lynx

Interesting, do you have spaces in your HOME path? btw, the existance check is not needed (that's what the -f is for).

I'll add #2 on our idea list. But I agree, it needs some tweaking, maybe taking only half of the speed into account.

AFAIK it checks for max current hp.

or just open the file and replace its contents with the one from here: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Gibberlings3/Tweaks-Anthology/master/cdtweaks/setup-cdtweaks.tp2 (if you can't just download it)

Yeah, the table got copied from gemrb which had the values from the exe.

It's the same with the fourth-wall breaking party in Abazigal's lair. DnD rules agree: https://open5e.com/gameplay-mechanics/conditions.html#srd-petrified http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#petrified didn't bother with adnd.

binary diffing is an option, but someone would still have to sieve through it and group it to make it manageable/readable. No easy way out of this.

it's tracking github, so currently pointing at beta 10. A new prerelease has to be made there if this is not the latest thing.

Plus the fact that DR works on non-enhanced games.

Sure you can, it's just lots of pixels and tedium, like I mentioned. The other stuff is point or polygon based, so much less data. Calculate the region you have to change and then alter each byte one by one to the target ones. Maybe someone already wrote a function or generator for that, but I'm not someone who would know.

There's an old polygon/door tutorial somewhere for DLTCEP. Patching the mos is possible, but the code won't look pretty (binary file).

Ah, sorry, also didn't notice github sorts capitalized folders first.

That fixpack doesn't address anything about this tweakpack, so it's a pretty odd question.

Thanks!

Thanks for looking it up!

Indeed, it appears to be hardcoded. All the ZZ* weapons lack anything extra, but have the bonus in the description. There are several hits for ZZ in the exe, of course, but it'd be the place to start looking.

The mailer still works, at least for password recovery. If some services started dropping mails, that's more of a spam protection problem. To try to prevent that you need access to the domain records though.

any? They get thousands of feature requests and bug reports, why would this one be special? Would it enable something really cool in the future for them, provided they'll continue using the same engine? Unlikely, so a waste of time. They have hundreds of other less obscure and more impactful things to pick from. Time spent on easy stuff is still time spent and it reminds of the 80/20 rule.

At the same time, making all those assumptions doesn't bother you? Hacks and Tobex are personal projects and up to the developer's motivation. But I did go and check and found no requests for anything like that in the latter's forum. Looks like a case of an un- or unsufficiently voiced want. The same could easily be said about bd, but it says little about complexity of such a feature. Where I'm going from is engine internals. It's hardcoded now per class, but moving it outside is just an extra table away. We're not talking about externalising the special wild magic effects, which could require a lot of refactoring/generalisation, but just reading a file or two before using the same values in the code. It's how gemrb got the feature in the first place.

You're jumping all over the thread, but even in the original it is possible. It just takes serious effort. You can't have 20 kits listed in vanilla? Sure, but tobex and iirc Taimon's hack both fixed that problem. Just a different kind of modding. The last complaints were about the core development, where sources were/are available, so the ruckus is even sillier.

It was never impossible?

Your reasoning being? I agree it would be harder if you wanted the iwd2 system, but the initial question was not about that.

I can only guess, but I'd say: not much, since it is just about externalising the data. Shouldn't be that hard for tobex either, but obviously I have no idea what the code looked like.

Yes, it's just a 2da in gemrb.

I took it from github and it appears that opcode ignores flags, that's all.