jastey

The whole mod content is a huge *** Spoiler *** for BGII game story so you are warned. *** I feel under a lot of time pressure every time after the incident with Irenicus, Imoen, and the Cowled Wizards at the Promenade. This mod lets Imoen be turned to stone in that fight. The idea is to give the PC more ease of mind to do all the quests in Chapter 2, knowing that Imoen doesn't suffer - and can be turned back to live like Branwen was in BG1 once the PC reaches Spellhold. The mod lets Imoen be turned to stone in the fight with Irenicus at the Promenade. She will still be taken by the Cowled Wizards, and Irenicus will have depetrified her and do his soul-experiments until the PC reaches Spellhold so the overall game flow is not altered. But overall it all happens a bit later than in the original, and (at least for me) it's a bit less disturbing. This mod is meant to be a very small mod, which is also one of the reasons why the overall game story is not altered. The mod tries to use as many originally voiced lines as possible, but some had to be taken out because they didn't make any sense without Imoen reacting. Also, some lines were added to stress the reasons why Imoen will be taken to Spellhold although she is turned to stone. The mod is compatible with Alamateria's Restauration Project "Extended Waukeen's Promenade Cutscene", Tweaks Anthology "Faster Chapter 1&2 Cut-Scenes & Dreams", Alternatives, and Saeileth mod. It has to be installed after Tweak Anthology. Visit the Mod's Homepage Read the Readme Download Imeon is Stone

It should fail anyway, but better remove it, yes. Thank you for your work on BWS. It is very appreciated.

I really should put that into the changelog ever time. No, BWPFixpack is not longer required for Xan BG1 Friendship v10.

And, take Ajantis on a quest to save Ajantis. Heh. Well, there will be always different mods featuring the same BG1 NPCs, and that's alright because it broadens the content the player can chose from. (Having them all in one game is the problem then.) But in general, there is no reason not to have another NPC mod for a game character if the modder wants to tell his/her own story (I am biased in this regard, though.) But - it's not scope of EET. And, as Roxanne already pointed out, having the BG1NPCs in BGII without content and taking them from Irenicus Dungeon and meeting all the (fleshed-out) BG1 mod NPCs along the way would kill the playing fun for me. (Just a note: Requests like these are one reason I will not script my BGII Ajantis to use the BG1 script variable. I am not judging, just saying that I'm not doing it to prevent two mod NPCs to be triggered at the same time.)

Gavin has the advantage of being a mod for BG1, too, meaning unifying the script variables wouldn't mean to tamper with original game content + no fear of other mods adding unwanted content at unplanned places, so it's worth the idea. With "not automatically" I meant that I never do transformations like that automatically, it's scary as hell. In theory, the script name should be used in quotation marks so doing a mass replace should be quite save (unless it's also used in hidden places like some spells for whatever reason). Would leave the spawning of Gavin in SoA, which is, as far as I recall, at only one place in area script (and not through cutscenes like Ajantis). Then there are details to be considered: Even EET offers the possibility to start a new SoA game so a BGII-mod-cre is still needed. The mod is compatible with all other BGII games, too, so it would mean either different spawning scripts for different games or the EET variable "NEWGAME_SOA" would have to make sense for BGII(:EE), as well. And as I said, so far the crossmod banter pack uses the BGII script variable for Gavin crossmod. This mod would have to be updated, as well, or Gavin would be without crossmod banters in EET. (And about now I am ready to run, screaming. Not that I'd not be ready to put work into this. It's just that I have such a long, long list of things I want to finish, as well. And it's not like there is a bunch of people waiting for continuous Gavin, is there? Great as the mod is, it was hard enough to find playtesters for the EE versions I put up.)

Can you narrow it down to which mod? Sorry if that's exactly the problem, I didn't read all your former posts. What does the whole message say?

Hm, maybe the mods that can be installed to BGEE before the conversion should have stayed in the first list (although I am happy if people use the direct EEt versions, of course). K4thos: The list of mods with direct EET version goes alphabetically up to "S" and then kind of starts at "M" with Might & Guile again, is this on purpose?

Question to cd_extend_bg_area_script: If I have a script that uses tra strings, but from another file (with different name). Is that possible? Where would I put the USING ~path/blah.tra~?

No, noone played with these mod versions so far. The last sentence is sarcastic. In case noone noticed: I got a bit frustrated at the general lack of playtesters nowadays.

Ah, yes, I recall now that I knew this. That is a very good thing. Still, since my mods are compatible with BGT, as well, I'll always have the problem with floating strrefs.

argent77 just posted a WeiDU function to to fetch a journal strref here. Thinking about all the instances where original game journal entries need to be erased by a mod which only works for exact matching strings but BGT / EET not having them at specified reference numbers, this is very cool to use especially across game platforms.

As Roxanne said, it is not easy to implement. Not for already existing NPC mods. I am working on Ajantis BGII to make him continuous storywise, i.e. he remembers what happened in BG1. This was enough work as it is. He won't have the same stats. To unify this, I would have to recode half of the mod, that is out of the question. I also started working on Gavin to do the same, but I cancelled it. Just to make Gavin conituous story wise means I'd have to untwine all the reply options Gavin BGII offers at the first meeting - romance yes, no, friendship yes, no, some more romancd related things ring yes, no etcpp. I would have to rewrite the whole meeting dialogue, and some more. It's not my mod, so that's out of the question. And I would have to unify the scripting names for Gavin in BG1 and BGII, which can't be done automatically. And then there is the crossmod that uses the old BGII script name etcpp. Too much work, too little benefit - and too little playtesters. Everyone expects bug free mods, but only a few volunteer to playtest nowadays. As for new mod NPCs, yes, it's not more work than making it two, and I can only recommend to modders to design their NPCs as one package for BG1-SoD-BGII. And yet, you have to keep in mind that EET isn't only the continuous playthrough, but also offers the possibility to start the game with BGII, or ToB. A mod NPC has to take this into account, as well.

Not sure it's the scope of the mod, but... SoD: make final ending independent on whether the PC defended him/herself verbally in the trial. - Including "Petrified Imoen" into Tweaks - good idea or not so?

Btw, I packed EET compatible versions of PPG Banter Pack and NPC Flirtpack, but those need to be tested first before they go into BWS: Banter Pack Flirtpack So, best everyone leans back and waits until someone else does the work (i.e. testing and integrating into BWS).

Yes, it's a rather unsatisfying situation for both players and modders. Players: because now maybe they realize how much work mainaining BWS is and was, or maybe not, because complaining that it's not up to date is so much easier. And for moddes, because I seriously start asking myself why I am updating mods if it leads to people complaining about BWS no longer working with the updates. Or trying to hang on to older (buggier) versions because "BWS knows them". It's really frustrating.

If a mod is no longer maintained and contains a bug it is community effort* to release a bugfree version. This does not violate copyright issues but helps to keep the mod at a bugfree state. But that's just my 2c. *Especially if the mod is hosted at a modding forum. (I have no idea how BGT works, too.)

Well, the thing is unless peolple start using this there won't be enough feedback to really tell whether it's fine in the sense of no game breaking bugs. There is only so much one modder can do to test his/her creation, nothing replaces the ways some players manage to break the mods in the game (I am saying this with the highest regards, because nothing is better to improve a mod than feedback and bugreports). Let's put it like this: CamDawg put a *lot* of work and dedication into this new version and he surely provided the best and most stable build he could come up with. Now it's on us to give feedback so it can get out of beta status. EDIT: I totally understand your point, though. I didn't mean to sound pushy, just trying to give some motivation to start a game and trade the surety of a bugfree playthrough with a warm, fuzzy feeling and the knowledge of having contributed to community efforts.

Please post any bugs or typos here. Make sure to specifiy the game you are playing (BG1, Tutu, BGT, BG:EE, or EET) and which version of the mod (Windows, Mac, Linux). If possible, please post your WeiDU.log so I can see which other mods were installed.

What version (with which bwsfixpack changes) are you playing and in which engine?

It was really great meeting! Monterey also presented itself with a pleasant fresh breeze in the sunshine. After being at Hoover Dam at 106°F three days before that was a very welcome change.

nope, not enough. The mod doesn't use EET cpmvars for BG1 resources, so can't be installed on top of EET. Ikki posted native patch here but it hasn't been tested yet. Ikki's patch is for BG1 NPC project.

I made a new version of banterpacks with EET comp so no worries about the mod. It was meant as a general thing.

Ah, but then it is considered. It was just a heads up because whoever did Fixpack's conversion for banterpack seemed to have missd it. Thanks!

Not sure where to put this. Banter pack uses syntax like G("Chapter",6) for Global("Chapter","GLOBAL",6). Seeing that these instances are missed in the EET patches from Fixpack, could it be EET_modConverter doesn't consider these instances yet? Same for GGT("Chapter",X) and GLT("Chapter",Y).