Jump to content

Leeux

Members
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Leeux

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I played BGT a couple of times and I don't recall that ever happening to me Thing is, it was always installed it with the old BWS. Could it be possible that somehow the BWS/BWP included something that fixed that? (it included several fixes and patches IIRC.) Though, to be honest, it's all a bit hazy at this point, last time I played classic BG with BGT installed was quite a long time ago, probably more than 4 years... sadly I don't have it installed anymore, so I can't quickly test to be sure.
  2. I was thinking, perhaps... but not sure if what I'm going to say it's totally bonkers... maybe, so don't roast me in that case, please When you land on the lone Ogre Mage encounter you only see an empty area with no enemies, so if you don't know what's going on your natural reaction would be, probably "Hmm.. something bugged" and you move on leaving the area immediately... but the Ogre Mage stays alive... if later, the game reuses that same random encounter area, would it be possible for the new encounter to overlap with the Ogre Mage? In this case the two Ogrillons, plus the previously spawned Ogre Mage?
  3. TBH, the encounter at the tent it's a bit ridiculous for the level you can first find it, I think that mage is ~L6 conjurer... But even if it's L6, yet his save vs. spell it's 3, so it's pretty much impossible to affect him with effects from wands or spells, and instantly casts Mirror Images, so it's also pretty much impossible to interrupt him reliably. It's sadly one of the few encounters that the only recourse is to delay them until you have better protections for your characters, specially if you just arrived at Nashkel and you're still just L2 to L3 as you normally are at that point in the game. On the other hand, that random encounter with the Ogrillons + Ogre mage... I don't really remember it, myself... there's an encounter with 2 Ogrillons and there's a separate encounter with a single lone Ogre Mage (from what I remember, at least... unless it's something changed by some of the components I haven't installed?)
  4. I'm not so sure about the same protagonist to experience all the sagas, but for sure having access to all existing areas in a single installation would allow for other mods to take advantage of that and maybe make use of the areas in the future. Nameless One is too iconic for me to be able accept that my charname in Bhaal saga can overlap with him
  5. One idea I thought of for keeping IWD1 separated would be to treat it like a "dream", maybe? I.e. something like, if you rest in a certain place (I don't know where, something specific or relevant to the IWD1 quest/story line, maybe?) you experience this as a sort of an alternate reality/timeline from your current one, and when you end that you come back right to where you were at the start in the normal timeline. The transition could even give you the option of taking your companions with you or not. The good side of this is that it implies that time doesn't necessarily passes on your current timeline while you're "out" thus you could come back and reset the current date to what it was before you went out (+8hs), if it's something feasible to do, of course. The con with this is that you can't easily justify bringing back items with this approach, but you could potentially justify bringing back levels and knowledge (learnt spells...) But, having said that, since as you said IWD1 happens in the past, it's entirely possible to give the player a choice of leaving items in some sort of "hidden" container in one the "overlapping" areas, and then go there in the current timeline after you finished your IWD1 adventure, and find that items you left in the "past" are actually there now. But the important thing is, this could be just an additional way of transferring, maybe, over the normal ones, to be used by people that doesn't want to bring back items (or even XP, given the possibility of an option of turning that off too, all under player choice.)
  6. I'm personally torn on the level scaling thing, myself. I tend to agree that some of it is good (specially when it's done correctly) but on the other hand, you get things like Oblivion and Neverwinter Nights where trying to play a high level character to make the game easy, actually makes the game much harder... which I hate. In my mind, if the scaling is done well, I'm of the type that prefers scaling to mean more mobs over super-buffed mobs, and vice-versa let difficulty slide control the buffing of each actual mob or not. But, as said by @subtledoctor above, there's cases where it makes no sense (narrative-wise) to have many-many more enemies than designed, so, it's a double edged sword. It has to be approached on an encounter by encounter basis, which is a lot of work. I don't know what your chosen solution might be, but if it's feasible I'd suggest a double-tiered approach, where there are level bands inside whom high level only means more enemies until you reach the next tier... i.e. for example, taking levels as offsets from the actual designed area base-level, L+1 to +2, as designed, L+3 to +5 some spawns randomly spawn 1 to 3 more enemies, L+6 to +8 all spawns spawn double enemies plus some spawn beefy-ed up versions with low chance but those spawns are back to normal numbers, L+9 to +10 more beefy spawns start appearing, but standard mobs always spawn at max number, and so on... then it comes a point where all base mobs are replaced by buffed ones and the next tier of them is introduced as buffed versions... perhaps is not perfect and it might be better to just provide several buffed up version of opponents, but if you do so, there will be slices of levels that might be harder than designed. You also have two paths when buffing up mobs in a spawn, one is introduce a copy of the same exact type of mob but with increased stats, and the other is just replace it with a more challenging enemy from the same thematic list (if it's available in the game ofc.) so there are plenty of options to tweak! In any case, whatever path you chose, it'll surely be a balancing nightmare, I tell you!
  7. Thank you K4thos for your work on this! The fact that the project is getting close enough to be able to be played is awesome! \o/ Just wanted to add a minor commentary w.r.t. the motivation to go on the quest to IWD1 for the player character... remember to add some kind of hook for a good aligned character (even if it's a charade in the end!) since the promise of power/items/favor from a demonic being/etc doesn't seem to be too much of a hook for a PC that would tend to distrust such things (i.e. any of the good alignments would IMO look at something coming from a demon or radiating demonic power with apprehension.) or at least give dialogue options that allows to role-play such apprehension and distrusts. Perhaps it'd be enough to mention that such and such is need of help, or that a grave evil is moving and it needs to be stopped, or something along the lines. W.r.t. the game mechanics... will this be closer to the type of game play found in the BG series vs. IWD? I mean, mostly referring to the spell system and the related mechanics and differences coming from a different DnD edition. I'm asking because I'm one of those that don't like the actual IWD gameplay too much... tried to play it personally, but I've hit a wall several times around chapter 3, and I find it tedious and boring to play, to the point I couldn't muster enough willpower to continue grinding ahead. So I'm kinda excited at the prospect of being able to play it as if it were a BG2 mod, with BG's rules and spells, and maybe a higher level party too I haven't played IWD2 yet, not even saw gameplay of it either (even I own it in GOG, but haven't had the chance sadly) but I'd guess same style applies to it as the main IWD1 campaign, so possibly the same point applies there too. Also, what will happen when you install SCS over an EET+IWD1+IWD2 installation?! Will mages and priests and mobs in those games also get upgraded with the SCS base AI? Thanks again!
  8. I really like the proposed map too, and also doesn't look cartoony to me. But maybe an option of having it grayscaled towards a more sepia color-based palette would help for those that see it as cartoony? EDIT: The only aspect I dislike a bit, just a bit, is the fact that it doesn't show up trading routes/roads, as other maps do. But that's a minor point.
  9. Oh right, you're right... I saw some mods like that, true! Sorry for the false report then... I tend to hate them myself, they're annoying when having to clean the installation up, requiring an extra prompt on deletion due to them being marked as system/hidden
  10. Also, you should exclude the desktop.ini files generated by windows explorer too... Some mods seem to contain them!
  11. Awesome \o/ Thank you K4thos! Glad that those files were of help!
  12. To be completely honest, I made a mess of things... I completely forgot in which state the files where when I ran the patcher... thing is, I /think/ that I forgot to undo my manual edits back to the original, so the patcher might have found the original state in the BAKs (the one with "Renal Bloodscalp" in the string.) So all in all, now I'm thinking that I might do a reinstall again... for one, it'll help me in reproducing me this issue and this time catch the error logs and relevant files, and for the other, I'm having the feel that 50% XP reduction was too much to chose... I might try with 75% and see how that feels... (As I cleared several areas and did several quests and all my party is still L1... using the SCS component that makes NPCs start at L0 and lets you reconfigure them might have something to do with this, though.) For now, since I won't be able to redo my install until the weekend, I'll attach the two files that caused me issues, they aren't the exact copies that failed for me, but I redid my edits and they should be in the exact same state as they were when I started! But of course, as they aren't the same... there could be something that I'm missing, of course What it matters is that if in one state they don't fail as they are in the ZIP, they *could* potentially fail if they were reversed (i.e. the BAKs become the BCS and the BCS become the BAKs.) The ones I'm attacking in, the BAKs have the name "RenalBloodscalp" with no spaces, and the BCS have the original reference as it was produced by the mod that made the changes... I'd bet that the error happened when the state were reversed, i.e. the BAKs contained the name with the space on it. But I'm jumping to conclusions ofc. I'm guessing taht the error was caused by the same issue that caused SCS to choke, but that might not be the case in this instance, not sure... I'd have needed the DEBUG file to be sure of that Sorry for being dumb and not saving it! Sorry for making this more complicated than it should have been XP Tweak-files with issues.7z
  13. Wow, I didn't expected to get a reply so soon Yeah you're right! It turns out that I have the option 'Backup on save' turned on! Sorry, should have said before reporting... I'm using v1.8 (as reported by Weidu) : ~EET_TWEAKS/EET_TWEAKS.TP2~ #0 #2052 // XP for killing creatures -> Decrease to 50%: 1.8 ~EET_TWEAKS/EET_TWEAKS.TP2~ #0 #2062 // XP for quests -> Decrease to 50%: 1.8 I have a clone of the main git repo that I keep updated frequently (making sure I only update to a tag version, I learnt my lesson ,) but I have not seen updates in the last few weeks... I'm using Project Infinity for all my installs purposes. EDIT: Forgot to explain the root causes, it might add more context to the issue... just in case, it's just detail that it might not be important! The mod that caused the root of the issue was 'All Things Mazzy', which adds some changes to the files OHHFAK.bcs and_bClara.bcs that broke SCS patching (uses a string: "Renal Bloodscalp", with spaces and the SCS script didn't account for that) so I had to manually edit those files to replace the strings removing the spaces, install SCS components that choke with those, and edit them then back again after that... But I had to do the installation twice since I forgot to install some mods early in the list and so the second time around the previously edited OHHFAK.bcs.bak and _bClara.bcs.bak were still present in the override folder (yeah, I didn't cleared it since I didn't remove *all* mods, just back up to NPC mods.) So, maybe they're are getting picked up due to some dependency globbing related to area scanning or something? I'm sure I missing way off the mark, not so confident when it comes to reading and understanding .TP2 and such Of course I reported the issue in the SCS thread (at beamdog forums) and I'm not sure if there's something wrong with the mod All Things Mazzy at all, so not sure if there's anything to report there.
  14. I found during my last installation that the XP patcher process BCS.BAK files generated by Near Infinity, since it seems to match them as part of the general globbing pattern? I had to manually modify a couple of files that were generating bugs on install and didn't realize that the backups of the old versions were kept there in my override directory, so those made the patcher fail on install. Sadly I forgot to report it at that moment and now I lost the logs for the failure... but it should be easy to verify, just change something in an area/creature BCS that grants XP with NI and save it, and run the patcher and that .BCS.BAK that NI generates should come up as one of the files patched in the process.
  15. Would there be any possibility of adding a third option to the Easy Spell Learning tweak to remove the spell book's cap but leave the scroll scribing chance alone? Reason: just QoL, since EE mark scrolls as green when you don't know them, it's easier to see which scrolls you need when you're visiting stores and such, and since under normal play you normally just drink a couple of potions of intelligence, the spell book cap doesn't matter at all. For me at least, I like the spell scribing failure chance, since it forces me to hoard scrolls and not be able to learn them on the spot... and have scribing sessions before rest and such, which makes sense RP-ing wise (or, at least, as much sense as you can withing the game's mechanics...) so removing the failure chance is never an option for me, but the spell book cap is something that never comes into play, since under buffed intelligence there's no cap, and you can learn all you want anyways.
×
×
  • Create New...