item usability (#319) and *_ALL?

[critto]

Hi everyone.

Say, I want to have an item that is restricted to rangers (single, multi- and dual-class). I can't do it by adding two equipping effects #319, one with the values of CLERIC_RANGER (18) / CLASS.IDS (5), power of 1 and the other one with the values of RANGER (12) / CLASS.IDS (5), power of 1.This becomes too restrictive due to how 319 works (as far as I understood it) and none of the ranger-type classes can wear it.

Of course, putting either one of those two 319 effects works properly, but either for single or multi/dual class characters. Why does RANGER_ALL not work at all, then? Isn't it supposed to catch all kinds of Ranger classes? It definitely works in script checks, when you do a function call to Class(). Is it simply the issue of Beamdog not expanding this logic to the new opcode and only doing strict checks on the value of the Class field?

PS: yeah, I know that it is possible to implement this with the help of usability flags but I like the 319 opcode approach in general and want to find out if it's possible to achieve the same result with it.

Cheers

[DavidW]

I think it's just that the logic of 319 doesn't allow for the _ALL classes - it just does a direct check on the field value.

[subtledoctor]

319 doesn’t work like a normal opcode. It’s a band-aid designed solely to allow shamans and druids to share a usability flag but have access to a few different weapons. And secondarily to have a more effective way to restrict NPC weapons. It would not be my first choice for setting general usability.

[critto]

Well, I guess it proves my suspicions. Thanks for the replies.