SR Revised V1.3.900 (2022 August 8th)

[Bartimaeus]

@pochesun It's better to attach the DEBUG file that's created when the installer is run (should be right next to the setup-spell-rev.exe)...especially seeing as I can't quite read the image. From what I can tell, the image says it tried to install but could not find a file called SPPR735.itm in spell_rev\sppr7##...and seeing as there's no such thing as SPPR735.itm, I can only conclude that I am not reading it right, .

Edited April 12, 2020 by Bartimaeus

[pochesun]

14 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

@pochesun It's better to attach the DEBUG file that's created when the installer is run (should be right next to the setup-spell-rev.exe)...especially seeing as I can't quite read the image. From what I can tell, the image says it tried to install but could not find a file called SPPR735.itm in spell_rev\sppr7##...and seeing as there's no such thing as SPPR735.itm, I can only conclude that I am not reading it right, .

Hello  I think you are reading it right but i will attach debug file tomorrow anyway (cant do it today, unfortunately). Also wanted to ask if it matters if IRevised should be installed before SRevised or visa versa? Also wanted to notice that when i complete install IRevised first (Version 4 Beta 10 + IR Revised 1.2.7) then i unpack SR v4 Beta 18 it asks me to overwrite some files and i agree to that. Then i unpack SR Revised 1.2.3 and it asks me to overwrite files i do it again. Basically i always did it this way but my question is should i really agree to overwrite files when unpacking SR v4 Beta 18?

[Bartimaeus]

@pochesun IRR should be installed after SRR, actually. It's not the end of the world if you don't, but there will be some minor inconsistencies for some item abilities in IRR.

It should be extract IR, extract IRR and overwrite - same for SR and SRR. I'm not sure what extracting SR would've overwritten if this was a clean install.

sppr735 is not referenced to at all in SR or SRR, so I'm unsure why this would be the case. I did notice a text problem just now for Earth and Fire Elemental Transformations that I just fixed with V1.2.4 on github, but it's not the critical error described in your image. Still, might be worth giving it a go.

[pochesun]

@Bartimaeus As i promised here is the debug file. I will try to reinstall all the components today with the order you outlined and the new 1.2.4 patch. Thank you.

SETUP-SPELL_REV.DEBUG

Sorry for being meticulous  So the order of installation is BG EE>SRR>IRR>Stratagems. And BG EE2>Ascension>SRR>IRR>Stratagems. Correct?

Edited April 13, 2020 by pochesun

[Jarno Mikkola]

1 hour ago, pochesun said:

As i promised here is the debug file. ... and the new 1.2.4 pa...

It features:

[spell_rev\sppr7##\sppr731.itm] loaded, 2810 bytes
ERROR: No translation provided for @9153
ERROR: [spell_rev\sppr7##\sppr731.itm] -> [override] Patching Failed (COPY) (Not_found)
Stopping installation because of error.
Stopping installation because of error.

ERROR Installing [Spell Revisions], rolling back to previous state
Unable to Unlink [spell_rev\backup/0/OTHER.0]: Unix.Unix_error(1, "unlink", "spell_rev\\backup/0/OTHER.0")

And a previous section of it says:

Install Component [Spell Revisions]?
nstall, or [N]ot Install or [Q]uit?
Installing [Spell Revisions] [v4 Beta 18 (Revised V1.2.3)]

... could it be that you didn't extract the SRR archive correctly ? Aka if you opened one of the files when opening the archive at least in WinRAR, you select the file, which can lead to not fully extracting the whole archive...

[Bartimaeus]

@Jarno Mikkola @pochesun No, actually, this was my fault, and this was coincidentally the target of the the patch I previously mentioned. I did not even see that error in your previous image - all I saw was "sppr735.itm not found" (and the DEBUG file shows it is actually 731, which is a real file). So that should be fixed with the newest 1.2.4.

As for your install order, that's correct, .

[pochesun]

11 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

@Jarno Mikkola @pochesun No, actually, this was my fault, and this was coincidentally the target of the the patch I previously mentioned. I did not even see that error in your previous image - all I saw was "sppr735.itm not found" (and the DEBUG file shows it is actually 731, which is a real file). So that should be fixed with the newest 1.2.4.

As for your install order, that's correct, .

Thank you for your work, really appreciate that.

[Guest byakuya]

Does SCS react properly to the globes protecting against Remove Magic option? In other words, do spellcasters remove the globe before targeting you with remove magic?

[Bartimaeus]

2 hours ago, Guest byakuya said:

Does SCS react properly to the globes protecting against Remove Magic option? In other words, do spellcasters remove the globe before targeting you with remove magic?

I would expect not. That's a good consideration, I don't know if SCS has some kind of flag I can set that says "don't use Dispel/Remove Magic here". Perhaps SCS has a flag for Spell Immunity: Abjuration that would accomplish much the same thing? Yes...indeed, I think it does - scripting state 6, value 1. One side-effect of this would be that enemy spellcasters would probably not cast stuff like Lower Resistance and Imprisonment at you either, but that would probably not be the end of the world as such spellcasters are likely to have antimagics that would strip such spell protections and attempt to do it afterwards.

(e): I've experimentally added the flag.

Edited April 14, 2020 by Bartimaeus

[Guest byakuya]

11 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

I would expect not. That's a good consideration, I don't know if SCS has some kind of flag I can set that says "don't use Dispel/Remove Magic here". Perhaps SCS has a flag for Spell Immunity: Abjuration that would accomplish much the same thing? Yes...indeed, I think it does - scripting state 6, value 1. One side-effect of this would be that enemy spellcasters would probably not cast stuff like Lower Resistance and Imprisonment at you either, but that would probably not be the end of the world as such spellcasters are likely to have antimagics that would strip such spell protections and attempt to do it afterwards.

(e): I've experimentally added the flag.

Thanks for the quick response. Would this work properly with Globe of Invulnerability as well, considering it's a level 6 spell instead of level 5 like SI: Abjuration? Will spellcasters avoid casting Spell Thrust if you have GoI up instead of MGoI?

[Bartimaeus]

Yeah, I applied the flag to both MGoI and GoI. If SCS differentiates between MGoI and GoI to begin with, I don't see any reason why it wouldn't.

[pochesun]

@Bartimaeus "One side-effect of this would be that enemy spellcasters would probably not cast stuff like Lower Resistance and Imprisonment at you either"

Would not that interfer with game balance? Imprisonment and especially Lower Resistance are important spells for the gameplay and i am not sure how Battle sequence should look like now, since AI interpretation of these changes could be weird.

[Bartimaeus]

8 hours ago, pochesun said:

@Bartimaeus "One side-effect of this would be that enemy spellcasters would probably not cast stuff like Lower Resistance and Imprisonment at you either"

Would not that interfer with game balance? Imprisonment and especially Lower Resistance are important spells for the gameplay and i am not sure how Battle sequence should look like now, since AI interpretation of these changes could be weird.

Note that what we're talking about only applies to the alternative, anti-Dispel Globes of Invulnerability enabled by a settings.ini tweak, not the normal Globes in a standard install. They're an experimental and alternative option for a reason, .

Hostile abjuration spells that aren't anti-magic spells (and therefore exempt from this): Glyph of Warding, Imprisonment, Lower Resistance. That's it. Do enemies ever use Lower Resistance? I would imagine not or close to, since it would be a waste of a spell slot by SCS in 99% of situations as the player does not basically ever have really substantial magic resistance. Glyph of Warding is just a low level AoE damage spell that isn't worth worrying about...Imprisonment is definitely the big one here, but even that's not used that much outside of Kangaxx, who has access to a variety of anti-magic spells that he can use to dispel the Globe anyways (and probably would, seeing as the spell in SCS is marked as being both SI: A and a GoI). It's possible there's room to abuse it, but like I said, experimental alternative.

Edited April 16, 2020 by Bartimaeus

[pochesun]

@BartimaeusNote that what we're talking about only applies to the alternative, anti-Dispel Globes of Invulnerability enabled by a settings.ini tweak

Sorry for being obtuse here  - what you mean by "standard install" here? Clean BG EE without mods or basic SR Revised?

Also, you have a very good point about Imprisonment spell, but my issue is i am not sure enemies will properly adapt to the change, for instance Kangaxx might not want to cast Imprisonment spell at all after magic defense of your party is gone or dispelled and will prioritize to use any other spell with less power or effect. Also i remember someone casted Glyph of Warding on my party several times in a game, this spell seems to be a "weapon" of choice for some helpless possies  

[Bartimaeus]

1 hour ago, pochesun said:

@BartimaeusNote that what we're talking about only applies to the alternative, anti-Dispel Globes of Invulnerability enabled by a settings.ini tweak

Sorry for being obtuse here  - what you mean by "standard install" here? Clean BG EE without mods or basic SR Revised?

Also, you have a very good point about Imprisonment spell, but my issue is i am not sure enemies will properly adapt to the change, for instance Kangaxx might not want to cast Imprisonment spell at all after magic defense of your party is gone or dispelled and will prioritize to use any other spell with less power or effect. Also i remember someone casted Glyph of Warding on my party several times in a game, this spell seems to be a "weapon" of choice for some helpless possies  

In the SR folder, there is a plaintext (i.e. editable by Notepad) file called settings.ini that contains a number of alternative settings to use. One of these is called the "dispel_globes" setting, which is automatically set to 1. When set to 0, it makes it so that M/GoI cannot be dispelled by Dispel/Remove Magic, effectively providing immunity those two spells for the one who has cast M/GoI on themselves. I created it (though I think subtledoctor came up with the idea) for a user who was trying to solo with a sorcerer (...or something like that) and was finding the lack of a Spell Immunity: Abjuration to be making SCS quite ridiculous with their constant high level Dispel/Remove Magic spam, though I thought it was a rather novel idea even ignoring the solo sorcerer bit (though it probably makes Minor Globe of Invulnerability a little bit too powerful - again, an experimental alternative option for a reason).

So it's only if you enable that settings.ini switch that this would affect you, which I presume you have not. A little bit of coincidental beauty here is that SI: Abjuration was a spell protection the same way a Globe of Invulnerability is, so setting the flag for SI:A means enemy SCS spellcasters should attempt to dispel it with Secret Word and the like, which is exactly how a Globe of Invulnerability is dispelled as well. As for Kangaxx, the flag is dispelled with the Globe if countered with an anti-magic spell like Secret Word, so he should indeed resume using it. Also, to be honest, I'm not even 100% Kangaxx's Imprisonment is even abjuration off-hand, because as I recall, it's actually called "Soul Trap": might actually be Necromancy, don't know for sure.

As for Glyph of Warding...remember that this is merely a flag: the intent is to basically tell the AI "hey don't cast this at this particular character with the protection spell quite yet". They should still take aim at other characters/summonables, and that flag wouldn't even protect them if they happened to get hit anyways. It's a pretty minor inconsistency in the grand scheme of things, I think.

Edited April 16, 2020 by Bartimaeus