rigidjelly

Its a bad dual combo unless you use multiple tweak mods. 1. Slings suck so you need expanded weapon options of dual/multi clerics or something that buffs slings (like inflicting bludgeoning damage) 2. No point in doing ranger/cleric duals without lua tweak for later druid spells. 3. Ranger xp table is significantly slower than fighter, though depending on when you dual and how well you know early game bg2 this can become pretty inconsequential. 4. Archer kit gets its oomph from levels. Dual late and it takes millions of xp to get your static boosts back, dual early (lvl 9 like a fighter) and you dont have much benefit from the kit in the first place. 5. Big draw in druid spells is ironskin which is significantly less useful for archers. 6. Two free pips in TWF is pretty useless since you're going to be shooting all game or why bother being an archer? 7. Have to be good. If you play no reloads you can have issues getting confused before you dual (though thats the same with all rangers.) Only one chance to un-fall. Yet another reason to dual early and thus get less benefit playing Archer kit. 8. DuHM and AoF are significantly less useful for archers. 9. No Tracking. Clearly the best HLA. Archers should stay pure. Cleric/Rangers and Ranger->Clerics should be flails user imo.

Mage kits add 1 spell per spell level and a +2/-2 saves for their chosen school in exchange for a full school of magic. They are inherently limiting. There is no point in having a mage kit assigned to an enemy unless it is to make use of the buffed saves. Presumably the kits DavidW chose to allow SCS to generate spell lists from lost things that were easy enough to work around (invokers unable to sleep charm or chaos) or gained benefits that were simple to set up for (necromancers blowing pcs away with sequencer skulltrap). I do not believe SCS is an appropriate way to implement what you're talking about. I don't profess to know the under-the-hood mechanics but broadly speaking SCS systematically assigns spells to mages on a given set of criteria and generates ai scripts to use those spells under given circumstances. Things like a wizard who only uses summons or does some sort of polymorph gimmick or only uses spook and blindness sound to me like interesting one-shot encounters with specific custom scripting but don't really mesh well with the automated nature of SCS. I mean, I'm sure its possible, but you keep talking about variety of kits instead of variety of spellbook composition and I just don't really get it. This information is not available to the player in game. I don't see how it can imply anything.

The inability of transmuters to remove spell protections and abjurers to use stoneskin means any enemy mage with those kits is free xp unless you have intentionally gimped your own party (eg. no arcane casters). Wild mages should never be enemies because they can kill themselves with their own spells on bad surges. Diviner just seems to lose a couple of things for no meaningful gain. Illusionists could easily swap skulltrap for fireball but losing horrid wilting for -2 save modifier on spook was probably not worth the effort. I havent played with SR for years but unless stoneskin and mage duel spells are universal school and there are offensive divination spells they don't add anything in terms of enemy variety. If SR adds some of the offensive illusion spells from 3e you could probably make a case to DavidW to include them. The shadow magic spells were pretty cool.

From version 6.5a3. Functional weapon tweaks has a couple of issues, maybe fixed since then. Dart adjustments alter all Melf's Minute Meteors and presumably any other such spell-weapons aside from the blacklisted ENEBLADE. This includes DW#ENEB though I am not familiar enough with how SCS does its stuff to know if this matters. Bow adjustments do not take into account launchers like Tuigan that add additional apr. Maybe a check for bonus apr and then set to 5/2 if found? Why set apr instead of adding a -1/2 to all bows? Dagger adjustments only change melee forms of throwing daggers. Boomerang/Firetooth (dagger) are 2d4 ranged 1d5 melee. Oof. Not sure how this should go. 2d5 would follow logically but seems a bit strong. Not a bug per se, but since Firetooth (xbow) is a light xbow, you can use it with a shield. Maybe a special case to make it 2 handed but still usable by thieves etc? It was already leagues ahead of every other xbow and better than Gesen unless you needed dispel arrows.

Spins provide modest situational boosts. Dual wielding is useful to increase applications of on hit effects (FoA slow) and without a backstab multiplier like thieves is a reliable way to boost damage output. Bard xp/level table (at least in bg2) means they will cap mirror images much earlier and have 1-3 more stoneskins per cast. Higher level means much less likely to be dispelled due to punishing dispel mechanics. Suck it F/M stans. Can use simulacrum helm to have a song active without sacrificing action economy. Use any item. God tier HLA. Only lose pickpocket vs. unkitted bards which is only ever useful to steal (some people think any stealing at all is cheese) and can be buffed with stacks of thievery pots. Haer'Dalis is probably most peoples first introduction to blades which may skew perspective since he gets extra illegal proficiencies and some resistances for being a tiefling. Big flute.

Ah, I had also encountered this issue once but was unable to figure out how to fix it and the component that threw the error for me (it was either smarter vampires or one of the improved bodhi components) succeeded on reinstall. Thank you deratiseur for the easy fix.

The tool installs the SCS IWD Spell components (1500 and 1510) as park of its tweaks section rather than the ai improvements section. This means that enemy mages and priests (from the Smarter Mages/Priests components) and other creatures that COULD use them (like vampires) do not get assigned IWD spells in their spell choices. Alterations to the spells are also part of the smarter mages/priests components leading to undesired spell behaviour (I think this is relatively minor though). The IWDification versions of the spells ARE installed earlier in the sequence, so for the time being dedicated bws users should choose that mod instead of the scs iwd components (or try spell revisions, a much broader modification of the spell system that scs can also account for)

I'm not interested in signing up for her super secret club forum and there's no way to tell if she even looks at the EE tool thread here at g3, though I will post there anyway for those who might look there. The reason I brought it up here was two-fold: 1. There are quite a few people who use tool assisted automation to install large mod lists and knowing that one of the tools totally guts a part of scs' ai improvements seems important enough to post on the scs forum. 2. If the spell tweaks are only ever done by smarter mages/priests and not by the IWD component itself this means that in addition to enemies not knowing the spells the actual spells will behave incorrectly (or at least not quite the expected way) which people could report here, since for someone who isnt well versed in bg modding (like me) this seems the obvious first choice, even if it turns out to be something else at fault. This error will happen even if scs is the only mod installed as it's an component order issue and not a mod conflict. As I said, I use project infinity to install, so this is only a minor inconvenience to me, but others may use the EE bws whole-cloth, which imo completely defeats the point of installing the IWD spells in the first place. As an aside, thank you very much for continuing to update SCS with new and interesting ways to murder my characters. Easily the best mod for the game.

Unless I have totally misunderstood what components 1500 and 1510 actually do I have encountered an install issue: In Roxanne's bws fork the two IWD spell components are placed with the rest of scs tweaks (ie AFTER all of the difficulty enhancing components, most notably after smarter mages and smarter priests). This makes scs install vanilla spell choices for all enemy mages and priests (and possibly any of the other tweaked creatures if they check for iwd resources) If, like me, you used Project Infinity to install but imported the EE tool's install order, its easy enough to move it around pre-install, but anyone using ee bws will never have enemies using iwd spells unless you are using the IWDification versions of the spells(which ARE installed before SCS). In addition to this, a question The readme says that the alterations SCS makes to the spells themselves are done by the smarter mages and priests components respectively. If the SCS IWD components are installed after smarter mages and priests, does the SCS installer make the changes anyway?

No, again you're straying from the actual issue. None of your interpretations about anything anyone else has said is relevant. Skeleton creatures EXCEPT the high hedge variant get slashing, piercing and missile resistances. Chuft believes this to be an error. I assume skellytz agrees, and I do too. Now you may believe that because you can go to high hedge early that whoever was in charge of setting up the .cre info for that area during development deliberately changed these specific skeletons to make it easier for low level characters if you wish, but it is a dubious position to hold since there are a myriad of ways a level 1 character can die in the begining areas that have a much larger gameplay impact than missing 50% slashing resist on a creature with 1 hit die. You continue to bring up irrelevant trivia (as if it matters in this context that you can regen from >100% resistance) but seem unable to unaderstand the Chufts main point which again is: High Hedge skeletons are missing the resistances that they should have for being a skeleton.

Perpetual lurker reporting in. Jarno I've seen countless posts by you that go on strange tangents but this is probably the best example of you living in upside-down land. To be clear: 1. Chuft pointed out that in BGT the skeletons in high hedge ( SKELETS.cre ) DO NOT have the piercing/missile immunities that they should. 2. skellytz linked an image displaying the difference between the high hedge skeleton ( SKELETS.cre ) and the default skeleton ( SKELET.cre ). This was the "proof" that skeletons in general should have these resistances and the high hedge skeletons were bugged. 3. You said NOPE and embedded an image showing the very same SKELETS.cre data that skellytz did, somehow convincing yourself that you were correct, though I'm not sure what point you thought you were making. Your line "This is the original intent. Nothing else matters." is perhaps the most bizarre as you are posting in a thread about a MOD, in reference to a post about an assumed error on the part of the original developers. You brought up the skeletons HP, their weapons choice, that they have a shield, how their AC compares to low level characters', how leather armor is poor against piercing damage, that BG1 doesn't have a dragon in it despite being a D&D game and how you could make a bow that deals 200+ damage but none of that is relevant to the main point: High Hedge skeletons are missing their proper resistances in the original, TotSC and BGT games.