SR Revised V1.3.900 (2022 August 8th)

[Bartimaeus]

1 hour ago, Lianos said:

Yes. Good call. If you cannot reproduce the problem, I will run some tests to see if it's a SCS problem.

I've just been playing around with that SCS troll component (first time ever doing so, since it's EE-only), and my experience is that trolls absolutely will not go down for the fire damage from the weapon effect part of Aura of Flaming Death. If the troll actually hits you with that aura up, then you can clobber the troll to death because SCS will temporarily apply an effect that allows them to be killed - but not the case for the weapon effect. The reason for this is that every single source of fire in the game, seemingly, gets a troll-killing/regeneration-disabling effect patched right in beside it by SCS as a part of its scheme to change how the troll-slaying mechanics work...except for fire damage applied directly by .eff files, which is the exact precise issue we're running into here - the fire damage for Aura of Flaming Death is applied by an .eff file. As of right now, the only two things I can think of that apply either fire or acid damage that way are Aura of Flaming Death and IR/R's Oil of Fiery Burning, and doing a quick test...confirms that it has the same issue.

[Lianos]

Splendid.

So should SCS patch these two remaining sources or will SRR/IRR handle the problem?

[Bartimaeus]

15 minutes ago, Lianos said:

Splendid.

So should SCS patch these two remaining sources or will SRR/IRR handle the problem?

DavidW could almost certainly figure out a way to scan all .effs for fire damage and figure out what spells and items reference said .effs, but it would be a lot easier if I just made the .effs in question cast a spell that does the fire damage instead of having the fire damage done by the .eff itself. So that's what I'll be doing.

[subtledoctor]

1 hour ago, Bartimaeus said:

DavidW could almost certainly figure out a way to scan all .effs for fire damage and figure out what spells and items reference said .effs,

This is probably the best solution, notwithstanding being a bit more work, because anything applied via opcode 248/249 will fall into this category.

Shouldn't be that hard. Something like: scan spells/items for opcode op248 effects, if found check the related .EFF for opcode 12/fire, if found then CLONE_EFFECT the op248 to also apply the regen-stopping spell.

[Lianos]

In my game (SCS, IRR, SRR v1.3.611), Summon Planetar doesn't work. After the spell is cast, there is summoned... nothing.

 

[Bartimaeus]

4 hours ago, Lianos said:

In my game (SCS, IRR, SRR v1.3.611), Summon Planetar doesn't work. After the spell is cast, there is summoned... nothing.

 

Cannot confirm - tried Deva, Fallen Deva, Planetar, Dark Planetar, all summoned fine. Would you attach "SPWI923.spl" and "SPPLAN.eff" from your override? The latter may not exist, and that's O.K., because that would mean it's the vanilla file which would be correct.

[Lianos]

Ok SPWI923 is working, but my wizard was using SPCL109 as HLA (though I cannot see a difference in Nearfinity).

My guess: The installation is bugged due to the subsequent installation of "HLA to Innates" from SCS. So no bug in SRR 

spcl109.spl spwi923.spl

Edited October 31, 2021 by Lianos

[Bartimaeus]

1 hour ago, Lianos said:

Ok SPWI923 is working, but my wizard was using SPCL109 as HLA (though I cannot see a difference in Nearfinity).

My guess: The installation is bugged due to the subsequent installation of "HLA to Innates" from SCS. So no bug in SRR 

spcl109.spl 2.95 kB · 0 downloads spwi923.spl 2.95 kB · 0 downloads

I can't either, bizarrely. Try this instead: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/h5tayb5sh2ygriq/spcl109.spl

Edited October 31, 2021 by Bartimaeus

[Lianos]

Your file works as intended. One difference ingame: The HLA from your file is listed in the abilities tab, while the other HLA is listed in the spells tab (which I think is the better way).

[Bartimaeus]

1 minute ago, Lianos said:

Your file works as intended. One difference ingame: The HLA from your file is listed in the abilities tab, while the other HLA is listed in the spells tab (which I think is the better way).

Putting it under innate abilities is how SR does it, putting it under spells is how SCS does it, I guess. I think I prefer the SR method, since it's not a spell from your spellbook...plus, while this wouldn't be an issue for mages, wouldn't it cause weirdness with sorcerers as it would mix a single time-use ability right in with your regular 9th level spell slots?

Here's a corrected version for your current game: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/l4en0jt65p2g1rn/spcl109.spl

[Lianos]

Thank you. Nevermind where the spell is listed in the end, as long as it works

 

[Salk]

Kudos for the big effort in pushing out version 700 for both SRR and IRR, Bartimaeus. 

[DrAzTiK]

Hi,

 

sorry but just a small question about compatibility with SCS . If I change some tweaks on settings.ini, is SCS going to take this into account? especially for : 

anti_magic_spells_pierce        = 1

spell_protections  = 1 

[Bartimaeus]

19 minutes ago, DrAzTiK said:

Hi,

 

sorry but just a small question about compatibility with SCS . If I change some tweaks on settings.ini, is SCS going to take this into account? especially for : 

anti_magic_spells_pierce        = 1

spell_protections  = 1 

As I understand it, SCS AI actually assumes that anti-magic spells pierce improved invisibility even if they don't (it will force them to do so for AI spellcasting!), so "yes" in a sense to that one (but it would be more accurate to say that SCS does not care what you set it either way, it will do what it wants to do regardless).

For spell protections, I do not believe so; if the AI attempts to use a Remove Magic against your Spell Deflection-ed character, the Spell Deflection will simply use up charges as if it were a Fireball. These are options meant to make the game easier for the player if they're struggling with SCS mage battles, not really meant to try to radically change how SCS behaves.

Edited November 7, 2021 by Bartimaeus

[subtledoctor]

1 hour ago, Bartimaeus said:

As I understand it, SCS AI actually assumes that anti-magic spells pierce improved invisibility even if they don't

My understanding was that SCS will actually make these spells able to target improved invisibility, regardless. In other words SCS will override preferences set here.