Ardanis

This is purely a writing issue, not technical. You can't possibly be allowed to kill a plot character prematurely, if doing so may break the following plot. What can be done, is to revise the scene to keep the player out of control while the plot character is around. Preferably in a way that doesn't focus the attention on a fact you're in cutscene mode and your PC might be doing something against your will. Or provide a legal way to shield the boss from player attacks. Or something else. This is nowhere as simple as it may sound, and can go a long, long, long way until all the issues are resolved - sometimes never.

On which game are you trying to install? This is the main question, I think. Crevs, if you wanna handle it, that variable needs default value, probably differing between game platforms. IIRC I mentioned it earlier at some point, but don't remember any details. There will be detection issues if Slow/Haste/Imp Haste do not set the relevant state. It's not limited to RR either, it would likely affect SCS and BP as well, and even original AI in vanilla/EE. I think we can live with Imp Haste acting as normal Haste, but STATE_SLOW and STATE_HASTE need to be preserved in some way. As for the stacking with Boots of Speed, maybe just set the fixed movement rate for Haste? Similar to how cleric STR buffs can lower (can they actually?) the value, if it was higher than what spell sets it to. PfMW I mentioned the concern about normal weapons to aVENGER, and he said it's not a big deal if SR changes the behavior - he's got Wisp to do the dirty work on enhancing compatibility That said, I do understand why some see normal weapons as a legal counter, but it still doesn't address the matter of AI blissfully ignoring the fact - RR is just a droplet in a sea, it doesn't change the AI response on a global scale. And worse, it's not just a matter of AI itself, but also the enemy equipment. And for the record, I personally find it weird to loot two sets of weapons, if they were to carry both normal and enchanted. Besides, as I said above, I don't advocate irreversible change, only the default/assumed behavior when it comes to balancing - the .ini settings can be easily updated to include the normal immunity option, like any other controversial change.

I am not exactly alone in my feelings towards PfMW/normal weapons, so it's not just me being an odd one. While alternative tactical options is always good, it is specifically PfMW/normal weapons that was a really bad example of old-school design. Besides I do have an idea what a good rule system is, and AD&D 2 in not a good rule system. A compilation of random rules thrown together, great for the feeling of nostalgia - sure, but never a system. It's not the strong point of early editions. Also you might have missed the smiley.

Guilty as charged That's what I get for abandoning forums for too long Have you any idea how OP that would be ? It would be the same as it always was, but full immunity will fix the issue with aVENGER's AI, which exploits PFMW's current vulnerability to normal weapons. It should never have been doing such a thing in the first place Normal weapons are just too far specialized to be a well-designed balance element. I think the frustration some people (well, me) have over "must keep vulnerable to normal weapons" thing, it prevents from going a simple route of make PfMW fully immune and forgetting about liches, monks, ToB PCs and other non-existent (to those like me) issues. Of course, I would most definitely add an .ini option for purist players to toggle it, before anything else. The problem is, I don't have enough quick slots when IR is installed

Well, if we were to compare TS against AI, the latter is indeed better when it comes to TS-immune enemies (all the four of them) and can free up a precious 6th level slot where competition is the most tight. Whereas TS works better against powerful wizard opponents, giving 2-3 spell casts for free. But part of the problem is that weapon immunity spells are too many Another shot: - Mantle (good save bonus) - Protection from Weapons - Improved Mantle / Absolute Immunity (+20 saves / immunity) - Mass Protection from Weapons Lvl 9 is less overkill, and AI is only one level lower.

"Usable by thieves" might be a wrong flag set at wrong offset. Can't tell more without proper checking. Could you check "item_rev/debug/weapon_debug.log" or post its contents? The patching code lists there the items with mismatching descriptions. Throwing spears have "hardcoded" 1d6 damage, set outside the table. Actually no, that was my imagination... If description didn't match the real stats, it should be listed in debug log.

Imo a good way to determine spell's usefulness and unique effect is to ask a question - "would I select it for a Sorcerer character?" So far TS and Spellstrike win over AI for me, by a league.

1) Mechanics wise it does nothing but require you to carry *vastly* inferior set of weapons for mage battles. This is just an example of unfriendly design. 2) Only aVENGER's AI tries to use normal weapons against PFMW, and I am in the state of war with [some aspects of] aVENGER's philosophy for AI design I'd be much more inclined to add a power user option to disable normal weapon immunity for those interested.

This is a very good idea, btw. Voting with both hands for it. PFMW & Mantles & AI - iirc I suggested to make all four grant full weapon immunity, to remove once and for all any issues related to enchantment level balance. And instead differ them by duration, range of immunities (weapons, debuffs, elements) and area of effect (self, single target, party). Something like: Mantle (6) - immune to weapons, self, 4 rounds Protection From Weapons (7) - single target, X rounds, perhaps longer casting time (iirc SCS only uses it to prebuff, so it won't notice the casting time change) Improved Mantle (8) - immune to weapons and +Y save bonus, self, 4 rounds AI (9) - immune to weapons/debuffs/elements (no direct spell immunity though, let Spell Deflection still play a role), party, 4 rounds

Just lurking about... Does it work in-game? The clone doesn't change the spell type, it is copied from the original.

*Arda appears to the sun. I mean, moon. I mean, clouds in the night. Ugh...* We are (I am?) going to try and keep the main component in a table format, so if you don't like any particular change, it can be unchecked. In theory, at least. I'm less sure it will be as flawless in practice because some spells are essentially changed in groups of 2-3, like the merged Conjure Elemental ones. Failing that, we can still use ini settings to allow some freedom without splitting the mod into dozens of components. *Arda crawls back into his basement*

Hah, I've been wondering about the same forum avatar

No, that's an oversight. Fixed in git. You can extend manually the engine check from ENGINE_IS ~soa tob~ to ENGINE_IS ~soa tob bgee bg2ee~ in TP2 (backstabbing is near the end of it).

Disintegrate Breath. I don't quite like it, mind you, but it makes the best summary as far as common sense and balance are involved. Slow Yes for all.

Disintegrate Agreed. Slow Change to polymorph. Wizards will largely ignore it anyway due to spell protections, but against warriors it is currently devastating. Not to mention a party-friendly AoE is a large bonus on its own. And we need more saves vs other types, not just spells, or even SR's spells/death/breath.

It's been like that in BG2 as well.

Swap Farsight and Clairvoyance, move area reveal to Farsight.

Haste And other 1/lvl duration spells - change to 1 turn + 1/2 lvl True Strike Change to 1 critical hit, max duration 1 turn.

@Jarno That depends on how much information we need, and how accurate we want it to be. That, and how many targets should be affected. Last but not least, I do not remember if it's even possible in the first place for a creature without selection circle to run its scripts (I definitely had issues with such thing in EE). So the bottom line is - it CAN be done given effort, but it really shouldn't be. Not for the seemingly average at best benefit it could provide.

In theory yes, but regular weapons work the same in IE - even if the damage misses, the secondary effect is still applied. There's really no way to change that.

Engine doesn't allow to read a creature's parameter and use it as an argument in text string. It does support custom string tokens, but it won't work on a local basis. I.e. using two abilities simultaneously will result in weird things. Doing everything manually is nearly out of question, I'm afraid.

Supposedly this is meant to stack with IR's armor resistance bonus.

I don't think there's a way to fix the reload on misses Pausing effectively caps the crossbow rate of fire at 2-3-6 per round, depending on the duration. Are we certain it's something we want? I still haven't played a darter to make a proper judgement about this weapon class, but darts have nearly non-existent damage and short range. And enchanted darts tend to run out quickly, never mind their price.

I can certainly add it as an ini option, albeit I'm skeptical about tp2.

Not to my knowledge.