Jump to content

DavidW

Gibberlings
  • Posts

    6,345
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by DavidW

  1. On line 144 of lib_cosmetic, %old_loc/ should be %old_loc%/. If you change that, it should work (it does on my install). Apologies: my testing was all with old_loc="", i.e. comparing to in-game files.

    Let me suggest that you might want to fully install IR, copy its files over to some data folder, uninstall it, and then compare the data folder items to the unmodded-game items. That way you don't miss any changes that IR implements by scripting (I don't know if there are any such changes, though).

  2. Just creating a 'night' copy is fairly trivial, iirc. Copy the tileset and add an 'N' suffix; copy the light map and change 'LM' to 'LN', and set the extended night flag. There might be one or two more steps (I haven't done it for a while) but that's basically all you need.

    To get different lighting effects, you need to alter the lightmap, the bitmap that determines lighting. To actually get beams of visible light from the windows, and the like, you need to alter the artwork. 

  3. 6 hours ago, Guest Mantis said:

    To add to that, the install error persists if the IWD arcane / divine spells install option is selected.

    That's compatible with my theory: if SCS detects an Acid Storm spell, it won't install its own, and it assumes anyone else who's installed it has provided a scroll. I suspect some earlier mod in your install is doing a partial/broken install of Acid Storm.

  4. 15 minutes ago, Guest Remar said:

    Yes, I updated midgame, I expected that could be some problems with it I but I didn't changed mod order or components, just updated SCS. Btw I loaded early save from beginning before Jaheira join and her spells already were like that. Are you sure that problem is in pre-34 saves and new game will fix it?

    I'm not sure of drawing my next breath.

    But if you saved a game when Jaheira had some spells and then reloaded that save and she had different spells, the only feasible explanation is that the spell filenames changed between saving and loading. SCS doesn't edit the savegame itself. And even if Jaheira didn't join the party, she's present in your savegame as soon as you meet her. (The version of Jaheira in my local copy has the correct spells.)

    In any case, if you're unsure, just test it. Start a new game, recruit Jaheira (she's in the starting dungeon, assuming you're playing BG2; otherwise, just create a copy with the console.) Should only take five minutes.

  5. 9 hours ago, temnix said:

    a small, excellent, forgotten adventure 

    This is theoretically possible but I doubt it happens in practice. It is extremely difficult to produce new quest content for IE games, at least if you want reasonable production values - it requires mastery of a wide range of skills (AI scripting, artwork, area design, dialog design, actual ability to plot and write) and most individuals only have a subset. So there aren't many high-quality adventures and those that exist are well known.

    (Prove me wrong by linking to a 'small, excellent, forgotten adventure'!)

  6. 56 minutes ago, Guest Remar said:

    After updating from SCS 33.7 to 34.3 (with installed Icewind Dale spells component) something strange happened with Jaheira spells:
    She lost Sunscorch and Spike Growth.
    She also got Circle of Bones and all Cause Wounds spells (except for Cause Moderate Wounds).

    I'm guessing you had a savegame for 33.7 and then loaded it into 34.3? If so some of the spells may have shifted: they get assigned resource names dynamically and they're not guaranteed to be the same between versions (or between installs of the same version, if you change other bits of your mod load).

    The workaround is to fix it with a savegame editor; future spells she gets when she levels should be fine.

    (Updating mods mid-game generally runs the risk of this sort of thing, hence the usual advice to start a new game - though I can quite see why that's awkward if you're partway through a long playthrough.)

  7. They ought to be fine. I use Cam's code (the one included in WEIDU) as a base and then just add other functionality. If you don't use that other functionality, the results should be identical.

    It's always possible I broke something, of course, but I don't think so (I've been using these modified functions for a while, including in SCS and (iirc) Ascension, and problems haven't arisen.

  8. 19 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

    Oh no, I'm not concerned with how the player might deal with it - that's easy, they can just run away and rest after the battle is over. Do enemy mages even use Blindness to begin with? No, I'm more concerned with players using it and it effectively serving as a death sentence for enemies.

    I was talking about how enemies might deal with it (this is how SCS tries to deal with it). I'm not disputing that it's overpowered though! (& SCS mages use blindness.)

     

    22 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

    ust in case it wasn't clear, this is not the current behavior of base SR and hasn't been for years - only through Detect Invisibility and True Seeing do you have the option to target improved invisible creatures with any kind of targeted spellcasting.

    Oh yes, that does ring a bell. I don't know how well SCS handles that; not terribly, I assume, or I'd have heard about it, but I don't allow for it explicitly.

  9. 31 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

    Perhaps, but [antimagic penetrates Improved Invisibility is] actually a change that SCS, AFAIK, will allready do itself (if it doesn't detect you playing an SR game, question mark?) and I think having the option makes sense given that many struggle with or don't enjoy high-level mage battles.

    SCS won't do this if it detects SR, but only because it assumes you've done it already (back in the day this was part of Demi and my discussions of how to align SR and SCS). SCS will get very confused if you use it without this.

    Incidentally, this is also vanilla-game behavior on the EE as of 2.6.

  10. 26 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

    Oh hey, you're right, it did originally last for two hours. Right now, SRR's version lasts for 1 turn, which is already too long. Two hours is the equivalent of 10 turns, which is basically just a death spell at that point.

    Except that it's relatively readily reversible. And you do have a few combat options if blinded: run around in confusion, cast self-targeted AoE that you're immune to, summon monsters.

  11. 6 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

    Based on what Bartimeus said, I’m fairly convinced that a comparo between IR and IRR would not be fruitful. But I haven’t heard anyone suggest this wouldn’t be worth trying. I didn’t have time to really tinker with it, just added it to IR as a new, initial component. But running it didn’t have any effect. Does it assume SCS is present? I saw what seemed to be some undefined variables, like %data_loc% and %workspace%. Maybe I didn’t feed it a necessary variable? 

    It doesn't assume SCS is present, but it does need you to tell it the locations of the 'workspace' and 'data_loc' directories - weidu_external/workspace and weidu_external/data/[mod name] are my usual defaults.

    Here's the TP2 I was using:

    BACKUP ~test/backup~
    AUTHOR ~blah~
    VERSION ~v1~
    AUTO_EVAL_STRINGS
    MODDER setup_tra none area_variables none missing_extern none missing_resref none ict2_actions none missing_eval none overwriting_file none fun_args warn
    
    
    ALWAYS
    
    	SILENT
    	OUTER_SPRINT workspace "weidu_external/workspace"
    	OUTER_SPRINT data_loc "weidu_external/data/dw_itemrev"
    	MKDIR "%workspace%"
    	MKDIR "%data_loc%"
    	INCLUDE "%MOD_FOLDER%/lib/alter_effect.tpa"
    	VERBOSE
    END
    
    
    
    BEGIN "move all made items" DESIGNATED 1000 NO_LOG_RECORD
    
    MKDIR "%data_loc%/item_copy"
    ACTION_BASH_FOR "item_rev/itm" ".*\.itm" BEGIN
    	COPY_EXISTING "%BASH_FOR_FILE%" "%data_loc%/item_copy" IF_EXISTS
    END
    
    BEGIN "compare items" DESIGNATED 2000 NO_LOG_RECORD
    
    INCLUDE "%MOD_FOLDER%/lib/lib_cosmetic.tph"
    
    LAM cosmetic_data
    LAF cosmetic_document_changes STR_VAR loc="%data_loc%/item_copy" RET change_count END
    PRINT "%change_count% itm files changed"
    
    BEGIN "implement changes" DESIGNATED 3000
    
    INCLUDE "%MOD_FOLDER%/lib/lib_cosmetic.tph"
    INCLUDE "%MOD_FOLDER%/lib/alter_effect.tpa"
    LAM cosmetic_data
    LAF cosmetic_implement_changes STR_VAR ini="%data_loc%/cosmetic_changes.ini" END

     

  12. 1 minute ago, Salk said:

    No, I do want SCS to handle all combat script except for 3-4 cases for which I created custom scripts for a few NPCs. Since they are not generic combat scripts then there should not be any compatibility problems after what you told me. 

    OK, cool. Yes, that's a common situation, and you have the right solution: if you don't want SCS to handle your NPC's AI, you just need to write your own AI for them (which can just be a renamed copy of a vanilla script - all that matters is the name). Provided your script uses your modder prefix, SCS will definitely ignore it. (But make sure you don't leave a WTASIGHT or something lying around in the script list along with your custom script.)

  13. 1 minute ago, Salk said:

    It is useful information. Is there a place inside SCS I can look for that list you mentioned?

    It's not externalized, so you need to look in the code.

    • for mages: the read_in_mage_scripts macro at the bottom of mage/mage.tpa.
    • for priests: the read_in_priest_scripts macro at the bottom of priest/priest.tpa.
    • for general AI: the read_in_combat_scripts macro at the bottom of genai/genai_shared.tph.

    There are also some special cases contained deeper in the code, but that's most of them.

×
×
  • Create New...