Various item inaccuracies

[LucklessCebu]

There are still quite a few inaccuracies in the descriptions of items (clean BG2-TOB GOG.com install with only the fixpack, using GTU-light). I've also included a few item errors that should probably be fixed. I realize the GTU light version attempts to be fairly minimalistic in making changes, but here are a few things I've come across while browsing Near Infinity that I believe fit the bill:

 

AEGIS.itm, AEGIS2.itm: One of these copies is the version Wufgar uses, while one is the version that actually drops upon death. Both versions are set to 0 enchantment level (the version you pick up should be +3, while Wulfgar's version is probably intended to be +5). Wulfgar's version also has inconsistent missile and melee damage - 2d4+7 melee, 2d4+5 missile (but this could probably be left alone - not as if we need to make Drizzt & co. any weaker).

 

Black Blade of Disaster spell/sword: Description lists +5 enchantment bonus. THAC0 and damage bonuses are indeed +5, but the enchantment level is +6.

 

BRAC09.itm (Gauntlets of Weapon Skill): Has "Not usable by:" text despite being universally usable.

 

HALB09.itm (Halberd +4, Wave): Would be nice if this clarified that the +15 damage is cold damage.

 

HAMM09.itm (Crom Faeyr): Completely fails to mention the fact that it does 5 bonus electricity damage - a rather egregious omission (and probably part of the reason why Crom Faeyr gets so frequently trashed on various message boards...).

 

NPARM.itm (Jansen Adventurewear): Has an undocumented "Set base AC to 9" effect. I suspect this is leftover rubbish and should be removed (the item description specifically mentions not affecting base armor class) - but if not, the effect should be mentioned in the description.

 

REAVER.itm (Unholy Reaver): The description of this sword is comically inaccurate. When Shadows of Amn came out, it didn't really matter as no one could use it - but with ToB it's a legitimate option for Fighter/Thief types with Use Any Item. The description fails to mention the immunity to charm effect provided by the sword, as well as the bonus 5 damage to good aligned creatures it provides. It also has a dispel-on-hit effect like Carsomyr which should probably be cleaned up: in current form, it hits 50% of the time, does not bypass magic resistance but is effective 100% of the time, and dispels magic from all enemies in the area(!). Compare to Carsomyr: hits 100% of the time, bypasses magic resistance, level 30 dispel, dispels from one target.

(Note: not sure if they changed this weapon at all for EE, which I don't have. Can Dorn wield this?)

 

SW1H15.itm (Frostbrand [Drizzt's Scimitar]): Not that it's terribly important, as this isn't really *supposed* to be an item you can consistently use, but the item description completely fails to mention the 50% resist fire bonus granted by the scimitar.

 

Lastly, quick question: have any attempts at standardizing the levels that items cast spells at been made? I believe the vanilla game is all over the place on this. As an example, it would be nice to know that the Amulet of Cheetah Speed casts a level 20 improved haste rather than, say, level 11. The desription could be updated to mention that the improved haste will last for 23 rounds, or cast at level 20 (assuming this is indeed the intended behavior).

[kreso]

REAVER.itm (Unholy Reaver): The description of this sword is comically inaccurate. When Shadows of Amn came out, it didn't really matter as no one could use it - but with ToB it's a legitimate option for Fighter/Thief types with Use Any Item. The description fails to mention the immunity to charm effect provided by the sword, as well as the bonus 5 damage to good aligned creatures it provides. It also has a dispel-on-hit effect like Carsomyr which should probably be cleaned up: in current form, it hits 50% of the time, does not bypass magic resistance but is effective 100% of the time, and dispels magic from all enemies in the area(!). Compare to Carsomyr: hits 100% of the time, bypasses magic resistance, level 30 dispel, dispels from one target.

(Note: not sure if they changed this weapon at all for EE, which I don't have. Can Dorn wield this?)

.

BG2:EE - it has a 50% chance to dispel on hit, dispel affects only hit target, ignores MR, is usable only by evil Paladins (I assume Dorn can wield it), extra damage vs Good, immunity to Charm effects.

Oh, and it doesn't have any description.

[LucklessCebu]

Oh, and it doesn't have any description.

 

Haha. Oh, poor, neglected Unholy Reaver.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Black Blade of Disaster spell/sword: Description lists +5 enchantment bonus. THAC0 and damage bonuses are indeed +5, but the enchantment level is +6.

There's nothing in the game that this effects. As a matter of a fact, it's enchantment level is +5 in all the game facts. Your editor might say what ever it likes, it's the game behavior that the description needs to resemble. It can be a +32767 and it doesn't matter---

The Unholy Reaver is just like it's holy variation duplicate.

 

Agreed, the enchantment level should be corrected to +5, not only because of the description but also because the sword is one-handed. All other +6 weapons in the game are exclusively two-handed.

No.

[Hurricane]

Quick review from my side:

 

AEGIS.itm, AEGIS2.itm: One of these copies is the version Wufgar uses, while one is the version that actually drops upon death. Both versions are set to 0 enchantment level (the version you pick up should be +3, while Wulfgar's version is probably intended to be +5). Wulfgar's version also has inconsistent missile and melee damage - 2d4+7 melee, 2d4+5 missile (but this could probably be left alone - not as if we need to make Drizzt & co. any weaker).

 

The description for AEGIS.itm is incorrect because it is the description for AEGIS2.itm, the version available to the player. However, since AEGIS.itm cannot drop, it does not matter that its damage is at odds with the text, because the player never sees it. The Fixpack generally doesn't alter unseen descriptions.

About the enchantment level: I agree that both versions of the weapon should receive appropriate enchantments. I also agree that AEGIS2.itm should get +3 and AEGIS.itm should be +5, because that's exactly what the description says: The weapon is more powerful in Wulfgar's hands, and is merely +3 when picked up by the player. Also, +3 and +5 match the thac0 bonus of AEGIS2 and AEGIS, respectively.

 

 

Black Blade of Disaster spell/sword: Description lists +5 enchantment bonus. THAC0 and damage bonuses are indeed +5, but the enchantment level is +6.

 

Agreed, the enchantment level should be corrected to +5, not only because of the description but also because the sword is one-handed. All other +6 weapons in the game are exclusively two-handed.

 

 

BRAC09.itm (Gauntlets of Weapon Skill): Has "Not usable by:" text despite being universally usable.

 

Since this is only a cosmetic error, you may have to convince Wisp to fix this in GTU Light.

 

 

HALB09.itm (Halberd +4, Wave): Would be nice if this clarified that the +15 damage is cold damage.

 

Agreed, even though it's only an omission. For what it's worth, elemental damage on other weapons is usually labelled as such. Plus, the description in BGII:EE now does specify it as cold damage as well.

 

 

HAMM09.itm (Crom Faeyr): Completely fails to mention the fact that it does 5 bonus electricity damage - a rather egregious omission (and probably part of the reason why Crom Faeyr gets so frequently trashed on various message boards...).

 

Agreed, this is an error. BGII:EE now mentions it as well. Needs to be corrected via setup.tra for all language versions, and added in GTU Light as well.

 

 

NPARM.itm (Jansen Adventurewear): Has an undocumented "Set base AC to 9" effect. I suspect this is leftover rubbish and should be removed (the item description specifically mentions not affecting base armor class) - but if not, the effect should be mentioned in the description.

 

I think you've misunderstood the description. It says it "does not give any bonuses to the base armor class", but the base armor class itself can very well be AC9. BGII:EE has also added AC9 to the description now, so we might as well go that way. AC9 should be added via setup.tra for all language versions, and to the GTU and GTU Light as well.

 

 

REAVER.itm (Unholy Reaver)

 

The inaccurate description does not need to be altered because the sword is flagged as undroppable from the one creature that has it (see GITH03.cre in Near Infinity). I mentioned the +5 damage vs. good-aligned creatures myself earlier, but CamDawg clarified that these things do not matter if the item is not available to the player.

 

 

SW1H15.itm (Frostbrand [Drizzt's Scimitar]): Not that it's terribly important, as this isn't really *supposed* to be an item you can consistently use, but the item description completely fails to mention the 50% resist fire bonus granted by the scimitar.

 

Agreed. BGII:EE also lists it now. Should be added via setup.tra for all language versions, and to the GTU and GTU Light as well.

[LucklessCebu]

Thanks for all the information, Hurricane. Good to know the EE is making some subtle improvements.

 

The inaccurate description does not need to be altered because the sword is flagged as undroppable from the one creature that has it (see GITH03.cre in Near Infinity). I mentioned the +5 damage vs. good-aligned creatures myself earlier, but CamDawg clarified that these things do not matter if the item is not available to the player.

Now this is fascinating. I can see the undroppable flag in Near Infinity, yet I distinctly remember picking up this sword on a previous playthrough (though this was a very long time ago - I believe Baldurdash was still the major fixpack at the time). A quick Ctrl+F of GameFAQs for Shadows of Amn turns up no mention of the Unholy Reaver, but there are numerous references to the sword dropping around the internet - it's even listed, with location, on GameBanshee. (*Searches recesses of internet*...) OK, best guess: in vanilla SoA, the Unholy Reaver was droppable, but this was something that was patched out at some point in ToB. Looks like EE adds it back in, though, in one form or another.

 

It says it "does not give any bonuses to the base armor class", but the base armor class itself can very well be AC9. BGII:EE has also added AC9 to the description now, so we might as well go that way.

Yep, that's a fair reading of the text - as long as it doesn't have unmentioned powers, I'm happy.

 

The description for AEGIS.itm is incorrect because it is the description for AEGIS2.itm, the version available to the player. However, since AEGIS.itm cannot drop, it does not matter that its damage is at odds with the text, because the player never sees it.

My issue wasn't with damage being inconsistent with the text (as, yes, the damage SHOULD be greater in Wulfgar's hands), just that the damage is inconsistent with itself - what other weapon has different damage amounts for thrown and melee versions? But again, not really an issue - Wulfgar needs all the extra damage he can get. The enchantment level definitely matters, though.

 

There's nothing in the game that this effects. As a matter of a fact, it's enchantment level is +5 in all the game facts. Your editor might say what ever it likes, it's the game behavior that the description needs to resemble. It can be a +32767 and it doesn't matter---

Could you clarify this, Jarno? If you're saying "The game actually reads the enchantment level as +5, despite what Near Infinity says" - then that is news to me. If you're saying "There's no difference between +5 enchantment and +6 enchantment in game, other than THAC0/damage bonuses" - then that is incorrect. +6 enchantment can bypass Absolute Immunity, while +5 cannot.

[Hurricane]

OK, best guess: in vanilla SoA, the Unholy Reaver was droppable, but this was something that was patched out at some point in ToB. Looks like EE adds it back in, though, in one form or another.

 

You might be right about SoA, but I really don't know since I've never experienced BG2 without ToB. As for BGII:EE, REAVER.itm is still undroppable, so there is no reason to change it in BG2/Fixpack. When you say that EE "adds it back in one form or another", that's because Overhaul created a new, separate copy of the Unholy Reaver (now called OHREAVER.itm) and properly modified that item to meet the standards for being a weapon available to the player, including a comprehensive description, new name (Ir'revrykal), lore value, its own unique icon etc. This version is obtainable now in EE, and that's probably what you have heard about. Nonetheless, this doesn't change the status of REAVER.itm in BG2/Fixpack.

 

 

My issue wasn't with damage being inconsistent with the text (as, yes, the damage SHOULD be greater in Wulfgar's hands), just that the damage is inconsistent with itself - what other weapon has different damage amounts for thrown and melee versions? But again, not really an issue - Wulfgar needs all the extra damage he can get.

 

Ah yes, sorry, I didn't even think of this as an issue. Two known cases of inconsistent melee vs. missile damage in vanilla BG2 are Azuredge (AX1H10.itm) and the Dwarven Thrower (HAMM06.itm). In both cases, the Fixpack changes one of the damages to match the other one, yet not because they are inconsistent but because the descriptions demand it. With AEGIS.itm, it's different because we don't have a case for either 2d4+5 or 2d4+7, since there is no valid description to go by for that item. Therefore I also suggest we leave it.

[LucklessCebu]

You might be right about SoA, but I really don't know since I've never experienced BG2 without ToB. As for BGII:EE, REAVER.itm is still undroppable, so there is no reason to change it in BG2/Fixpack. When you say that EE "adds it back in one form or another", that's because Overhaul created a new, separate copy of the Unholy Reaver (now called OHREAVER.itm) and properly modified that item to meet the standards for being a weapon available to the player, including a comprehensive description, new name (Ir'revrykal), lore value, its own unique icon etc. This version is obtainable now in EE, and that's probably what you have heard about. Nonetheless, this doesn't change the status of REAVER.itm in BG2/Fixpack.

Yeah, I realize the new EE reaver is a different item - just seems to be based on the old reaver. Anyway, sounds like the fixpack can safely ignore the unholy reaver description - best guess is that letting it drop in the first place was a mistake that was fixed a long time ago. It's probably still worth looking at the dispel effect on it, though, and making it consistent with other weapons - I believe the fixpack standardizes all on-hit effects to bypass magic resistance, for example. Can't have enemies lacking the same benefits CHARNAME & co. receive. From what kreso said, it looks like EE revised the dispel effect, and those changes look solid (though it's hard to say if original developer intent was for it to be single-target or multi-target).

 

With AEGIS.itm, it's different because we don't have a case for either 2d4+5 or 2d4+7, since there is no valid description to go by for that item. Therefore I also suggest we leave it.

Sounds good to me - we might guess that 2d4+5 is what was intended, but lil' Wulfie doesn't need any nerfing.