Conjurations, not Invocations (the latter even included physical damage output in vanilla). In PnP it means they are considered as "real arrows" magically summoned/conjured. In later editions they even go further with this aspect by making all Conjuration spells bypass magic resistance too.

 

SR's Melf Minute Meteors are +2 enchanted just like SCS ones. This spell is more controversial because it was partially Invocation partially Conjuration, but the fact that it deals physical damage and that it's used as a sort of "echanted dard" lead me to consider it as a "physical missile".

 

That being said, you may as well disagree with that, it was done only to make the spell appealing (as Raj better explain), and consistent with its "new name". Nothing prevents me from removing such feature for SR V4 as long as most players agree.

Link to post

Catching up with this thread:

 

(1) it looks like I've broken a macro, sorry. (The macros in SCS and SCSII had got tangled up with each other in a way that was causing various problems; I've obviously not fixed all of them.) I need to do another release shortly to release the Russian translation; I'll fix it for that.

 

(2) @Ardanis: Yes, I probably should start using the various built-in macros for new bits of code. But they didn't exist when I originally wrote SCS(II) and I don't really want to rewrite all the various bits of code that use them.

 

(3) I don't know what's going on with the missing objects and random hostility; I'll see if I can reproduce it.

 

(4) @Ardanis: I'd forgotten all about the simulacrum code you sent me. Can you remind me what it does that the extant code doesn't (well, apart from not work on a BGT install, which is just an area-code bug).

 

EDIT: I've now dug up the thread from six months ago. Yes, this should definitely have been included.

 

(5) I don't particularly object to dragons being affected by maze, so I don't want to give them that. I'm amenable to adding a specific protection-from-spell immunity to Imprisonment, for compatibility with tweaks to that spell.

 

(6) I do allow for Shield when deciding to cast magic missile.

 

(7) @Ilyich:

 

its perfectly logical behaviour for them to realise shield is in effect if magic missile does nothing after 2 castings of it (something similar to the Beholder AI when the shield of Balduran is used)

 

In principle I'd love to do wizard defence-spotting this way (at least for non-visible defences). But it's totally unmanageable: it would drastically increase the length of the mage codes, and I can't afford that kind of length increase. (I can get away with it for Beholders, because they're looking for two specific effects, and in any case they're scripts are generally simpler.)

 

(8) @Raj:

 

Btw, what does happen if I manually substitute some spells to scs2 mages, will they use them once meet in game? Or change the mage.tph so that they have a chance to memorize different spells? Do they have a clue how to cast them? Does it make a difference if they know, for example, Bigby's Crushing Hand instead of Imprisonment (same targetting)? There're simply too many spells left out of mage memorization table, and while many are nearly useless, sometime ( like, 1:10 chance ) could be fun to meet a wizard who decided to fight out of schemes.

 

If you change the spells mages give, they'll use them, provided they're on the list of spells that SCS uses overall. Adding spells that none of my wizards already cast won't achieve anything, whether it's done via mage.tph or via editing the CRE files manually.

 

If there are offensive spells I don't use which you think are worth casting (in their vanilla form) I'd be interested to hear. I perhaps ought to think about using the higher level Bigby's Hand spells, they're borderline worth it.

Link to post
(1) it looks like I've broken a macro, sorry. (The macros in SCS and SCSII had got tangled up with each other in a way that was causing various problems; I've obviously not fixed all of them.) I need to do another release shortly to release the Russian translation; I'll fix it for that.

 

Maybe that's the cause for some of the bug-reports we're getting over at the kerzenburg forums. Some users reported that every creature with a bear animation they encountered crashed their game. Aside from a XP-reduction mod every other mod edits the bear's scripts, and I'm not aware of any sweeping changes in those mods.

 

Moreover, isn't the code for dw#bear.spl, which doesn't get applied as there's no dw#bear.bcs, unnecessary if you use opcode 176?

 

10th

Link to post
(1) it looks like I've broken a macro, sorry. (The macros in SCS and SCSII had got tangled up with each other in a way that was causing various problems; I've obviously not fixed all of them.) I need to do another release shortly to release the Russian translation; I'll fix it for that.

 

Maybe that's the cause for some of the bug-reports we're getting over at the kerzenburg forums. Some users reported that every creature with a bear animation they encountered crashed their game.

 

No, that can't be it. I use the WEIDU-standard macro to patch the bears. (The only reason I've still got many of my own versions of these macros is legacy.)

 

You're right about dw#bear.spl, thanks.

Link to post

@Ilyich:

 

Lastly, a bit of curious behaviour from a lich in the "undead town" from the Cult of the Eyeless quest, just before the beholder lair. After it spawned I fled out of its immediate sight, to avoid its spells during the first time stop. After chasing me down it stopped just outside my sight (I could see its fireshields, but not the lich) and summoned a Mordenkainen's sword which I never saw since this happened too far away from my character, then for some reason targetted it with all of its ADHW spells, rendering them useless.

 

What's happening is that it's (somehow) erroneously decided that you're using Protection from Undead scrolls. Standard strategy in that situation is to summon something, let the something attack, and then target the something with area-effect and dispel-magic. I've tweaked the code, hopefully to avoid this glitch.

Link to post

@10thLich:

 

Found the bear problem. The standard WEIDU ADD_CRE_EFFECT macro only works for the effect file format introduced in BG2, and TUTU uses the BG1 version. Note to self: RTFM. I'll need to do it manually.

Link to post
If there are offensive spells I don't use which you think are worth casting (in their vanilla form) I'd be interested to hear. I perhaps ought to think about using the higher level Bigby's Hand spells, they're borderline worth it.

 

Admittedly there're not many worth spells in vanilla, anyway for the sake of variety:

 

I think Polimorph Others is funny and effectively removes one party member from the fight if it hits.

Hold Monsters is less powerful than Chaos but it could be added because the latter is overused

Nishruus are interesting summons.

Bigby's Clenched Fist (lvl8 one) doesn't have great damage but the hold effect has no save so can be useful against the party.

Energy Blades do some nice damage and could be nice to add to hla cleric spellbooks so that they can use a cast and attack routine similar to melf meteors users. High level mages could use this innstead of MMM as well.

 

 

Crazy idea, what about limited wish, used the way mages already cast wish? the mass heal is decent, the mass minor globe is very nice for the wizard allies if combined with area of effect low level spells. With a chance enemies decide to use their 'one time wish' against the party, so an opportunity to show time stop or wail of the banshee for <18 wizards. Or they could be not that wise and summon a bunch of vampires ('I wish to be protected from undead right now' option): those could always decide to attack the party first :blush:

@Demi/Wisp: there's material for both ''IRs'', what about changing the 'I wish for a powerful magical item' reward? It's always a lame full plate+2, while it could be anything random.

 

 

Liches and Rakshasas could abuse a lil more their spell immunities in order to see some underused spells in action:

Ice Storm, Delayed Blast Fireball, Death Fog, Grease etc.

 

 

Some errors I think in the mage.tph, the way the choice is set/made:

 

level 5 for invokers (btw, cone of cold is pretty cool, could use some love from other specialists as well):

SET ~choice~=RANDOM(1 2)
		END
		PATCH_IF ~choice~=1 THEN BEGIN
			ADD_MEMORIZED_SPELL ~spwi523~ #4 ~wizard~ // Sunfire
		END 
			PATCH_IF ~choice~=1 THEN BEGIN
			ADD_MEMORIZED_SPELL ~spwi503~ #4 ~wizard~ // Cone of Cold

level 7 conjurers

			SET ~choice~=RANDOM(1 3)
		PATCH_IF ~choice~=1 THEN BEGIN
			ADD_MEMORIZED_SPELL ~spwi715~ #6 ~wizard~ // Power Word: Stun
		END 
		PATCH_IF ~choice~=2 THEN BEGIN
			ADD_MEMORIZED_SPELL ~spwi707~ #6 ~wizard~ // Cacofiend
					END
					PATCH_IF ~choice~=3 OR ~choice~=4 THEN BEGIN
							ADD_MEMORIZED_SPELL ~spwi714~ #6 ~wizard~ // Prismatic Spray
					END
		PATCH_IF ~choice~>4 THEN BEGIN
			ADD_MEMORIZED_SPELL ~spwi717~ #6 ~wizard~ // Summon Efreeti
					END

level 9 necromancers

SET ~choice~=RANDOM(1 7)
		PATCH_IF ~choice~<3 THEN BEGIN
			ADD_MEMORIZED_SPELL ~spwi905~ #8 ~wizard~ // Gate
		END
		PATCH_IF ~choice~=2 OR ~choice~=3 THEN BEGIN
			ADD_MEMORIZED_SPELL ~spwi912~ #8 ~wizard~ //  Power Word: Kill

 

 

 

edit: heh, right after v15 upload :laugh:

Link to post
edit: heh, right after v15 upload :laugh:

 

It's okay, I've slipped these fixes in (quick silent update) - thanks!

 

PATCH_IF (~%kit%~ STRING_EQUAL_CASE ~invoker~) THEN BEGIN
			SET ~choice~=RANDOM(1 3)
					PATCH_IF ~choice~<3 THEN BEGIN
			 ADD_MEMORIZED_SPELL ~spwi812~ #7 ~wizard~ // Horrid Wilting
					END
					PATCH_IF ~choice~=3 THEN BEGIN
			 ADD_MEMORIZED_SPELL ~spwi818~ #7 ~wizard~ // Bigby's Clenched Fist
					END
		PATCH_IF ~choice~=4 THEN BEGIN
			 ADD_MEMORIZED_SPELL ~spwi810~ #7 ~wizard~ // Incendiary Cloud
		END

 

:blush:

Link to post
@Demi/Wisp: there's material for both ''IRs'', what about changing the 'I wish for a powerful magical item' reward? It's always a lame full plate+2, while it could be anything random.

You're right. I'll see about randomising the item in v6.

Link to post
@Demi/Wisp: there's material for both ''IRs'', what about changing the 'I wish for a powerful magical item' reward? It's always a lame full plate+2, while it could be anything random.

You're right. I'll see about randomising the item in v6.

 

There's a text requirement to allow for. The +2 plate mail is specifically described (iirc) as being created by the LW spell, so ideally other items would likewise have some such descriptor. (And conversely, the +2 full plate can't be randomised elsewhere, at least not without having its description changed.)

Link to post
There's a text requirement to allow for. The +2 plate mail is specifically described (iirc) as being created by the LW spell, so ideally other items would likewise have some such descriptor. (And conversely, the +2 full plate can't be randomised elsewhere, at least not without having its description changed.)

Yes, that does complicate the matter a little. Doing away with it entirely would be a lot easier.

Link to post
'I wish for a powerful magical item' reward
Imo that's best suited for SR, since we're talking about a spell in the first place. Indeed, both Wish dialogs have quite a room for improvements.
Link to post
'I wish for a powerful magical item' reward
Imo that's best suited for SR, since we're talking about a spell in the first place. Indeed, both Wish dialogs have quite a room for improvements.

I think IR would be a better place instead. Wish spell simply says you'll get a powerful item, and since IR re-write all descriptions it would be fairly easy to change plat19.itm into a really unique item while plat23.itm remains the standard Full Plate +2. As of now the former is identical to the later except for a small difference in the identified description (a small line which indicates the plate's magical origin).

 

Wish could indeed be improve A LOT, but that's another story imo.

Link to post

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...