Jazira

Merry Christmas and happy holliday.

Hi,

I commited an another batch of string fixes. Somehow, I was unable to update de html docs without messing the encoding, so I let you that part.

Tell me if I'm wrong on anything. I'll fix it. 

https://github.com/Gibberlings3/EE_Fixpack/pull/54

BG2EE

According to all online drow dictionary/translator i've found, it should be "a dobluth", not "an obluth".

@25308 = ~And my sister's suitor, Gomph, was prodigiously endowed but bowlegged. A dobluth... an outcast. She must have heard us in bedchambers and couldn't help herself.~

Double space in the middle of the sentence.

@28025 = ~Tell me next time, then, if you intend to tune me out, and I shall be sure to include colorful drawings and cartoonish dances to keep your infantile mind interested.~

It should be "Ma Jansen", not "Ma Jensen".

@48516 = ~Ah, yes, the old puzzle-box trick. Ma Jansen used to hide the keys to the breadbox the same way, not that it ever stopped us. "Jan," she used to say, "one of these days, you're going to have one too many sweetbreads!" I never did, although my cousin Arfie once did that day he exploded. Sad story, that.~

It should be "could elicit a response", not "could illicit a response".

@48747 = ~Not interested in her, or not interested in women? I do so wonder, ranger, if even my charms could elicit a response on behalf of females everywhere...~

BG1EE

It should be "Ajantis Ilvastarr", not "Ajantis Ilvarstarr". (Credit to Lefreut)

@46138 = ~This is a bloody business we're in, Ajantis Ilvastarr. Sometimes, we must do things we would find... distasteful... to ensure a venture's success.~

It should be "4 vs. crushing", not "-4 vs. crushing".

@51969 = ~The sturdy craftsmanship of the drow allows them to design many beautiful yet utilitarian goods. Among these is drow chain mail, which is so finely wrought that it can be worn under normal clothing without revealing its presence. This and its lightness allows it to be worn by Thieves and Fighter/Mages with few restrictions.

This item, like most drow equipment, is created using adamantine, an alloy of adamantite that quickly turns to dust if exposed to sunlight.

STATISTICS:

Equipped abilities:

– Open Locks: -5%

– Find Traps: -5%

– Pick Pockets: -20%

– Move Silently: -10%

– Spellcasting is not disabled

Armor Class: 0 (4 vs. crushing)

Requires:

5 Strength

Weight: 12~

1 hour ago, Sam. said:

I think I have the multi-lingual version of oBG2, but not oIWD.  Here's the original version of the files in English from oIWD:

NARR_CH6_oIWD.WAV

chap0A.WAV

Thanks. As had said Camdawg, every existing dubbed language gonna have to be edited.

So what should be done exactly for English, Just remove the "Leaving the horrors of the frost giant caves behind them"? Or something like "Leaving the horrors behind them, the party..." would be better?

Oh, and I feel like the very last syllable is missing "Lower Dorn's Dee-." Should I try to fix it too? If so, I will need more dubbing from the same actor (the other chapters narration with the sound "P" should do it). I tried to in my files but I'm sure i can do better with more content.

@14448 = ~Leaving the horrors of the frost giant caves behind them, the party made their way into the deepest tunnels of the dwarven complex. In the distance, a bright red glow emanated from the mouth of a large corridor, indicating that they were not alone in the darkness of Lower Dorn's Deep.~ [NARR_CH6]

Here are 2 different tries:

https://filetransfer.io/data-package/HNSjyNe5#link

15 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

I think the issue is, there are voiced lines. No?

1 hour ago, CamDawg said:

Yes, it's the chapter text screen with voiced narration.

If needed, I can have a look. I do have a few competences on audio edition.

Share the uncompressed .wav.

2 hours ago, jastey said:

Well, the French ones too, apparently. And Viconia's response is as if the PC said "Hell yeah let's f*".

I do confirm this.

The original French translation from ~2000.

@27512 = ~Je ne pourrais rien rêver de plus alléchant.~

Deepl translation: "I couldn't dream of anything more enticing"

While looking for the difference of enchantment between BG:EE and BG2:EE of arrows of fire, I found this article on bg wiki.

https://baldursgate.fandom.com/wiki/Arrow_of_Fire

@6767  = ~Arrow of Fire +2~

@6767   = ~Arrow of Fire~

11 hours ago, Salk said:

French and Italians have historically always understood nothing about romance.

Almateria certainly is right saying we're missing the forest for the trees.

 

I doubt that bringing in authoritative arguments about our ethnicity raises the level of the discussion.

I don't pretend to understand a language better than someone for whom it is the native language. And if I come here to ask questions, instead of committing on Github directly, is a proof of my lack of knowledge, or at least certitude regarding this specific subject. Though, I suppose double negative (I can think of nothing less...) is a pain in the ass for every language.

One thing is for sure, though, when translated this line of dialogue seems completely off (to me, Salk and the whole crew behind CorrectfrBG2EE) given the answer Viconia give.

dwchan02.itm bg2:ee:

@46657  = ~The sturdy craftsmanship of the drow allows them to design many beautiful yet utilitarian goods. Among these is drow chain mail, which is so finely wrought that it can be worn under normal clothing without revealing its presence. This and its lightness allows it to be worn by Thieves and Fighter/Mages with few restrictions.

This item, like most drow equipment, is created using adamantine, an alloy of adamantite that quickly turns to dust if removed from the Underdark.

STATISTICS:

Equipped abilities:
– Open Locks: -5%
– Find Traps: -5%
– Pick Pockets: -20%
– Move Silently: -10%
– Spellcasting is not disabled

Armor Class: 0 (4 vs. crushing)
Requires:
 5 Strength

Weight: 12~

dwchan02.itm bg:ee:

@51969 = ~The sturdy craftsmanship of the drow allows them to design many beautiful yet utilitarian goods. Among these is drow chain mail, which is so finely wrought that it can be worn under normal clothing without revealing its presence. This and its lightness allows it to be worn by Thieves and Fighter/Mages with few restrictions.

This item, like most drow equipment, is created using adamantine, an alloy of adamantite that quickly turns to dust if exposed to sunlight.

STATISTICS:

Equipped abilities:
– Open Locks: -5%
– Find Traps: -5%
– Pick Pockets: -20%
– Move Silently: -10%
– Spellcasting is not disabled

Armor Class: 0 (-4 vs. crushing)
Requires:
 5 Strength

Weight: 12~

Oh, and I almost forgot, but some icons, or at least their resolution seems to be different too. I don't know if it's from NI, tho.

14 hours ago, Almateria said:

@Jazira @Salk I feel like you guys are extremely missing the forest for the trees regarding that Viconia exchange? You have three options, one very negative, one neutral (please, for the love of god, not wanting to have sex with someone desperately crawling into your bed to seek comfort after telling you about their brother is NOT a negative behavior), one positive already. It's not exactly new or outside of Viconia's character to disregard barbs pointed at her when she wants something from you.

The text is unambigouous and perfectly understandable.

Then how do you explain she reacts to the lesser negative one but not the very negative one?

Lesser negative:

@27516  = ~I am not interested in laying with you, Viconia.~

@28057  = ~I... have a need, <CHARNAME>. A need that must be fulfilled... I must feel your strength within me and around me.~

@27525  = ~Do not deny me this, <CHARNAME>... I offer to you all the pleasures that a drow woman may bestow if you but hold me this night.~

Very negative:

@27512  = ~I can think of nothing less appealing.~

@27518  = ~Let me partake of you, <CHARNAME>, drink of your courage this night. See what a drow female may offer: I shall inflame your passions, your senses... Stay with me.~

14 hours ago, Almateria said:

From the item description, duh.

I doubt that this is a valid argument, but even if it were, how could Charname write this journal entry before even retrieving said object.

@34099  = ~Freeing the djinni

To retrieve what is in possession of the djinni Malaaq, I must first secure his release by obtaining the twin to the flask he is bound to. He informed me that the flask is kept close to his master... either in his chambers or in the possession of some dryads or golems.~

On the sound part of the subject, I wish to report [REPUP] sound file and sound texts entries is missing on BG2:EE (@10468 and @19686)

It seems this sound was added in BG:EE by Beamdog, but it was not imported on BG2:EE.

It is not on the scope of our project (CorrectfrBG2EE), we believe it is more on the EEFP, but if you do not want to add this sound, please tell us so we will make some exception in our project.

On 10/7/2022 at 1:12 AM, CamDawg said:

With that in mind, the primary question instead shifts to whether the French players want these changes. If the French version wants to synchronize these strings in the GTU--as apparently the Polish team did, from Cahir's post--I don't have an opinion on it, and the discussion should be held by and with the French players. Whether these changes constitute a fix and should be included in the in the core French fixes component is a tougher discussion, but I'm again comfortable deferring to the French players. Since the Polish community already did this, Cahir or one of the other Polish translators may be able to give you a better framework on the pros and cons of a synchronization approach for discussion.

There is no need for French GTU in EEFP for BG:1EE & BG2:EE, CorrectfrBG1EE and CorrectfrBG2EE already do the job. And we do have already unified most of the shared texts.

This thread is not about unifying French localization, but to report all the other one that there is a ton of discrepancies in English, which is the core for everyone.

1 hour ago, Sam. said:

For whatever reason I was under the impression that the first X dialog.tlk entries between BGEE/SoD and BG2EE were "theoretically" supposed to be the same (in other words the BG2EE dialog.txt started with the BGEE dialog.txt, and then added its new entries from there).  A quick test of using WeiDU to traify the DLG files and diffing the two shows this is absolutely not the case.  Is my original assumption completely wrong, or is my method flawed?

Can't tell about the .tlk or .txt files, I only work with the .tra one.

In BG2:EE dialog.tra, the lines are "arbitrarily" mixed together. The old ones (from BG1:EE in BG2:EE) are mostly concentrated at specific spots (with the same string ref in both game), but also contain for sure some inactive ones replaced with others (mostly in BG1:EE) later in the file, or in .lua file. That is the reason of all the false flags in my examples.

So, to complicate things even more... the active entries of the same object, spell, etc. present in both games could have different strings ref between BG1:EE and BG2:EE.

 I'm almost sure the 1046 first entries from BG1:EE and BG2:EE are story wise entries, and are consequently different. Or at least not shared together. Can't tell about IWD:EE.

You can easily export the latest dialog.tra by downloading the 2.6 patch of both BG1:EE and BG2:EE (& IWD:EE), then export the dialog.tra with Near Infinity:

Edit > String table > Export > as TRA file.

To change localization:

Options > TLK Language (EE only) > the language you want

2 hours ago, jmerry said:

On a systematic level, we're not going to overwrite any of those old strings that don't match.

Honest question, why not?

(By "strings that don't match", you do mean "strings that are not identical"? Not the old, inactive ones, right? For the latest, of course, why would we want to lose our time about it.)

2 hours ago, jmerry said:

Mods don't do that.

Our does, French localization had the same problem but far worst, but it is understandable, since it's been through the same process of translation several times by several teams. It's still WIP, and I guess we have to wait for an "official" stance, or at least a consensus about the remaining English entries that are not identical.

I don't know if any other localization have already done the same. Anyone?

And most of the time, those corrections should have been applied directly to the Enhanced Edition through localization, not mods. Like everything present in the EEfixpack. But since 2.7 is so far off...

2 hours ago, jmerry said:

The EEs didn't do that either.

It should have been done in the Enhanced Edition, in my opinion. I am both very grateful to Beamdog over some subject, and very annoyed by their laziness over some other.

2 hours ago, jmerry said:

If one of those needs to be replaced by a new string, we'll be making a new string and replacing references to it. Which means that we need more than just "these strings are different". We need to know where they're being used, too. After all, they might have been fixed already by replacing one or both of those references.

So, we do agree. Some people should investigate the subject more deeply. That is the reason of me reporting a lot of inconsistencies. Nothing else.

2 hours ago, jmerry said:

Taking your latest post, I'm not sure those strings are even used in the game right now. "Mage Book" and "Mage Spells"? Those don't show up as string references to 11989. They show up as literal strings in the L_en_US.lua file, and their translations would be in the corresponding files for other languages. (Relevant entries: rows 424 and 425, MAGE_BOOK_LABEL="Mage Book" and MAGE_SPELLS_LABEL="Mage Spells")

And yes, it's all about the examples. However many there are, they're just a list of examples in the end.

And what about all the other valid examples? As I said, it's cool that you debunked some of them, but it is not the point of this topic.

2 hours ago, jmerry said:

And we can't just automate this, because lots of different things are going on and every one of them needs an individual look.

So, what do you all suggest?

Personally, I would try to export all the lines for both games, by categories (spells, items, ui, engine and so on), automatize a process to eliminate all the identical and unused ones. Then do a first manual pass to eliminate the ones that are not present in both game (only present in BG1:EE, for example). And then a second pass to harmonize whatever is left with the approach @Sam. (quoted below) suggested, or something like that.

On 10/4/2022 at 1:20 AM, Sam. said:

Moreover, in many cases I doubt the "best" wording is either A or B, but some combination of the two.

2 hours ago, jmerry said:

Noting a discrepancy is only the first step, and it doesn't even guarantee that there's a problem at all.

You just saw 0.1% of it by looking at my non-proof checked examples. Since some of them are valid, don't that prove there might be a problem that should be investigated more deeply?

Again, this is not about the few descriptions and examples I cited, but hundreds, if not thousands of them. I didn't even proof check most of them because there are too many. This post is not about correcting those examples, but to discuss the subject as a whole.

@11988  = ~ALIGNMENT~ / @11988 = ~Alignment~
@11989  = ~Mage Book~ / @11989 = ~Mage Spells~
@11990  = ~GENDER~ / @11990 = ~Gender~

Sometimes it is just a little visual or logical inconvenience, a few commas, capital letters, different wording, etc. But sometimes the difference is more critical, different range, different information about spell effects, etc.

The same identical objects, spells, interface panels names, etc. are slightly, if not totally different between two games that are supposed to share the same engine, lore, spells, items, etc.

One could argue BG1:EE and BG2:EE are two different games. Story wise, yes, but the ruleset and the lore is the same for both. And for the sake of continuity and convenience, I do believe this should be synchronized.

2 hours ago, jmerry said:

#6641: Genuinely different items between BGEE and BG2EE. PLAT02 is Fallorain's Plate +1 in both games, with name #6641 in BGEE and #103095 in BG2EE. PLAT10 is Plate Mail +1 in both games, with name #61978 in BGEE with SOD and #6641 in BG2EE. The large numbers, in both cases, are Beamdog additions.

Actually, what was PLAT02 called in pre-EE BG2? I suspect that it was just called "Plate Mail +1", meaning that you could import the unique "Fallorain's Plate +1" and have it become generic "Plate Mail +1" in BG2. Then Beamdog renamed that item in BG2EE, creating a new string. And added generic +1 plate mail to SoD, with a new string for that name. So basically, this one's already fixed.

#6644: Genuinely different items between BGEE and BG2EE. Sure, both versions of RING08 add spell slots, but that's the only thing they have in common. BG1/BG2 did something silly, and we kind of just have to live with it.

#6652: Descriptions for LEAT01. OK, we probably don't need two different descriptions for basic leather armor. Not that I have any idea which one would be standard. This one might merit a change.

Sure, you can automate a tool to find possible discrepancies between text entries. But then every single one of them requires individual attention to even see if it's a real issue. This is starting to feel like that creature stat harmonization idea that went mostly nowhere, with stuff like hundreds of creatures that have two of their base saves inexplicably swapped. It's just too big, with too many things to do.

I appreciate your desire to provide answers to each of the examples cited, but I didn't even bother to look beyond that in Near Infinity when I posted it. These are just examples to make my point. This subject is vast and is not limited to a few entries.

That's what scares me, it might require too many human resources that you (English-speaker) might not have, or don't have enough experience about, there are very few English translators/proofreaders as far as I know, translation often goes one way. I wish I could help, but I'm not English native, and honestly we're already exhausted with the work we got on the French side of the topic to provide anything meaningful.

But, the good news is that it just require a few insane, very motivated people. If a few French fools could do it, why not some English one?

edit: Also, another good news, it is not required to have advanced technical knowledge. It's really accessible to anyone who can use a text editor and Near Infinity. Beside the testing part.

Technically, this is just about the spells, the items, the user interface lines, and the engine lines. I'm pretty sure it's below the ten of thousand entries to compare and proofread. With something like what... maybe 25% of binary variations within. The hard part could be the different location (stringrefs) in the files.

2 hours ago, Sam. said:

@Jazira

Personally I like the idea of BGEE/SoD vs BG2EE overlapping texts being unified, but I also don't consider myself an authority on what the "correct" wording is.  I could probably provide technical details like a list of which StrRefs are binarily different, but I'm not sure where that gets us.  If there are as many differences as you suggest there are (and I don't doubt there are), I struggle to envision a method of presenting the differences between A and B in such a way as to be easily digested by the masses so as to form a consensus.  Moreover, in many cases I doubt the "best" wording is either A or B, but some combination of the two.  Sure if "technical" descriptions differ but the underlying ITM files are the same there may be one correct answer, but this surely won't be the case for many of the discrepancies.  I'm willing to help, but will need suggestions on how to do so.

I know this is a sensitive subject, which will raise many questions and even conflict.

As you said, I agreed the best wording isn't A or B, but a combination of the two. This is what we're trying to do with the French mods correcting the texts & sounds, most of the latest commits are good examples of this approach.

BG1:EE (alpha - do not install it) / BG2:EE (beta)

But we are at a point where the non-synchronism of the English texts between BG1:EE and BG2:EE start to handicap us. And we mostly left those entries untouched yet. This is the reason of this topic.

While I'm glad you responded to me about these specifics examples, what about the hundreds, if not thousands of other occurrences? And I do not exaggerate here, the following took me 3 minutes to find.

What about the "shared" texts, the one supposed to be exactly the same, for example: spells, items, user interface, etc.?

@6641  = ~Fallorain's Plate +1~ / @6641   = ~Plate Mail +1~

@6644  = ~Evermemory~ / @6644   = ~Reaching Ring~

@6652  = ~Leather armor, despite the popular misconception, is not soft and supple like the leather used to make a Ranger's boots or a Druid's robe. That kind of leather offers no better protection than common clothing.

STATISTICS:

Armor Class: 8 (10 vs. piercing and missile)
Requires:
 4 Strength

Weight: 15~

@6652   = ~Basic armor made of thick, wax or water-hardened leather. It is sturdy protection, not supple like boots or a cloak. Soft garment leathers like that would offer no more protection than common clothing. 

STATISTICS:

Armor Class: 8 (10 vs. piercing and missile)
Requires:
 4 Strength

Weight: 15~

I do believe there is a huge subject to discuss here. What should/could be done?

4 hours ago, CamDawg said:

I think, in this case, it's literal. Keldorn is (playfully) telling Yoshimo to knock it off or he'll ask Torm to turn him into an actual pumpkin.

Thank you!

Hi,

I'm currently working on correcting the French translation of Baldur's Gate II, and I need to know what does "turn YOU into a pumpkin" mean.

Here is the context, it's a dialogue between Keldorn and Yoshimo. They don't like each other's very much, but this banter is kind of friendly. They had a little exchange about bawdy songs and ribald tales, and the following sentence is Keldorn's conclusion:

"Now get a move on, scalawag, before I call on the gods to turn you into a lowly pumpkin of some sort."

As I understand it turn into a pumpkin mean to go to bed, to go home. It's an idiom referencing Cinderella. I interpret it as Keldorn being tired of this exchange and threatening Yoshimo to send him to bed rather than literally, physically transforming him into a pumpkin.

So, am I right? Could this mean something else, could this be interpreted literally (to physically transform into a pumpkin)? Can you turn someone else into a pumpkin by this idiom? Are there any bawdy songs or ribald tales about Cinderella? Is the song below about Cinderella?

I could provide the full dialogue if needed:

Thanks.

I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding about Johnbob's Github repo.

His Github repo is not mean to host another version of the mod, but to learn the how-to's. And sometimes there are several translators or proofreaders working on a single project using Github.

As some have already said, it is not recommended to translate mods that are still in development. It is counterproductive for both the modder and the translator. I won't comment about why not to, because I believe it has been explained very well.

Traification is one of the last, if not the last, step in mod developement.

Give AionZ a bit of time. Who knows why he doesn't have responded yet. And give yourself a bit of time too.

No answer is still better than a "No, bye!"

I'm surprised that what's following haven't been noticed before.

It is about the djinni Malaaq, the Irenicus' djinni slave in the Plane of Air. You have to find its twin flask in possession of the dryads in order to free him, right at the beginning of BG2.

There are only 3 occurrences of the word "Malaaq" in BG2:EE (@34099, @34701 and @47515), two journal entry and an item description. At no time did he ever mention his name directly to charname, so how could charname know his name?

A simple fix:

@10867  = ~I am bound. What do—who are you? Ah, I see... the master is gone, and you've managed to get yourselves in trouble. My name is Malaaq.~ [OGREM01]

Another fix could have been to change his name and tooltip, but unfortunately @9261 and @9262 are shared between other genies. Or perhaps patch the IDJINNI.CRE file with new entries.

@9261   = ~Genie~
@9262   = ~Genie~

13 hours ago, jmerry said:

Glyph of Warding uses the TRAPGLYP projectile. Trap size 150, explosion size 200. Identical between BGEE and BG2EE. Though ... where are you getting that "25 ft" description? The descriptions are identical between BGEE without SoD, BGEE with SoD, and BG2EE for me.

12 hours ago, CamDawg said:

Like jmerry, Glyph lists a 12-ft radius on all games for me (which is correct). Cone of Cold probably does need to be synced as 17 or 18 feet for BG/SoD/BG2 (the actual projectile value to actual in-game feet is an estimate at best, and using the IESDP conversion sets it as 17.6 feet), but the IWD cone is indeed different (and correct) at 60 degrees, 20 feet. For Shield of the Archons, we need to verify it one way or the other.

Sorry, I didn't have double-checked this one.

The 25 ft radius come from the old BG1, not in function anymore, spell description in BG:EE.

Quote

@12200 = ~Glyph of Warding
(Abjuration, Evocation)

Level: 3
Sphere: Guardian
Range: 60 ft.
Duration: Permanent until discharged
Casting Time: 9
Area of Effect: 25-ft. radius
Saving Throw: Neg. 

A Glyph of Warding is a powerful inscription magically drawn to prevent unauthorized or hostile creatures from passing, entering, or opening. It can be used to guard a small bridge, to ward an entry, or as a trap on a chest or box. Any creature violating the warded area is subject to the magic it stores. A successful Saving Throw vs. Spell enables the creature to escape the effects of the glyph. Multiple glyphs cannot be cast on the same area; although if a cabinet had three drawers, each could be separately warded. When the spell is cast, the priest weaves a tracery of faintly glowing lines around the warding sigil. When the glyph is activated, it deals 1d4 points of electrical damage per level of the caster to the victim.~

Still, those are just a very few examples, there are many more.

Hi,

While working on synchronism of French texts between BG:EE & BG2:EE, Lefreut and I noticed a lot of inconsistencies about the English texts between BG:EE and BG2:EE (and IWD:EE). I'm talking about the "shared" texts, the one supposed to be exactly the same, for example: spells, items, user interface, etc.

Sometimes it's just a few comma and stuff, but sometimes it is more "crucial". And there is hundreds (if not thousands?) of occurrences.

Here are just a few examples:

On 8/4/2022 at 11:51 AM, lefreut said:

Some inconsistencies in spell descriptions.

Cone of Cold Area of Effect: BGEE/SoD 17-ft. cone with 90-deg. arc, BG2EE 18-ft. cone with 90-deg. arc, IWDEE 20-ft. cone with 60-deg. arc.

Glyph of Warding Area of Effect: BGEE/SoD 25-ft. radius, BG2EE/IWDEE 12-ft. radius.

Quote

BG:EE: @26287 = ~Shield of the Archons
(Abjuration)

Level: 7
Sphere: Protection
Range: Touch
Duration: 3 rounds/level
Casting Time: 9
Area of Effect: The caster
Saving Throw: None

This powerful abjuration spell causes the spells cast against the priest to be absorbed and consumed. This affects a total of spell levels equal to half the level of the caster. This includes spells cast from scrolls and innate spell-like abilities, but excludes the following: area effects that are not centered directly upon the priest, as well as area effects that are stationary such as Cloudkill and Stinking Cloud. As long as the spell is cast directly at the priest, it will be absorbed provided that there are spell levels remaining. For example, if there is only 1 level left and a 3rd-level spell is cast at the priest, the spell will be absorbed while canceling the shield. This also works against Dispel Magic.~

BG2:EE @11015  = ~Shield of the Archons
(Abjuration)

Level: 7
Sphere: Protection
Range: Touch
Duration: 3 rounds/level
Casting Time: 9
Area of Effect: The caster
Saving Throw: None

This powerful abjuration spell causes the spells cast against the priest to be absorbed and consumed. This affects a total of spell levels equal to half the level of the caster. This includes spells cast from scrolls and innate spell-like abilities, but excludes the following: area effects that are not centered directly upon the priest, as well as area effects that are stationary, such as Cloudkill and Stinking Cloud. As long as the spell is cast directly at the priest, it will be absorbed provided that there are spell levels remaining. For example, if there is only 1 level left and a 3rd-level spell is cast at the priest, the spell will be absorbed while canceling the shield.~

These spells, items, etc. are supposed to act the same with the shared engine, right?

I know it is not game breaking, but beside the obvious inconvenience, it makes any attempt to automate synchronization of translations way harder.

So, do you think anything could be done to harmonize it, other than manually proofread it all? If not, which game is the more correct, the most proofread? The one to blindly follow? To me, from my experience, BG2:EE English texts seems to be the most proofreaded one, but I might be wrong.

On 9/1/2022 at 11:08 AM, Salk said:

I think what you pointed out has merit, Jazira.

I don't really know what the intention was with "I can think of nothing less appealing." but it does sound and feel completely off. Just changing the "less" with "more" doesn't sound like a good solution to me either though because at the next reply node CHARNAME can firmly dismiss Viconia's proposal and that would be in direct contrast with what the revision you suggested would imply. I think that the best alternative is to introduce a reply which prompts further elaboration from Viconia. It would not really be needed but since CHARNAME needs to say something I believe that would be the less damaging possibility.

Inside the GTU revision for BG2 I have now tentatively changed that string to something quite different:

@27512  = ~What kind of night are we talking about here?~

If someone has a reason/explanation for keeping the original one please intervene.

Thanks.

The next node doesn't shock me, this is a double check, there are several others in the same dialogue (I'm not defending my ground, fact is I don't really care, since I never played and will never play in English).

I feel that the 3 options at this node lack a real positive answer.

@27512  = ~I can think of nothing less appealing.~ //very negative, insulting

@27516  = ~I am not interested in laying with you, Viconia.~ //negative

@27517  = ~All right... I will stay with you, if that is what you wish.~ //neutral positive

We discovered this while correcting the French translation of BG2EE, and @27512 was (incorrectly?) translated like that: "Je ne pourrais rien rêver de plus alléchant." (I couldn't dream of anything more appealing.)

But your proposal could be a solution too. I'm no native speaker, so... can't really tell what is the best.

Another solution could be to edit a bit the Viconia's answer, but I'm no fan of it (I'm truly convinced that the mistake lies in the previous line @27512) :

@27518  = ~Please, I beg you. Let me partake of you, <CHARNAME>, drink of your courage this night. See what a drow female may offer: I shall inflame your passions, your senses... Stay with me.~

Unrelated question, what does GTU mean? Not the first time I hear that acronym here.

On 9/1/2022 at 11:16 AM, Guest Morgoth said:

I don't think the text you are mentioning warrants a revision. You are taunting viconia a bit with that line of dialogue.

Have you checked the context before posting? And by context, I mean the arborescence (tree structure) of the dialogue?

That is usually the answer I got in my circle of collaborators before they check the context. All of them changed their mind afterward.

To me, it sounds way past the little taunt. There is NOTHING LESS appealing! Charname would rather fuck an illithid, a diseased gibberling or even... me instead of Viconia, that's saying something.

In addition, it's really poor writing and design to let the user interpretation decide the meaning of a sentence. Especially in player choice. In tens of thousands line I have proofreaded, I can remember very few occurrences where sarcastic tone (for example) is used in Charname lines, and most of the time, it was specified with a "*sigh*" (for example) inside the line.

14 hours ago, Salk said:

It would be very uncharacteristic of Viconia to completely ignore such a taunt and continue pleading for CHARNAME's company, if that is indeed how we're supposed to interpret that line.

Agreed, I have already proofreaded a lot of Viconia's dialogue, and she's not used to let that kind of stuff pass so easily. But... who knows, afterall, she seems way down in the hole at that moment.

I'm very unsure about what will follow. But I might have discovered a typo in BG2EE.

Viconia is asking Charname to lay with her for the night, and this is one of his possible replies.

@27512 = ~I can think of nothing less appealing.~

But curiously, Viconia does not seem offended afterward, and keep going...

Maybe a positive answer would be more suitable?

@27512 = ~I can think of nothing more appealing.~

As I said, I'm not sure at all about it. You might want to check the full dialogue with Near Infinity. What are your thoughts?

23 hours ago, CamDawg said:

If you're ever unsure, you can use NI to search for references. Search > String ref > enter the string ref > Find references.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm doing.

23 hours ago, CamDawg said:

In this case, 9855 is used in nobwbas.dlg (a leftover BG dialogue, when 9855 had different contents) and Viconia's banter file (bviconi.dlg). Viconia's does seem to be unused, yes: you can go to the edit tag on the dialogue, select state 90, and use the find > references to this state to verify. Same for 9859, used in bviconi state 91.

For nobwbas.dlg, yes, its lines make absolutely no sens at all.

Alright, thanks. Now I do know for sure both those lines are unused, even if they're present inside an "active" .dlg like Viconia's one.