Mike1072

See here. You define the array before the COPY action.

No, WeiDU doesn't have a general way to do that. The closest regexp approximation of "match anything except abc" that is supported in WeiDU is: ([^a].*|a[^b].*|ab[^c].*) For readability, I left out the backslashes that are required in front of the round brackets and pipes. This regexp matches a string that either: Doesn't start with the letter a Does start with the letter a but continues with a character other than b, or Does start with the sequence ab but continues with a character other than c It's a very awkward way to deal with this and it gets worse when you are avoiding a sequence longer than abc. It only disallows the forbidden sequence in one particular place in the string and it doesn't combine well with other regexp constructs, which means there are situations where it won't do the trick. If it's not possible to do what you want in one regular expression, consider your other options. Depending on which part of WeiDU you're dealing with, you might have the ability to query the data (STRING_CONTAINS_REGEXP) or manipulate it (REPLACE_TEXTUALLY) beforehand. Sometimes two or three regexps are better than one.

Congratulations! The article was an interesting read. Looking forward to the retrospectives.

Eww, I hope so. I'll investigate. Edit: @argent77 It turns out this is simply a display issue and is actually caused by the font (Inter). I'll think about whether it's a big enough issue to justify swapping to a different font.

There's a Security and Privacy tab on your Account Settings page that has an option to control your online status. The tab can be seen in the screenshot I posted above.

It wasn't me, but Demi was fond of incorporating descriptions and ideas from 3.5. I'll replace the reference to darkvision with infravision.

I've split this off the SCS v33 topic as requested. This is a curious sentiment to come from a guest.

Think of all the time you'll save not having to use your scroll wheel! Edit: you can still view the mod descriptions by navigating to the category (e.g. NPC Mods).

I've split this off from the The Forums Look Weird, because this was a deliberate change unrelated to the forum software update. The categorization of mods is generally something we leave to mod authors. I arranged the forums to mirror the existing categories on the website.

Hey, just a heads up, a recent update of the forum software brought a lot of unexpected changes and I haven't had time to go through all the settings yet & update the theme to play nice. One thing I found was that clicking on a topic annoyingly started bringing me to the first post rather than the first unread post like it used to. It turns out this is a user setting which you can change by clicking your avatar and going to account settings:

tb#tweaks = The Bigg Tweaks, by the_bigg.

There is no practical difference. There seemed to perhaps be a convention to use the .tpa extension when the file contains actions and the .tpp extension when the file contains patches. That way, you'd know whether to use INCLUDE or PATCH_INCLUDE for the file. But I'm not sure how the .tph extension fits in.

IR does some pretty complicated description patching. It covers different languages and handles inconsistencies in formats from mod-added items. It's not rewriting anything to a specific standard (which would be next-to-impossible to automate); it's replacing particular parts of lines or adding new lines. My recommendation to avoid it where possible is based around the experience of doing it. However, if you enjoy dealing with stuff like ~\(Not[ %tab%]+\|Un\)[Uu]sable[ %tab%]+[Bb]y[ %tab%]*:~, then dive right in.

Description patching is very finicky and there are lots of odd cases to consider when you start dealing with additional languages and format differences between the original games, EE games, and modded content. Recommendation: keep it to a minimum for the necessities.

Welcome back!

No. Nobody has to call it "BGT-weidu". Stop harassing people with this bullshit.

If you're just updating spell names, you could do that pretty easily by patching the descriptions using the update_item_descriptions macro from IR and this simple macro: DPM ~replace_spell_name~ BEGIN REPLACE_TEXTUALLY CASE_SENSITIVE ~%old_spell_name%~ ~%new_spell_name%~ END And then you could call it like: COPY_EXISTING ~brac23.itm~ ~override~ SPRINT old_spell_name @99175 // ~Righteous Magic~ SPRINT new_spell_name @175 // ~Righteous Fury~ TEXT_SPRINT text_update ~replace_spell_name~ LPM ~update_item_descriptions~ This would mean less maintenance if the description ever changes in the future and better compatibility in the case where SR is being installed after something else that alters the item's description (like one of IR's other components). You would have to update the values in tooltip.2da - there are macros/functions to make this very simple, including one in IR.

Nice. And also after any mods that add joinable NPCs (because of SR's Update Spellbooks component).

Traditionally, there was no required install order between IR and SR's main components. However, we recommended a very early install position for IR's main component, while SR's main component didn't have the same requirement. I generally installed both main components early, with IR before SR. Even though we didn't initially recommend a preference for which to install first, we learned later that it would be handy to define a preferred order, because then we could implement compatibility code in just one place.

Fine, I've updated the mod page and download page. The mod is still exactly the same, it's still a beta, this is not a "definitive" version, yada yada yada.

I remember being concerned about confusion regarding "+2 to THAC0" or "-1 THAC0" when I was editing descriptions a long time ago... probably for Spell Revisions. I think our solution was to add "bonus" or "penalty" if it wasn't there already so players would know if it was good or bad. I think the BG games lean so heavily on the THAC0 labelling that it's probably better to stick with that. I find "attack roll bonus" to be a fairly understandable alternative. I'm not a fan of "to-hit bonus" since it's awkward (even if it's the logical contraction of THAC0) and I think "attack bonus" might invite confusion with damage bonuses. Why do we "roll" attacks, but "throw" saves? Variety is the spice of life?

The BG1 GUI is my favourite. Just saying.

Thanks for the update. You can safely ignore Jarno.

You can find info on achieving EET compatibility in its Modder's Notes. If it's not convenient to set up an EET environment on your machine, you might be able to use Golem to test if your mod installs sucessfully on EET.