my monk can't equip priest scroll of healing

[Guest John]

My monk (LG, lvl 10, INT 10, WIS 12) just picked up the scroll of healing off of one of the Copper Coronet hobglobins. I get the "cannot use item" when I try to put it into a quickslot. The monk kit description says that the monk can use priest scrolls.

 

Is this a bug, does my pc have to reach a certain level or is there a known conflict with a mod? I installed the fixpack beta 4 first, then other mods and the Tweak Pack last as the readmes recommend.

 

Thanks,

 

John

[NiGHTMARE]

This is a deliberate change made by the Fixpack.

 

The part of the monk description which says the monk can use priest scrolls isn't actually present in the unmodded game. It seems Kevin Dorner, the author of Baldurdash, decided that this ability was intended, and so amended the monk description in the Baldurdash Game Text Update accordingly.

 

The Fixpack authors on the other hand, decided that the monk's ability to use priest scrolls is a bug. However, it seems Camdawg forgot to alter this particular part of the GTU when importing it from Baldurdash .

[CamDawg]

The monk kit description says that the monk can use priest scrolls.

Argh, another Game Text Update mistake--we really should put that thing through another review. The Baldurdash GTU, for whatever reason adds this line to the Monk description and we add it as well:

 

- Monks have the Read Scrolls ability for cleric scrolls. A monk may equip a cleric scroll in a Quick Item slot and use it, casting the spell and consuming the scroll in the process.

 

There's nothing to support this in the game, so Fixpack restricts monks from using clerical scrolls. It is possible this was intended and simply not documented, though I doubt it--the monk usability flag is, by a wide margin, where the majority of usability flag errors occurred.

[devSin]

I just felt like stopping by to point out how much I loathe the game text update.

 

Loathe.

[Guest John]

Thanks for the info everyone

 

Since I'm playing a monk at present, is there anything else I should be on the lookout for to report? I can't promise to specifically notice it, but I'll try to keep an eye out if that would help.

 

John

[devSin]

@63319 pre-update reads "Calm down, calm down. I'm no demon...look closer, I'm a <RACE>." and is edited to read "Calm down, calm down. Look closer at me... not demon, just <RACE>." Yes, me not demon either.

This is horrible. Absolutely untenable.

 

If there are changes like this, Cam, it may be time to consider excising this chunk of poop stuck on the fixpack. Please?

 

The saving throw for AX1H10 is part of the DIE and MESDIE EFFs. As usual, Baldurdash just screws things up even more with its "fix."

 

Base movement rate is hard-coded, but familiars are explicitly set to something higher than 9 (usually, but the cornucopia of effects they get probably has some move faster with others moving slower). It's a stupid thing to mention because there is no explicit measurement for movement rate in the default text. I haven't looked at the text update in several years, though, so I don't really have any idea what you're referring to.

 

The other stuff doesn't invoke any sort of reaction, good or bad.

[Gorilym]

Wow! I'm so lucky to have you as a friend, magic gecko who moves at ten!

 

OK, that is hilarious.

 

NB: No spam intended.

[Wanderer]

THE DOWNWARD SPIRAL INTO MADNESS IS REALLY QUITE RELAXING

This too almost made me fall off my chair.

[CamDawg]

First: thanks Nythrun.

 

Also, Sensate Amulet (described as cleric usable, flagged as cleric and monk usable, GTU updated to be monk usable). Monks are priests except how they aren't.

Fixed--now unusable by monks with correct description.

 

@9588 wspecial.2da lists +3 damage at four stars and +4 damage at five, and -3 speed factor at five stars - GTU is using the old in-game table.

Fixed.

 

@38608 Flail of Ages +3 GTUed to say that it slows on each hit; TOB reduces slow to 33% chance.

Fixed.

 

At least someone already had the "unwhimsy the ellipsis" party.

Ellipses were tremendously bad, but I think most are fixed (or at least standardized) now.

 

@72509 missing plural on "spellweaver"

Fixed.

 

@45866 "A sorcerer's prime requisite is INTELLIGENCE." Okay, this one isn't Baldurdash's legacy - but sorcerors haven't any prime requisite.

It's a prime req in that they have a 9 minimum in it. However, they also have a minimum of 9 charisma (a la 3e). So, it should either be no prime reqs, or both INT & CHR as prime reqs. I hate specifying meaningless prime reqs, but if we don't there's no explanation as to why they get these minimums.

 

"I'm all ." sound less grating? Precludes article mismatchery and scans somewhat naturally.

Yeah, fixed.

 

Somehow we have to travel from the broken Azuredge that ships with ToB:

3d6+0 thrown (one extra dice for throwable weapons) with a Kill Creature Type Opcode and 1d6+0 melee with a Kill Creature Type Opcode and an unindexed, duplicate Kill Creature Type opcode (with resref 77h, neato) and arrive a destination where 1d6+3 is the correct interpretation of the above. But I get lost on the way. I don't think this was just more whimsy, but why did 1d6+4 become 3, was it thusly described in SoA? Wherefor this text, O Baldurdash?

The problem with the original description is that it's unclear as to whether the damage to undead is in addition to or in place of the base damage, i.e. 1d6+4 or 2d6+4. As for the 1d6+3, I'm guessing this is Dorner adding +3 to THAC0 and damage for the weapon's enchantment level. None of this really gives us an idea of what to do with it.

 

I'd suggest it does 1d6, with an extra 1d6+4 to undead plus the chance to be destroyed, as this appears how it was intended. The +3 THAC0/damage to non-undead is not present in the original file and seems completely spurious.

 

Only a few of the familiars have the movement rate set to 10 effect and the corresponding text update...it's just not a meaningful representation of how quickly things go. Liches with movement rate set to 10 still amble like the amoeba; might as well be Special Bonus Ability: Moves at dx/dy! Wow! I'm so lucky to have you as a friend, magic gecko who moves at ten!

So, what to do here? Movement rate of 10 is meaningless and should be struck from the GTU, the question is whether the familiars' MOVRAT10 item does anything or should even be added.

[berelinde]

"I'm all <RACE>." sound less grating? Precludes article mismatchery and scans somewhat naturally.

Yeah, fixed.

 

Why, oh why, did the English language have to use an indefinite article that was dependent on the first letter of the following word?

[Guest John]

CamDawg, Nythrun

 

As to the Sensate Amulet, FWIW, the amulet description in-game does specifically say that it can be used by both clerics and monks.

 

As I understood your post, you have made the Sensate Amulet unusable by the monk. As a fan, I really would like for the Sensate Amulet to remain usable by monks. It might be the one item (I'm not sure) that a monk can use to have a way to get fiends to ignore them during a fight. Plus it does seem reasonable that a monk should be considered as a type of priest.

 

Of course, I find the whole notion of what a monk is and can do rather confused. On one hand, I've seen references to the class described as being the closest to martial-arts fighters in BG2. In real world, we've seen the story lines incorporating Eastern philosophies of the monk as a fighter whose training incorporates mastery of weapons, not just unarmed fighting techniques. We also have the Western philosophy of monk as a semi-sequestered priest type leading a life of contemplation; the Eastern philosophy certainly seems to accomodate that perception as well.

 

I can understand the arguement that the monk is first and foremost a fighter and therefore the Sensate Amulet should not be usable by a monk. However, unless it's a bug in my game, my monk PC is in the process of obtaining his stronghold in the Temple District rather than the fighter's stronghold. That being the case, it would seem that the game designers recognized the potentially dual nature of a monk (fighter and cleric) and, therefore, the monk being able to use the Sensate Amulet would be in keeping with the idea that the monk can gain a cleric stronghold. FWIW, I do not have the Multiple Strongholds mod installed.

 

And my apologies in advance if I have totally misunderstood your post and the Sensate Amulet remains usable by the monk.

 

John

[CamDawg]

As to the Sensate Amulet, FWIW, the amulet description in-game does specifically say that it can be used by both clerics and monks.

The original description in a patched ToB or SoA game states explicitly that it's only usable by clerics. The Baldurdash GTU changed the description and we inherited the error. AFAICT it was never meant to be used by monks.

 

I can understand the arguement that the monk is first and foremost a fighter and therefore the Sensate Amulet should not be usable by a monk. However, unless it's a bug in my game, my monk PC is in the process of obtaining his stronghold in the Temple District rather than the fighter's stronghold. That being the case, it would seem that the game designers recognized the potentially dual nature of a monk (fighter and cleric) and, therefore, the monk being able to use the Sensate Amulet would be in keeping with the idea that the monk can gain a cleric stronghold. FWIW, I do not have the Multiple Strongholds mod installed.

No, but I'll bet you have Oversight's "Cleric Kits" component installed.

[Guest Guest]

As to the Sensate Amulet, FWIW, the amulet description in-game does specifically say that it can be used by both clerics and monks.

The original description in a patched ToB or SoA game states explicitly that it's only usable by clerics. The Baldurdash GTU changed the description and we inherited the error. AFAICT it was never meant to be used by monks.

 

I can understand the arguement that the monk is first and foremost a fighter and therefore the Sensate Amulet should not be usable by a monk. However, unless it's a bug in my game, my monk PC is in the process of obtaining his stronghold in the Temple District rather than the fighter's stronghold. That being the case, it would seem that the game designers recognized the potentially dual nature of a monk (fighter and cleric) and, therefore, the monk being able to use the Sensate Amulet would be in keeping with the idea that the monk can gain a cleric stronghold. FWIW, I do not have the Multiple Strongholds mod installed.

No, but I'll bet you have Oversight's "Cleric Kits" component installed.

 

Yep, you beat me to an apology Sorry. I had forgotten about that mod because I installed it to change some things; my monk is "only" lvl 17 now (2.07M XP) so none of the HLA's have kicked in yet.

 

Wah. I want that Sensate Amulet badly; I so dislike Pit Fiends with their invisibility and gating in another pit fiend when they're about to die.

 

I'll have to ask in their forum if Oversight will provide an item similar to the Amulet for the monk's use.

 

Thanks,

 

John

[CamDawg]

It's also dead easy to remove the change if you don't mind opening up the tp2.

[CamDawg]

@45866 "A sorcerer's prime requisite is INTELLIGENCE." Okay, this one isn't Baldurdash's legacy - but sorcerors haven't any prime requisite.

It's a prime req in that they have a 9 minimum in it. However, they also have a minimum of 9 charisma (a la 3e). So, it should either be no prime reqs, or both INT & CHR as prime reqs. I hate specifying meaningless prime reqs, but if we don't there's no explanation as to why they get these minimums.

 

Somehow we have to travel from the broken Azuredge that ships with ToB:

3d6+0 thrown (one extra dice for throwable weapons) with a Kill Creature Type Opcode and 1d6+0 melee with a Kill Creature Type Opcode and an unindexed, duplicate Kill Creature Type opcode (with resref 77h, neato) and arrive a destination where 1d6+3 is the correct interpretation of the above. But I get lost on the way. I don't think this was just more whimsy, but why did 1d6+4 become 3, was it thusly described in SoA? Wherefor this text, O Baldurdash?

The problem with the original description is that it's unclear as to whether the damage to undead is in addition to or in place of the base damage, i.e. 1d6+4 or 2d6+4. As for the 1d6+3, I'm guessing this is Dorner adding +3 to THAC0 and damage for the weapon's enchantment level. None of this really gives us an idea of what to do with it.

 

I'd suggest it does 1d6, with an extra 1d6+4 to undead plus the chance to be destroyed, as this appears how it was intended. The +3 THAC0/damage to non-undead is not present in the original file and seems completely spurious.

Bump.