Tweaks in progress

[CamDawg]

Just a quick update to let folks know what's being worked on for the next G3/Tutu Tweaks:

• Make wilderness areas accessible in chapters 2 & 3 -- (G3 only) this is already coded and ready to go.
  
• Shapeshifter tweaks -- Littiz and I have exchanged PMs and have hashed out what should be an even better fix for disspellable paws. Neither one of us has had time to sit down and code it yet.
  
• Alter item descriptions for item-changing tweaks -- this is going to require heavy involvement from the translators. An Engish version is easy enough.
  
• Gradual drow item disintegration -- (G3 only) I'm attacking this from two sides. The items will have an x% chance to disintegrate per day as well as a chance to break every time they're used.
  
• Low level abilities -- Some of these will be included.
  
• Adding spell scrolls to Exotic Items -- (Tutu only) As stated in the thread, this will focus on scroll that are not present in bogstandard BG.
  
• Randomized traps -- This will be a long-term project, but the ultimate goal will be to add many, many traps to the game, only a fraction of which would be active in any game. The net result should be that you will actually need a thief looking for them and should not be able to metagame through them.
  

[Littiz]

Shapeshifter tweaks -- Littiz and I have exchanged PMs and have hashed out what should be an even better fix for disspellable paws. Neither one of us has had time to sit down and code it yet

How would you coordinate this?

You asked me to remove your stuff from Refinements in order to avoid redundancy, and I did.

What should we do now? Placing this in both places, or just in one?

[CamDawg]

Shapeshifter tweaks -- Littiz and I have exchanged PMs and have hashed out what should be an even better fix for disspellable paws. Neither one of us has had time to sit down and code it yet

How would you coordinate this?

You asked me to remove your stuff from Refinements in order to avoid redundancy, and I did.

What should we do now? Placing this in both places, or just in one?

Oh, the fixes should be the same in both--it's just that both of us want to do something to the shapeshifters beyond just fixing them so the components will be different. I'd like to do the fixes + at-will shapeshifting and allowing armor to the shapeshifter kit whereas Refinements is fixes w/o armor tweaks and at-will shapeshifting and other changes. So I would like the shapeshifting fixes to be the same in both components as I think together we can fix them even better than they are now, but the components in the two mods should likely remain separate and possibly exclusive from one another. I'm not sure if we could integrate all of Refinement's changes with the ones I'd like to make in the tweak packs into something coherent and satisfactory to all the parties involved.

[Littiz]

Building slightly different versions for our mods is fine for me, yet, frankly, I thought we would proceed as I suggested.

I would use my files, re-using the same base solutions and the -already heavily worked on and debugged- structure of interactions.

I would change it as I indicated, using the virtual secondary type trick, and I would handle the additional interaction issues that would arise.

I would remove all the effects from items and include them in the secondary type trick to better handle continuity issues.

At this point I would pass the files to you to implement the gender trick, and render the final solution even cleaner. If everything works, at this point, we could both release it.

 

But now I discover that the fix could be actually implemented and released before I could use my own ideas in Refinements.

I'm willing to collaborate (as I proved with the load of PMs I sent), and you're fully right, if we combine our efforts we can build an almost perfect fix, but if it's not possible to do it fairly, then I'm not that interested.

Try to understand me: you'll admit that you left half of my PMs unanswered, including the last one... I come here and I read this post (AND that other one...), and I think, hey!

 

I hate to sound unpleasant, but, for my part, I really take always a great care to be correct in such issues (just read the thanks section and all the credit notes I put in the tp2).

[CamDawg]

I have been planning to proceed as you suggest. If you wish for me to postpone release until they're implemented in Refinements I'll do so.

[SimDing0]

How come it matters where the fix comes out first?

[SimDing0]

[*]Low level abilities -- Some of these will be included.

While we're on the subject, Echon mentionned that in PnP high WIS and INT are meant to give bonuses like immunity to illusions or charm. He can't implement any of them in BG1, but you might be able to do something for BG2. Seems like a good feature of PnP here.

[Andyr]

How would you have an immunity to something like Mirror Image work in game - have it auto-dispelled when the enemy casts it?

 

Some of the stuff could be cool, though.

[Echon]

I have been thinking about how to implement stuff like this in BG2 (purely theoretically though, I am not modding BG2) and one of the first problems I run into is finding a way to make sure that the intelligence and wisdom scores have not been modified with spells or items.

 

-Echon

[igi]

Simply run a script at the start of the game, and note the players INT/WIS scores (yes, thats 50 stat checks, but it only runs once, so ...). Then set a global (or local) to the value of each stat.

 

Then, just use that global when you want to test the original INT/WIS.

[Echon]

That is possible but things still become complicated. Int and wis can be increased permanently and temporarily. A character would gain the appropriate bonuses under both circumstances, so there has to be both permanent and temporary abilities. Intelligence can be drained by illithids so they have to be removable, as well.

 

-Echon

[CamDawg]

Why wouldn't temporary changes in INT/WIS from items or spells affect a creature's ability to see past illusions or be charmed?

[Andyr]

I think Ech is saying that temporary changes *would* affect it.

[Fallen_Demon]

I think cam is asking why it shouldn't.

[CamDawg]

Yeah, sorry, let me clarify. From Echon's comments and his response to igi, I thought he was implying that magic and items that affect INT/WIS should not affect the charm/illusion immunities. Based on that conclusion, I was asking why they would/should not have an effect.