Jump to content

Graion Dilach

Modders
  • Posts

    1,130
  • Joined

Posts posted by Graion Dilach

  1. Quote

    Now, the astute reader may just ask, "Ok, so why don't you run EET_End after installing your mod?" - to which I would retort, "My mod installs in about 10 seconds, EET_End takes 5 to 10 minutes, and when I'm learning a new programming language or technology, having the time between cause (changing the code) and effect (seeing the code in action) needs to be as short as possible, and 10 seconds is much preferable to 10 minutes".

    No, the astute reader would moreso ask why wouldn't you dedicate a vanilla BGEE folder (even without SoD) to your in-dev mod and then do the EET conversion after you're done. That also prevents you from using BG2EE or SoD resources without realizing that you're introducing that dependency.

    EEEE was like this - WithinAmnesia modded on a BGEE+SoD combo and a fair amount of his stuff are SoD monsters backported.

  2. EET has it's own save folder, it updates engine.lua to use Baldur's Gate - Enhanced Edition Trilogy.

    The utility XP issue seems to be intended by EET. Personally I always install the progressive option from EET Tweaks instead. (Note that mod cannot change thief utility rewards based on the campaign progression but only based on the character level.)

  3. EET doesn't remove or touch that block. If you installed EET with the EE Mod Messup however, then it is possible you ended up with another mod causing this.

    An alternative solution is to throw EndlessBG1 and/or Transitions to delay the transfer however. These mods are missing from EE Mod Messup though.

  4. 4 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

    I mean, it literally is a stretch in that evil planetars simply don’t exist in this published universe. Planetars aren’t sapient creatures who can choose their own ethics. They are manifestations of law and goodness put in corporeal form by celestial powers from the afterlife. 

    How do you define published universe - AD&D, Forgotten Realms or D&D altogether?

    Because Zariel already existed in 2e - https://twitter.com/newbiedm/status/1173807082388299776 -, but wasn't defined as a fallen solar until 5e's Descent to Avernus.(5e also has a fallen planetar in Undermountain according to Dungeons of the Mad Mage.) And that ticks two of the three boxes I can think of.

     

  5. I... don't understand.

    You make a point of showcasing that rest encounters are problematic because they are too easy and the frequency multipliers just turn them into a chore. And you propose a solution... which is basically convoluting everything related to rest and all the alternative options, instead of focusing on the issue itself, even after a fairly solid inspection.

    Then you even berate the original system because people headcanon the shortcomings. On the other hand you do acknowledge the issues within your own proposal, but this still gives me the vibes that you came up with your idea first then retroactively did the inspection to justify and defend it. 

    A simpler "resting encounters would lead to bigger amount of enemy mobs spawned" tweak would also do the job. Sure, it would be a bit convoluted in terms of code since it would need to clone the creatures set up in the rest encounter to artificially decrease their creature power (or someone going through all the basemaps at least to handcraft rest encounters appropriately with this method being used as a starting point, this is needed because both the spawn point spawning and the rest encounters use the creature power variable). You can make this more interesting if you use dummy creatures which spawn groups like the MiH small spider spawner or the DSotSC-SCS kobold commando spawning it's group of kobolds. This can also be immersive, because the rest encounter could be played out as if a scout of the enemy went back and called in their reinforcements and gave themselves time to prepare for the ambush outright (ofc this doesn't work with animals and the like). Sure, again, this would also be convoluted in code (especially with handcrafted encounters and shim creatures used for blobspawning/introducing variety in the spawned enemies) but it would be more respectful to the core game design.

  6. 6 hours ago, jmerry said:

    Another possibility: some other mod decided that building was a good place to place a new entrance and area in, overwriting the NTotSC area.

    No, Swieca only gets spawned, if one accepts the quest from Ordolath and both are placed to vanilla maps. NTotSC EXTEND_BOTTOMs the map scripts and the majority of the many DSotSC-BGEE script blocks are missing the Continue()s - if someone runs straight to his location, the game won't have enough time to reiterate the script enough times to reach his spawning even.

  7. jmerry was faster, was typing the same pretty much; use RESOLVE_STR_REF then ALTER_EFFECT or ALTER_ITEM_EFFECT atleast for the practical benefit so that you don't have to recalculate offsets if you change/rearrange the opcodes. 0xDE was your op141's Target, that's why it failed though.

  8. I have Ordolath in my EET run and NTotSC is a fine mod. Think the problem is on your side.

    I even doublechecked the code and the only way to broke his spawning would be if another mod would introduce a dialog loop bug.

    DSotSC-BGEE does introduce some delays there with some missing Continue()s, so it might take some time for him to actually appear on the map.

×
×
  • Create New...