Sword Coast Stratagems v33 now available

[Guest SCS Fan]

Thank you!

[DavidW]

16 hours ago, Hoverdawg said:

Honestly, since SCS gets rid of the clay golem, Enchanted Weapon isn't all that important anymore.

The clay golem is still there on higher difficulty levels.

IIRC, the reason I removed Enchanted Weapon is that it works differently in EE games. But I should check, especially as it looks like I didn't get around to documenting it.

[Hoverdawg]

My bad. (honestly I was surprised he wasn't there)

[Bartimaeus]

It is possible you have already solved my previously reported bug regarding Contingency and innate component, but just in case you haven't, it is the block starting at line 87 in "innate_triggers.tpa" that is the cause of the issue - disabling the block entirely prevents the problem from occurring, though I'm unable to figure out what this block is supposed to accomplish in the first place. Why are the Spell Sequencer and Spell Trigger-adding class spells (applied at character-creation/level-up) also adding and then removing Contingency (or rather, failing to remove Contingency because this block has actually made it so it's first removed and then added afterwards, leading it to simply be added)? The comment says "for aesthetic purposes", but I'm not sure what adding and removing a spell has to do with aesthetics.

Additionally, the way the Contingency innate is set up right now at lines 14 and 15 makes it so that it double-casts - when you use the Contingency innate, you first cast the 1-length innate, which then leads to you casting the 9-length real spell. Why not just have the innate have a casting length of 9 and then use a timing mode of 1 (instant) to cast the real spell? It's currently inconsistent with the others.

Edited July 26, 2020 by Bartimaeus

[crackwise]

Also maybe a related bug: I found a Spell Trigger scroll in the game. Having forgotten that SCS ads it as an innate ability once the necessary level is reached, I ordered Edwin to write the spell into his spell book. He failed to write it, which is good. However, the spell trigger appears now as an innate ability for Edwin, even though he is not the required level. I assume this is not intentional?

[DavidW]

3 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

It is possible you have already solved my previously reported bug regarding Contingency and innate component, but just in case you haven't, it is the block starting at line 87 in "innate_triggers.tpa" that is the cause of the issue - disabling the block entirely prevents the problem from occurring, though I'm unable to figure out what this block is supposed to accomplish in the first place. Why are the Spell Sequencer and Spell Trigger-adding class spells (applied at character-creation/level-up) also adding and then removing Contingency (or rather, failing to remove Contingency because this block has actually made it so it's first removed and then added afterwards, leading it to simply be added)? The comment says "for aesthetic purposes", but I'm not sure what adding and removing a spell has to do with aesthetics.

Additionally, the way the Contingency innate is set up right now at lines 14 and 15 makes it so that it double-casts - when you use the Contingency innate, you first cast the 1-length innate, which then leads to you casting the 9-length real spell. Why not just have the innate have a casting length of 9 and then use a timing mode of 1 (instant) to cast the real spell? It's currently inconsistent with the others.

I haven't solved it yet, so thanks.

If I recall correctly, the 'aesthetic reasons' were to do with the order the powers appeared on the bar. But I don't recall clearly, and in any case it's clearly not working correctly.

[Bartimaeus]

5 hours ago, DavidW said:

I haven't solved it yet, so thanks.

If I recall correctly, the 'aesthetic reasons' were to do with the order the powers appeared on the bar. But I don't recall clearly, and in any case it's clearly not working correctly.

Ah, I see - presumably trying to get Contingency to be at the end of the innate abilities with Chain Contingency (i.e. in blue to white to red order - although innates get so hopelessly muddled over the course of a game it's probably a lost cause anyways). Can fix it by changing the two "resource=>%WIZARD_CONTINGENCY%" to "resource=>dw#cnss", as the Contingency innate is through a shell spell, not what the IDS entry refers to (you have it specially noted at the top of the file that unlike the rest, the Contingency innate should *not* be its base spell SPWI617, apparently for multiclass/dualclass compatibility purposes?).

Now I can continue my install, yay.

Edited July 27, 2020 by Bartimaeus

[Bartimaeus]

Okay, so uh...what's the deal with Kahrk? Dude's insane. Has like 4 APR with his proficiencies, hits virtually every time even against a character with -6 AC (and he hits like a tank even with his unenchanted long sword - presumably because of the 19 STR and the proficiencies), seemed to be totally immune to first level spells (no magic missiles to wear down his Mirror Image for me!), just keeps casting Minor Globe over and over (and had a Spell Deflection in his pre-casting), and I can only hit him with crits (literally - I checked). Hardest freaking fight in the game given its location, .

[Salk]

I seem to remember Kahrk being quite tough even on a non SCS'ed game.

I'm also pretty sure I managed to defeat him with SCS's mage AI installed but I did play with no AI pre-buff  anda tweaked stratagems.ini file tolower the mages' level (something DavidW kindly introduced after me requesting it some time ago).

Edited August 4, 2020 by Salk

[Bartimaeus]

7 minutes ago, Salk said:

I seem to remember Kahrk being quite tough even on a non SCS'ed game.

I'm also pretty sure I managed to defeat him with SCS's mage AI installed but I did play with no AI pre-buff  anda tweaked stratagems.ini file tolower the mages' level (something DavidW kindly introduced after me requesting it some time ago).

Gosh dangit, I forgot about the new(ish) SCS innate difficulty dial, I could've toned just down the AI/precasting for just that fight. My party is ~level 6-7ish, and that was just too insane. ...I ended up effectively cheating by kiting, since his AI is weird in that he glues to the main character (or at least to mine - most enemies will disengage my main character who's a swashbuckler in favor of squishier targets like mages, but he would walk right past mine unless my main character went completely out of sight or near so). Feels bad.

[DavidW]

I don't actually single out Kahrk for special treatment, so this is just the automated code messing with him. But he's listed as 12th level, and SCS keeps him that way - and since he's an ogre-mage, he gets treated as a fighter/mage. That gives him another APR, which probably is double-counting since he's already given 3 - I might tweak that later. He'll be specialized with his weapon and have two pips in one-weapon style, and his ability scores are awesome. He has 18 Dex and a base AC of 1, so that's AC -3 before his defensive spells kick in - again, that's just the vanilla game. And of course he's 12th level, which is pretty high level for BG1. I don't give him anything special to make him immune to MM - could he have had Shield running?

So: with the arguable exception of that extra APR, this is just an already-pretty-tough BG1 creature that gets horrendously tough when SCS gives him level-appropriate spells and proficiencies. So, on the one hand I can see the case for toning it down, since that 12th level flag is mostly nonfunctional in the baseline game but creates a hellishly dangerous SCS opponent. On the other hand, this is a completely optional fight which you get into only after a conversation that goes something like this:

CARSA: this jar caused all my companions to die; it wants me to open it; I won't.

PC: Give me the jar.

CARSA: No, if I give it to you we'll all die. Run now.

PC: Give me the damn jar!

CARSA: No! Get away or I'll release the thing in the jar and it'll kill you.

PC: We're taking the jar by force.

CARSA: KAHRK!

 

To be honest, I think if you let Kahrk out you get what you deserve

[Guest Ront]

 Please, make Sarevok haste undispellable. 

 

And if possible, it would be cool if abazigal lair was to be added back on bgt. Or was it added already?

Also, would it be possible to add the rope back via an .ini setting so I dont have to fight the dragons?pretty please?find the fight cheap, they got no loot at all.. compare with the yellow dragon that has good dialogues too..

[Bartimaeus]

35 minutes ago, DavidW said:

I don't actually single out Kahrk for special treatment, so this is just the automated code messing with him. But he's listed as 12th level, and SCS keeps him that way - and since he's an ogre-mage, he gets treated as a fighter/mage. That gives him another APR, which probably is double-counting since he's already given 3 - I might tweak that later. He'll be specialized with his weapon and have two pips in one-weapon style, and his ability scores are awesome. He has 18 Dex and a base AC of 1, so that's AC -3 before his defensive spells kick in - again, that's just the vanilla game. And of course he's 12th level, which is pretty high level for BG1. I don't give him anything special to make him immune to MM - could he have had Shield running?

So: with the arguable exception of that extra APR, this is just an already-pretty-tough BG1 creature that gets horrendously tough when SCS gives him level-appropriate spells and proficiencies. So, on the one hand I can see the case for toning it down, since that 12th level flag is mostly nonfunctional in the baseline game but creates a hellishly dangerous SCS opponent. On the other hand, this is a completely optional fight which you get into only after a conversation that goes something like this:

CARSA: this jar caused all my companions to die; it wants me to open it; I won't.

PC: Give me the jar.

CARSA: No, if I give it to you we'll all die. Run now.

PC: Give me the damn jar!

CARSA: No! Get away or I'll release the thing in the jar and it'll kill you.

PC: We're taking the jar by force.

CARSA: KAHRK!

 

To be honest, I think if you let Kahrk out you get what you deserve

Hey, the lady's clearly unwell and being possessed and needs help, sometimes you have to be firm about these sorts of things! ...Sure, she dies in the process, but nobody knew that was going to happen!

Maybe from now on, I'll just wait until Sarevok is dead before I move on to the real final boss...

[DavidW]

2 minutes ago, Guest Ront said:

Please, make Sarevok haste undispellable. 

Can you explain why?

2 minutes ago, Guest Ront said:

And if possible, it would be cool if abazigal lair was to be added back on bgt. Or was it added already?

Not yet. It's on my to-do list, but lowish priority (sorry).

2 minutes ago, Guest Ront said:

Also, would it be possible to add the rope back via an .ini setting so I dont have to fight the dragons?pretty please?find the fight cheap, they got no loot at all.. compare with the yellow dragon that has good dialogues too..

I think you can just summon the rope via CLUA. (It's bazplo05.)

[Guest Ront]

One of the answers, but I guess that may not satisfy you is that I find karkh more dangerous than sarevok 1vs1, and part of the reason is that you can dispel his haste with ease. 

I often install the mod that buffs sarevok, forgot the name, that gives him back his very old (pretosc era, I guess?) and ultra powerful stats. 

Okay you have to fight his goons before, but without them he is nothing.

I apologize for finding sarevok too weak.