DavidW

Plausible but outside the scope of what I'm prepared to do for one HLA!

My own advice for some while has been that WoP is not really working on EE (I think it's still basically fine on vanilla) and you shouldn't use it until I've had a chance to properly rework it (something that keeps being pushed back).

Correct. I think I had this as a Dragon Disciple HLA at one point. The biggest problem is technical:the dragon avatar is way too big to fit in most areas.

The other reason to avoid it is that it triggers a warning if you have the fun_args MODDER flag set. Oh, to be clear: referencing "../%workspace%" is dumb, I don't know why I did it. (It looks like very old code.) Just wanted to note that at least my symlink setup has always been fine with it.

I corresponded years ago with wildgirlmods and have blanket permission to include any bits of TOBR in WoP that I want to. There are bits of it I like very much but I wouldn't want to just systematically incorporate it. But in any case it's something that will have to wait until I have the time, unfortunately.

I don't think this can per se be about a problem with symlinked folders. Literally all my SCS modding is from symlinked folders - the last time I physically put the stratagems folder in the game directory, Obama was president. But I agree that the ssl_to_baf call in smarter_beholders.tpa is redundant given current SFO functionality and that your change is an improvement (except that ssl is an INT_VAR, not a STR_VAR). Fixed locally; if that sorts out whatever symlink problem you're having then so much the better.

Incidentally, the other story-based blocks are: BG: priests of Lolth (same issue as drow), priests of Umberlee (it breaks the Tenya quest in BG) IWD: priests of Auril, Talona, Myrkul (in each case because fighting worshippers of that god is a substantial event in the core plot). Again you can turn them all off at the ini if you don't mind story incongruities. (And SCS uses them whether or not you've turned them off.)

It's slightly more substantial than that, I think: a rather complicated interaction between that component and others. I don't think it's hotfixable so a fix will need to wait for beta 8.

I'm fairly relaxed about aasimar bhaalspawn if people think it's sensible. Drow is another matter: as various people have pointed out, it's deeply woven into the plot. (Of course it's a one-character ini edit to enable them if you want them; just don't blame me for story incongruities.)

It’s this. The plot of chapter 5 of BG2 revolves around the fact that you are not drow but need to infiltrate their city. Having a drow PC breaks that plot hard. Of course you could change the plot, but that’s way out of scope for ToF.

I think there’s a bug in the batch mode system here.

Aha, that’s interesting. I couldn’t reproduce this as a ToF only bug - looks like it might be about interaction with other mods.

Ok, will check.

Just checking: you did reinstall after changing the ini?

oK, let me know if you do work out how to reproduce it.

OK, cool: it must be internal to ToF (and yes, almost certainly an issue in the ranger enemy component). I'll check it out when I have a chance; thanks for flagging it.

Remind me if you're using a UI mod.

I think that was my logic, once I looked at how minimal the component's footprint was in BG2.

It's difficult to give stable recommendations when this is still so much a use-at-own-risk mod! It will be safer to skip other UI mods, to be sure.

My guess is it's a compatibility issues with LeUI, but I'll check it out.

Remove your eyes? Only then can you remove the veil of lies and deceit clouding your lives. After that, you can joyfully serve the Elder Orb, and it won't need to imprison you.

Yes. I don't actually remember if that was intentional! Still, people seem to like them so I'll look at restoring them.

Just checking: this is advice to people, not a bug report? If so I might edit the title, it reads as if there's a bug. (I don't think I agree with the advice, but that's a different matter. Maybe for solo play, I guess.)

Can you post a weidu.log?

Don't worry, I've worked it out - I'm misreading my own code. Removing the Baervan kit from Quayle is already implemented as of beta 7, the documentation just hasn't caught up. So this is intended behavior. & yes, in principle a Baravar kit would be nice.