Jump to content

Creepin

Modders
  • Content Count

    162
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Creepin

  1. Spellhold Studios Baldurs Gate Trilogy (BGT) It is with great pleasure we are announcing latest shiny BGT release, which is another update over recent v1.19, done again thanks to the tireless efforts of CamDawg! This new version contain fixes to reported bugs of 1.19, insight into original developers' intent and leftover fixes from the Big World Fixpack. Changelog: Installation changes Fixed bug where a typo in the 1.19 music fixes could prevent installation of the music pack (thanks to Salk and Lunareon) Incorporated the following fixes from the Big
  2. What about tradition, and the decent order, and proper way to do things? :( I have not yet reconciled myself with the idea of not placing tp2 in the root folder of the game, and losing "setup-", well that's just unthinkable!
  3. Creepin

    New engine

    I'll add my 2 cents here so as to not spawn several topics. New RSS feed seem to drag in updates of both public and private forums. At least this is the explanation that came to my mind when I started receiving "Error Code 2F173/K You do not have permission to view this content" on many of topics listed in RSS. Also, there's "open SHS" and "open PPG" tabs at the top of each RSS feed which take me to respective forum root. For G3 same tab of the new RSS take me to this page instead of G3 forum root. P.S. I can't find "preview post" or "go to a full editor" buttons, is it just me or t
  4. Thank you folks, I haven't hoped for that much knowledge on that short notice! I've also found that opcode 257 (Sequencer Creation) only work with 7 symbols long spells, that's probably what Alien did referred to. So, it's opcode 172 (171 is not confirmed by IESDP actually but they might be wrong?), opcode 257 and scripting actions 160. I wonder if this scope is big enough to keep all my spells named with 7 symbols limiting my options in regard of spell naming or should I generally not care but keep an eye for the spells that might fall to one of these conditions. What would you advise, whic
  5. I have some vague recollection that there are some specific cases when .spl file name of 8 symbols won't work, only file name of 7 symbols will do. Is it me imagining weird things or there are indeed some cases where 8 symbols long .spl file name will screw something?
  6. Have you installed Java? NI needs it to run. OP in that SHS thread has a link to download it. Putting NI to game folder, by the way, is not necessary If you have Java installed and NI still don't work for you, just ask in that thread - Argent is pretty active and will have the best knowledge of NI and how to make it run.
  7. The opening topic in that SHS thread is indeed somewhat confusing. To put it short, get the latest stable version here, as could be seen in this post
  8. As per description, "this oil will immediately burst into flame, inflicting 5d6 points of damage (save vs. breath for half)". Were it implemented truly that should mean 5-30 dmg total, with a fractions of 2,5-15 plus 2,5-15. Obviously we don't have 0,5 damage so... In vanilla game it was implemented as 3d6 plus 3d4, or 6-30 total with a damage count of 3-18/3-12. This is almost perfect in the terms of total but has one "half" at 60% and another one at mere 40%. (58% & 42% if consider averages). BG2 Fixpack fixes that by using 3d6 plus 2d6. This leads to exact total indeed, being 5-
  9. Multiple forums-wide reaction was perfectly justified by her multiple forums-wide deception. Also, I personally have wasted several evenings to explicitly map her shenanigans and deserved a bit of my own fun as a compensation. Indeed! But don't forget to also account her for: - lying to every single member of the community, simple as that; - intentionally misleading community members to perceive, erroneously, certain mods and modders as being more popular than they really are, this including blatant driving up of her own "helpfulness" meter where such present; - worse yet, intentiona
  10. A small update: a basilisk attack item have 3 effects: paralyze, petrify and visuals. All 3 are hitting against paralyse save of the target. This makes little sense indeed UNLESS it's done as a means to ensure it's either all 3 effects are firing or none. IF that is correct than changing only petrifying attack to hit against petrify save would break the intended effect. It's either all 3 should have their save changed or none. It's just a guess though, but if that is correct then I believe all 3 changed to having petrify save is a better decision lore-wise than leaving all 3 to having paralyse
  11. @918 = ~Прежде, чем я соглашусь раскрыть вам больше информации, поручитесь, что сохраните её в тайне.~ @919 = ~Отлично. Заплатите 15,000 золотых, чтобы скрепить сделку.~ I'd be happy to help with @920 as well but I'll be damned if I have any idea how they called Shadow Thieves in a Russian translation EDIT: googled a bit and it seems like I've found Shadow Thieves Russian translation, not 100% sure it's most widespread one though. Anyway: @920 = ~Если вы согласитесь одолеть Теневых Воров, вас будет ждать второе задание, которое принесёт ещё больше добра.~
  12. Hmm, do you think it could be fixed in BG2Fixpack if only for the benefit of BGT (unless they overwrite BG2 basilisk with its BG1 counterpart)? I understood BG1Fixpack died in 2013, so no point bringing this in its thread. Or is it better to ask BGT maintainers (if there's any) to fix it on their end?
  13. I'm not sure if it's a bug or not, and even whether this is the right place to post, but anyway: I've noticed that both lesser and greater basilisk's petrification attack in BG1, BGT and BG2 hits target against targets paralyze/poison saving throw instead of petrify/polimorph save. Is that intended? Is that so because two effects in the same item ability can not attack against two different saves due to engine limitation (just a wild guess, not saying it's actually so)? Is that a bug?
  14. CamDawg, one more detail for the next release: I've improved a main hand axe paperdoll to make it exact copy of the vanilla (but in correct colour of course) My previous attempt was a little brighter than it should. Off hand axe is fine though and doesn't require correction. Attaching correct axe recolour. P.S. What colours do you use for your red/yellow/blue? I'm using 70/67/96 respectively, but I had to admit I like your colours more Main hand axe CORRECT.zip
  15. Fixed main hand flail and mace: Flail before and after It should be noted that all vanilla flails use the same colour for 16 and 21, so no difference in vanilla game would be seen. However I believe this should be included in fixpack for the sake of modders who would not be as lazy as devs and would want to utilize 3 different colours and has all right to expect their item look similar regardless of the hand it is held in Mace before and after All vanilla maces use the same colour for 16 and 21 as well. However the mace issue is not so obvious: vanilla mace paperdoll composed of only 2 co
  16. I am attaching 2 archives. "Main hand axe" is a recolour of vanilla axe paperdoll so that it now use all 3 colours as it was supposed to and as offhand axe correctly does. There's only a few vanilla axes that would benefit from that change, namely Battle Axe +1, Bala's Axe, K'logarath and both incarnations of Axe of Unyielding, but still this is how it should be and what modders might expect/benefit when coding 3 colours to their axes. "Off hand axe" is twofold: firstly it is a recolour of vanilla axe paperdoll so that it now use shaft colour for that little ball at the end of the shaf
  17. Ahh, I've found the link to Dropbox you were talking about, sorry for the fuzz!
  18. That's funny: download works for me perfectly, but there's only v.13, not 16 or anything in between.
  19. Adding 2 plus 2 took me almost a week, but eventually I found out that Erephine didn't touch H type because it is unused but updated L, M and S types, so this issue is actually covered by 1PP Further study proved this wrong so I'm marking this as such to not to mislead anyone.
  20. - vanilla BG2:ToB with latest patch, BWS ready - only the paperdoll luckily, it would have been world of pain to fix zillion frames of ingame animations! (even though I'm considering it because vanilla axe animations for some dumb reason features strip of a shaft colour along blade's edge ) - checking 1PP was the first thing I did. Sadly I found no mention of wphaxinv in its tp2 or files, neither its extensive readme mentions such a feature, nor does there any change appears in my install of BWS with 1PP included. For me all 4 looks absolutely the same (from vanilla PoV). How many pape
  21. I have studied on how BG2 handles application of colour to the weapon animations within paperdoll, and noticed something weird. I have assigned 3 different colours for locations 16, 20 & 21 of my axe under opcode 7 for test purposes and went on to check it in game. First thing I saw was that item equipped to the main hand had only 2 colours applied, ones set for locations 16 & 20. Much to my surprise when equipped to the off hand it got back its 3 colours including the one assigned to location 21. Here's an illustration: 16 is green, 20 is yellow and 21 is red. First I thou
  22. Thank you AstroBryGuy! I could have swear I downloaded BG1NPC later than 25 march, but I will try once again to make sure
  23. Getting the issue similar to one Zaghoul had at #123 here: I'm using 22.8 downloaded a week ago, latest version I recon.
×
×
  • Create New...