jastey

Thank you very much for the report!

11 hours ago, Caedwyr said:

I can make these if you wish.

That would be great!

Ah, ok. I wasn't aware the mod types aren't used yet.

Short answer is no. Since the crossmod for these mods is inside the Breagar component ("2"), the mods would need to be installed before the Crossmod and PID component. But the main Breagar component would not necessarily need to be installed before the mods.

It might seem that simply putting the whole Breagar mod after these mods would have sufficed to solve this conflict. The component-wise install order gets interesting the moment there are three mods that need to be installed before/after in a way that simply putting one after the other in total wouldn't suffice as an install order.

23 minutes ago, AL|EN said:

Do you know any of NPC mod needs to be installed AFTER "ACBre: Component 0 ~Breagar: Contents~" and BEFORE "ACBre: Component 2 ~Breagar: Crossmods and PID~:" (assuming someone is doing manual install when he quits and re-run installer)

I put "NPC" in there as a condition for the Crossmod and PID component which would mean it would need to be installed after any NPC mods. Do you want it more specific?

On 10/14/2020 at 11:49 AM, AL|EN said:

weidu usage context allows and even encourages (because of the syntax) them to be not globally unique.

Right, my bad. I always understood they'd have to be globally unique but I see that from the syntax of tp2 name+LABEL they do not have to be.

13 minutes ago, AL|EN said:

Note that I could allow for using LABEL as reference but only under the condition that all labels from all mods are globally unique. I don't want to make any promises since this isn't set in stone yet.

Aren't LABELs globally unique? The whole LABEL thing if used instead of DESIGNATED numbers would be useless if they wouldn't be.

Will PI still list the components of one mod in the correct order? If the "component wise install order syntax" leads to optional components accepted before main components then it doesn't make much sense.

5 minutes ago, AL|EN said:

Since you used 'ACBre:0' as reference, I must clarify: You cannot set those rules as DESIGNATED-based for oblivious reasons. Specification doesn't mention about it anywhere.

You mean this is not possible for the dynamic install order syntax?

What would be the best way to give syntax for the components, then. Repeat the overall rules or just leave them out completely?

What I mean, would this make more sense:

Component 2 ~Breagar: Crossmods and PID~:

Quote

Type: Crossmod

BEFORE: cdtweaks, EET_end, Tweak

AFTER: EET, imoen_forever, NPC, Tweak_early

Component 10 ~Change Breagar's dialog timer? (Default is 30 minutes between dialogues.)~:

Quote

Type: NPC

BEFORE: cdtweaks, EET_end, Tweak

AFTER: EET, imoen_forever, Tweak_early

@AL|EN example for ACBre:

Component 0 ~Breagar: Contents~:

Quote

Type: NPC

BEFORE: cdtweaks, c#brandock, c#brage, c#grey, EET_end, Tweak

AFTER: EET, imoen_forever, Tweak_early

Component 2 ~Breagar: Crossmods and PID~:

Quote

Type: Crossmod

AFTER: ACBre:0, NPC

Component 10 ~Change Breagar's dialog timer? (Default is 30 minutes between dialogues.)~:

Quote

Type: NPC

AFTER: ACBre:0

@AL|EN will do.

Is there a list of so far used Type declarations? I'd suggest "Crossmod" if it doesn't exist yet.

5 minutes ago, Caedwyr said:

Just make sure it is copied to the override folder earlier in the  tp2.

Oh! I can do that. Thanks! Will be fixed in the next version.

That's.. a very good find and I just noticed I have no idea what to do with this file. Any help appreciated.

New version v5 Beta 0.3 is up which fixes the issue.

Good catch, thanks! This will be a problem in case Imoen gets kicked out and moves with the camp to the new locations (bd3000, bd7100).

This will be fixed in the next version.

I think you can cover both by using "Dialogu?e?" or something.

Reinstall EET? If you need to reinstall EET then I'd recommen starting with a new fresh game.

Personally I prefer to deinstall mods according to reverse order, make the changes, and install them anew, and not using the automated reinstall feature.

If you have a game where you already installed SCS after EET_end (I understood there are components that require this), then adding mods is a PITA due to SCS's size and complexity.

If it's only a matter of deinstalling EET_end because it's the last in the mod order, then adding mods is not so complicated.

I undestood the OP's concern is regarding the integrity of their EET install, not whether it's a good idea for a current playthrough. For a current playthrough it is always best not to change mod installation, that is true.

Because weidu will remember the order and do the following: deinstall the mod you installed after EET_end, reinstall EET_end, and reinstall the mod. It does that on purpose so your mod order doesn't get borked. That's what always happens if you reinstall a mod from your installed mods.

40 minutes ago, taurus1942 said:

I'm worried that uninstalling EET_end would do more harm than good, especially since I'm using other mods that depend on dialog.tlk.

There is no reason to. EET_end makes sure all game and mod added texts are considered in the appropriate dialogues, and it does that anew every time you (re)install it.

1 hour ago, subtledoctor said:

-- Then, upon going through the soul-steal dream and being dropped in the maze beneath Spellhold, could simply apply another spell which uses opcode 321 to cancel the various stat-penalty spells. 

Not sure it's something else or the same thing but applying some effects and removing them again works well with ADD_SECTYPE.

@Cahir thanks!

Just now, AL|EN said:

Yes, it's not yet compatible with EET directly, but if you install it before EET everything is fine.

Thanks!

Haha! That's hilarious!

Thanks for the kind words, though.

I am missing the setup-EET_end on your BGII weidu (as the last mod). It's needed to finish the EET install: it merges all dialogues of NPCs for the whole saga into one. That's probably the reason why you are only seeing the BGII dialogue, because EET uses Imoen's BGII files but adds all BG1 content to her (with EET_end).

Also: are you sure SoD to BG2:EE Item upgrade by Daeros_Trollkiller should be installed before EET to BGII? I am asking because I don't know.

EDIT: ALIEN beat me to it.

I'll add to my earlier statement: ...or make the idea a stand alone mod without any ties to I4E, works for me too (I'd hope for compatibility, though).

I know this is a stupid question but did you have a look into the mod package whether there is some documentation about the LTs and their required conditions? I don't know about Aran Whitehand but some mods have quite extensive documentation buried somewhere in the package.

3 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

Periodically do some kind of harm to Charname, like apply a random ability score decrease with every dream about Irenicus.  There are only a few of these dreams, but Charname doesn't know that.

In-game, you will suffer some non-trivial penalties (mah stats!) and it can be implied that this will keep happening until you find Irenicus and reverse it.  The game already has an example of a wasting curse, in the Baron Ployer plot.  It makes complete sense that Irenicus would have contingency plans that could included something like "cripple Charname if he/she is more than one mile away from me."  (See e.g. Belkar's Mark of Justice in Order of the Stick.)  The effects wouldn't be that troublesome - a few stat points aren't that big a deal, mechanically - but they are enough to motivate the player.  And bonus, when you do finally get though Spellhold, you'll get a multi-point stat boost right before entering the Underdark!  Who wouldn't appreciate that?

Heck, I really like this idea, and it would be pretty easy to implement.  Make I'll work it up as a separate mod...

@subtledoctor Feel free to make an add-on of kinds. I would also be willing to include something like this as an optional component into I4E if you'd provide it.

Thanks for the interesting discussion!

I can only repeat myself that I don't see a problem. BGII with I4E is the same situation like BG1: you know you should go / could go to some place eventually - in BG1, it's first the FAI to meet Gorion's friends, then the Nashkel mines, etcpp but there is no real reason to, no pressure (other than NPCs complaining and the game not progressing). BGII with I4E is the exact same situation. The PC knows there is this place where they could go eventually, but there is no rush if they want to go exploring first.

As I said, I don't see a "motivation problem" with I4E installed. And:

1 minute ago, Lightbringer said:

I don't think the abduction can occur before that and preserve the intent of this mod.

This.