suy

Someone mentioned a scroll of Death Spell working against a Hakeashar, but the Skull of Death failing. I looked into them and found that the former uses 148 (cast spell at point) while the latter uses 146 (cast spell at creature).

CamDawg mentioned that the BG2FP went through many scrolls to correct this, but other items like this might be missing.

Ah, that's an interesting detail. Note that the Unique Artifacts mod goes way beyond this, and removes many duplicates that from the description, one might understand that are unique. But it doesn't include this weapon.

On 3/25/2022 at 11:28 PM, Angel said:

Which looks much more consistent to me.  However, the BG1 and BG2 manuals reflect the table as it is in game.  Developer intend, or an invasive bug?  I really can't think of a reason why the devs would want the faulty table.

Good point Angel. I always knew this table was suspicious, but I never bothered checking with the PnP manuals. The way the table it's specified there is a bit weird, and it's the only table I know of that it's not specified in full detail (like in the 2DA or the BG/IWD manuals), but instead it's just one column saying how much to change from one level to the next. So you need to build the table yourself, carrying from the previous result. I think it's obvious that someone was confused when understanding that description of the bonus spells per score level, or that just read a wrong row by accident. There seems that the mistake is only when reading scores 19, 23 and 24. Since the result carries to the next row, the table gets more and more borked at the end.

PS: I'm not sure if this is EE specific content. Are we in the right thread?

I also have the old edition in paper, but in Spanish, so that's let's useful to share here of course. There it says roughly the same, and instead of "negate" it says "anular", which I would translate as "nullify" or "cancel". I think it makes sense, as it says that the idea is that the target is not aware of the attack, so it can't attempt to dodge it (or, in the case of awful dexterity, accidentally get hit with more ease). So it should just have a 0 bonus/penalty IMHO.

Both Chaotic Commands and Free Action seem a mess that I would not dare to open in "bugfix mode", unless one wants to just rethink the spells at least little bit. Free Action, for example, is always questioned that it blocks Haste or any other beneficial effect. I remember having searched quite a bit (within my limited resources) and could not find where is justified in the books that it blocks something beneficial. The description in P&P said:

Quote

(...) move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that impedes movement (such as web or slow spells) or while under water. It even negates or prevents the effects of paralysis and hold spells.

Additionally, one weird inconsistency of Free Action is that it cures stun, while it doesn't prevent it... And according to a comment I've just read, it doesn't cancel Haste/IH, but it blocks it from being applied. I think that was the case with the Flail of Ages as well.

About Chaotic Commands... I don't know. It is true that what it does, according to its description, it's not very consistent. The issue is, that given that most spells have a verbal component, it is hard to understand why some spells "place a direct verbal command upon a single individual" and others do not. The list on P&P description seems to be open to spells that have this verbal command, but again, how a new spell from an expansion can be known if it fits or not?

This is a quote from the PHB, revised edition (AD&D 2nd edition, of course). It's obviously a bug, IMHO.

Thanks Bubb. This was what I meant.

6 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

This seems to be a pretty blatantly intentional addition on Beamdog's part, but I cannot see any rationale for it

I think that Bubb mentioned this being not intentional, actually.

There were a few changes to lightning bolts in 2.6. A user reported one different behavior at the start of Irenicus' dungeon, when there is a device that spawns mephits and lightning bolts in a room nearby the starting cages. Galactygon reported that it has been fixed in 2.7. There could be others, in other traps, maybe.

I suggested to keep the petrification but updating the description because it seems more balanced and less controversial. The effect is only on the upgraded version, and the upgrade item is found in Abazigal's lair, so it's when you have progressed through ToB somewhat. Removing an effect from an arguably not-so-awesome weapon for ToB's standards (is it used more than Celestial Fury?) might deter some people from using the mod/component. Maybe it's not a big deal, though.

OK, after the feedback, this is what I would do (but let me know if you don't think the same):

• Death Ward is the "standard", and it's fine. No need to change.
• Hindo's Doom is like Death Ward, but with the extra protection against petrification. I would update the description instead of remove the effect.
• Cloak of the Lich should get protection against disintegration.
• Avoid Death should get protection against PW:Kill, and should get the description updated to mention protection vs imprisonment, energy drain and petrification.

• Cloak of the Lich (OHBCLCK1.ITM): "Powerful enchantments woven into it shield the wearer from all forms of death magic"
• Hindo's Doom +4 (SW1H71.ITM): "Immunity to all forms of death magic"
• Death Ward (SPPR409.SPL): "protects the target from all forms of death magic"
• Avoid Death (SPCL917.SPL): "the rogue becomes immune to death magic"
• Others anyone?

The list of effects that one is immune to with those spell items (via #101) is kind of a mess (I've written them in the order found in the game files).

• Cloak of the Lich: 13 (kill target), 55 (slay), 209 (power word kill).
• Hindo's Doom +4: 13 (kill target), 55 (slay), 134 (petrification), 209 (power word kill), 238 (disintegrate)
• Death Ward: 13 (kill target), 55 (slay), 209 (power word kill), 238 (disintegrate)
• Avoid Death: 13 (kill target), 55 (slay), 134 (petrification), 238 (disintegrate), 211 (imprisonment), 216 (level drain)

As you can see, it's pretty inconsistent.

• Cloak of the Lich lacks many effect protections compared to the others. Disintegrate seems a must.
• Hindo's Doom seems OKish (but petrification being there is arguable).
• Death Ward seems OK as well, similar to Hindo's Doom (but petrification is NOT there in this case).
• Avoid Death seems the most powerful one, but it's weird. It's missing Power Word: Kill protection, which is odd given that it protects against Imprisonment. It also protects against Level Drain. The protection against Imprisonment and Level Drain seems a nice touch for an HLA that only lasts 5 rounds, but it's not mentioned on the description.

I'm not sure what to add, remove or change, but I'd like to hear your input on what should "death magic" be.

• Imprisonment it's like a permanent maze. I don't know if it counts as "death" given the special way to bring back the creature to the original state. It's only on Avoid Death.
• Petrification is good to have in some of the higher level utils, given that nasty stuff in high level spells can petrify (Prismatic Spray). But it's a kind of different form of death as well, and can be protected with low level things available even on early BG1. It's on Avoid Death and Hindo's Doom.
• Level Drain can indeed kill, but it doesn't do so instantly like the others, so we can compare it to regular damage. If Death Ward would protect against it, it would be so convenient, but it would make Negative Plain Protection useless, which lasts a lot less and it's at the same power level. It's only on Avoid Death.
• Disintegrate seems an obvious insta-kill, like Finger of Death. It's on all except Cloak of the Lich.
• Power Word: Kill is missing only on Avoid Death, so seems a no brainer that it's a bug.

Some classes/kits get what to me seems a suspicious enough inconsistent penalty in the last colum. For example, this are the ones receiving a 5 penalty (should be only Wizard group, I think):

MAGE                0                   0                   5
MAGE_THIEF          0                   0                   5
ABJURER             0                   0                   5
CONJURER            0                   0                   5
DIVINER             0                   0                   5
ENCHANTER           0                   0                   5
ILLUSIONIST         0                   0                   5
INVOKER             0                   0                   5
NECROMANCER         0                   0                   5
TRANSMUTER          0                   0                   5
WILDMAGE            0                   0                   5
SORCERER            0                   0                   5
SHADOWDANCER        0                   0                   5
DRAGON_DISCIPLE     0                   0                   5

I think Mage/Thief should not be there, as it should get the best of the two classes, and neither should Shadowdancer, because other thieves have a 3 instead. The list receiving 2 or 3 penalty seems correct to me.

jmerry's Tweak Collection has a component with the following explanation:

Quote

Many NPCs have null (kit ID 0) kits, instead of the standard "base class" kit that a player-created character gets if they don't otherwise select a kit. In most cases, this is irrelevant. However, if a character (such as Imoen) with a null kit is capable of learning arcane spells, they are treated as a specialist with no school for the purpose of spell learning, and take a 15% penalty to their spell learning chance for all scrolls.
This component takes all joinable characters with null kits and gives them the "base class" kit. (It may also apply the change to some characters that can't actually join, but that's completely harmless)

The issue on the engine is mentioned on another thread, and is scheduled to be fixed in 2.7 once released (if ever), so I think it's worth it to have this simple fix applied to joinable NPCs.

There is a bug that causes any arcane caster with a kit to receive a -15% penalty to learning spells by scribing scrolls.

Roughly speaking, the engine (as of 2.6 or earlier) instead of checking if the caster is a specialist of a different school than the spell attempted to, it also applies the specialist penalty to classes with ANY kit. That means any kitted Bard gets the -15% penalty, but also a Berserker>Mage or Kensai>Mage.

The sources for this are Bubb and CamDawg, and according to Cam, this will be fixed in 2.7. Links to the conversation on Discord (which I hope is not a problem to share, given that it was a public conversation):
 

• https://discord.com/channels/155707640255741952/538120283916337152/840647016916582461

• https://discord.com/channels/155707640255741952/538120283916337152/862443849217081354

Also, related, but on the side of fixable things with WeiDU:

On 3/18/2022 at 4:04 AM, DavidW said:

If actually the extant mods only use 50-60 in total, we could borrow a bunch for FP with impunity (which would simplify immunities); if there's real pressure on splstate.2da, of course we shouldn't.

One problem of not using spell states, is that, as mentioned on this thread (and an older one), some modders are using proficiencies instead. Freeing proficiencies by changing detectable spells seems worth it, to me at least. But I'm not so experienced, so I can't see the consequences of such change.

I want to add something that I've mentioned on the other discussion (I think), and it's that my idea was actually to boost by 1 probably all weapons usable by players or more mundane enemies. The rationale was that it's quite often that I find that "kiting" is too effective against enemies (and cheesy), but also frustrating when they do it against you. I often try to hit an enemy, specially when backstabbing, and the walking of some creatures makes it silly. You seem to be visually very close, but a tiny movement ruins your attack. It looks silly that they move away, often showing you their back or their side, and instead of having an easier attack you just fail because they move faster than the animation. That feels really silly. I don't know how well a range increase would work, though.

I've noticed some time ago that the component to create interval saves doesn't work for me. I've never payed much attention, as it's just a convenience, but I think I've found the reason: It doesn't append to "$HOME/.local/share/Baldur's Gate - Enhanced Edition/Baldur.lua", but instead to the directory and file name all lowercased. I've found this contents there, on "baldur.lua" (lowercase):

SetPrivateProfileString('Script','IntervalSaveEnabled','1')
SetPrivateProfileString('Script','IntervalSaveCombat','0')

But those are in the wrong file and file path. The game creates both directory and file name with mixed case.

I've looked at the code, and it I see it just uses "~%USER_DIRECTORY%/Baldur.lua~", which seems correct. WeiDU's doc also seems correct in how it seems to define %USER_DIRECTORY%.

Is there anything I can do, or should I report this to WeiDU's project?

Thank you.

If you have downloaded the library, it's a matter of having it on the right directory. If you get it from the operating system (e.g. a package, which would be recommended anyway) it should be available right away. I can't say about Steam-specific bits, but with the GOG installer everything is a pretty regular Linux program.

3 minutes ago, DavidW said:

I'm not sufficiently invested in SR to do it myself.

I think I got the answer while I was typing my question, sorry.

10 minutes ago, DavidW said:

i.e. the spell-selection list for NPC mages/priests is the IWD list, not the SR list. NPCs will still use SR spells, but their spell selections won't be tailored to SR. (So, for instance, they won't learn Larloch's Minor Drain, because the vanilla version is too weak.) PCs aren't affected.

Is simplifying the implementation the motivation for this change, or is something else? Just curious, I'm not a SR user myself. But if I were, I would dislike it very much, as it makes the world inconsistent, where mages on one side of the fight seem to have access to something that others don't. One of the things where I saw SCS making a huge improvement to the game was that, after installing it, computer-controlled enemies would do stuff that humans do as well (better choices in spells, throwing MMM in between casting, etc.). But just curious.

Story mode is what you want.

Why don't you copy and paste the messages and format them in the forum? It's text! It's very hard to read the screenshot, and the dumb Google Drive system that you uploaded to thinks the innocent PNGs can't be previewed, and have to be downloaded as stupid ZIP file. Even attaching to the forum would have worked better. I know that showing a screenshot gives alleged verisimilitude, but everyone today knows how to use the web inspector in their browser to fake any website.

11 hours ago, DavidW said:

OK, so just to check I'm not being stupid, if I

1. create a text file called stratagems.sh, whose contents are 'weinstall %MOD_FOLDER% --uninstall --force-install-list blah';
2. put that text file in weidu_external/batch;
3. typed 'sh weidu_external/batch/stratagems' (/ rather than \, yes?) at the command line

the result would be the same as entering 'weinstall %MOD_FOLDER% --uninstall --force-install-list blah' at the command line?

& this is Linux, not OSX, yes?

3 should be "sh weidu_external/batch/stratagems.sh" because in 1 you named it "stratagems.sh". Sorry if I confused you about "not needing the '.sh'". I mean that the file doesn't need any naming to work (you could call it "stratagems.png"), but you need to execute it with the exact same name (no extensions omitted). The slashes should definitely be forward (which IIRC nowadays also work on Windows and on any mainstream OS).

And this should also work on Mac OS X, provided they have a weidu/weinstall in their path... I don't know if that's customary for them, though. I only know @subtledoctor as macOS user, and I understand he just uses his GUI.

Just "filename" should work, but I think it needs to be executable, unless AT_EXIT takes care of it, somehow. The one that for sure works is "sh filename" (no need to end in ".sh"). CamDawg shared a snippet from Fixpack where he was doing a similar hack of generating a shell script and running it: https://discord.com/channels/205226905870270466/531043595252137985/881580184954863656
 

// os x "can't save" bug
ACTION_IF ~%WEIDU_OS%~ STRING_EQUAL_CASE ~osx~ THEN BEGIN
<<<<<<<< fix-temp
#!/bin/sh
test -f temp && (rm -f temp && mkdir temp)
>>>>>>>>
  COPY ~fix-temp~ ~fix-temp~
  AT_NOW ~sh fix-temp~
END

Thank you again!