Class Checks - How do they work with Kits?

[Thimblerig]

I'm sorry, because this is probably an obvious question, but -

 

If I have the check:

 

IF ~Class(Player1,MAGE)~ THEN etc.

 

will it return true for all the mage sub-classes like Sorceror and Illusionist and so-forth?

 

Or do I have to list all the potential variations separately?

 

**

 

I want to filter out all the pure mages; using MAGE_ALL will return Fighter/Mages and so-forth, which won't do.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Look at the identifiers... Class(Player1,MAGE) ... you could use that and then using this:

The fact of the matter is, you can't separate the Mages form Sorcerers with one step, so you just add in this:

IF ~Class(Player1,MAGE)
!Class(Player1,SORCERER)
Kit(Player1,TRUE_CLASS)~ THEN etc.

 

The base game also needs a fix to separate the special kits of the wildmage and barbarian, it's easy. You fix it by first editing the kit.ids file so it has this:

IDS
0x0000 SPECIAL_CLASS
0x40000000 BARBARIAN
0x80000000 WILDMAGE
...
0x4000 TRUE_CLASS
...

Edit: added stuff about the Enchanted Editions...

Instead of the idiot thing the original ToB game has, it should be fixed in the BGI/IIEE's. There's a lot of info on this in different places, but here's a report I made to a mod about it... yes, it's the first google hit I got to it. So sue me.

[Thimblerig]

Look at the identifiers... Class(Player1,MAGE) ...

 

Thanks, Jarno - that list is just what I needed.

[cmorgan]

Hey, Thimblerig.... just for your consideration, after looking at all the possibilities TobEX and BG:EE and BGII:EE have introduced or have the potential to introduce, and the probability that more folks are going to extend classes, kits, and races with custom values that may or may not be grouped under FIGHTER FIGHTER_MAGE MAGE et al...

 

I suggest making sure that there is a no-class/no-race/no-kit option for whatever you want, and that you play fast and loose with the conditioning.

 

Just a friendly reminder from a dude who just had a NVROL (No Valid Replies Or Links) pop because his dialog test did not have a condition of "IF ~none of the above are true~ THEN ~do this~ ...

[Thimblerig]

Yup - I've marked out about four special cases and everything that doesn't fit those goes to the default. Thanks :-)

[Belanos]

I have a related question. If use MAGE_ALL, does that also include Bards or will I have to list them seperately? Likewise, does CLERIC_ALL also include Druids?

[Jarno Mikkola]

I have a related question. If use MAGE_ALL, does that also include Bards or will I have to list them seperately? Likewise, does CLERIC_ALL also include Druids?

No and no. Did you actually read the iesdp link I linked to above on the mages... it has these definitions at it's end too.

[Belanos]

No and no. Did you actually read the iesdp link I linked to above on the mages... it has these definitions at it's end too.

 

Yes I did. I just wasn't sure if listing MAGE_ALL referred to all Arcane casters, and CLERIC_ALL to Divine. That iesdp site doesn't always give the most straight forward information. I guess I'll have to add some entries for Bards and Druid then.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Yes I did. I just wasn't sure if listing MAGE_ALL referred to all Arcane casters, and CLERIC_ALL to Divine.

Erhm, what's unclear about this:

204 CLERIC_ALL

Detects clerics, including single class, kits, multi-class, and dual-class.

And the fact that there happens to be DRUID_ALL also etc. Look at the class.ids page's bottom notes !

 

Erhm, it's more like you don't like the answers given.

[Belanos]

And the fact that there happens to be DRUID_ALL also etc. Look at the class.ids page's bottom notes !

 

I'm not sure why you're making such a big deal of it. If you don't like my questions, don't read them.

[Avenger]

The *_ALL cases just solve the multi/dual class ambiguity. There is no bypass between classes, at least in bg*.