Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Bartimaeus

Recent Profile Visitors

4,255 profile views

Bartimaeus's Achievements

  1. Even right clicking and choosing "save as" or equivalent?
  2. Looks like I'm the big dumb and put a zero where a two should've been. Just drop and drag this into your override and it should immediately correct it: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/8dh2mcegfzzqk81/misc3c.eff
  3. What specific version of IRR do you have installed, and do you have SR/R installed?
  4. I keep their statistics the same, of course. What would even be the point of the mod if you just immediately negated the mod's main effect? Also, all creatures in the game are affected AFAIK - doesn't make sense to penalize your party members when enemy creatures won't suffer the same fate. From the readme regarding strength: "This component alters the Strength tables so that the effects of mid-range values of strength are now different: for example, 8 Strength gets -1 thac0, -1 damage, whereas 14 gets you +2/+2. Previously both cases would receive +0/+0. Thac0 is computed with the real 3rd edition rules (thac0 bonus = (str - 10) / 2), whereas the other Strength bonuses (damage bonus, bend bars/lift gates, weight allowance) use different rules. In the case of damage, the formula is similar (damage bonus = (str - 9) / 2); the value is greater because that's how it's in 2nd edition, and to ensure that advancing to an odd value is useful." Similarly, dexterity: "This component alters the Dexterity tables so that the effects of mid-range values of dexterity are now different: for example, 8 dexterity gets you -1 AC, whereas 14 gets you +2. Previously both cases would receive +0. AC bonuses are computed with the real 3rd edition rules (bonus = (dex - 10) / 2), whereas reaction bonus, ranged thac0 bonus and Save vs. Breath bonus is slightly lower (bonus = (dex - 11) / 2)), to ensure that advancing to an odd value is useful." ...Constitution: "This component alters the Constitution tables so that the effects of mid-range values of constitution are now different: for example, 8 constitution gets you -1 HP per level, whereas 14 gets you +2. Previously both cases would receive +0. Bonuses to hit points and fatigue are computed with the real 3rd edition rules (bonus = (con - 10) / 2), whereas Save vs. Poison/Hold/Death is slightly lower (bonus = (con - 11) / 2). Regeneration rate and minimum dice are untouched. As an additional consequence, all classes would benefit from a constitution over 16. Previously, only fighters/rangers/paladins would." i.e. odd values are useful, .
  5. Yeah, I prefer the doubled up numbers as well...but spell descriptions still say "radius" even though they should probably more accurately say "diameter" (not just in the "Area of Effect" field, but also sometimes in descriptions themselves, e.g. Remove Fear), but I've kind of made my peace with it - especially because I have no desire to list any AoE sizes as 2.5', 7.5', or 12.5'. Anyways, ultimately my goal is that projectile sizes are consistent to the gold standard fireball - if you know the size of a fireball at 30', then you should be able to roughly mentally measure half of it at 15' for something else, and as best I can tell, the numbers I have stay true to that.
  6. I just installed IRR again now, gave the shield to Minsc and...nothing. His AC never goes down except for the +3 provided from the shield itself. I had him stand next to me and my character's AC went down by 2 immediately - his is still fine. I'm not sure what the issue would be. Perhaps what I'll do for Ashideena is restore it just for BG1 with that very minor revision, while leaving the Rift Hammer in BG2. No overlap with Hammer of Thunderbolts that way, plus if I need to re-use an icon (there aren't exactly a lot of hammer icons to go around as it is), there's no issue there as well.
  7. I believe they are. As for AD&D, I imagine that it's a very difficult thing to compare - heck, even a Fireball is apparently supposed to be a 20' radius in 2E...but how exactly that would translate to in-game would be a complete mystery to me (in terms of character size and whether a "foot" in these games is the same as a foot in AD&D...). To me, the 256 size (which is used dozens of times in the vanilla games) is the only consistently used size, and so it makes the most sense to work off of that, especially given everyone knows just about perfectly what the radius of a fireball and the like is. @Satrhan Hope you're able to figure it out. If your BG2 game is 2.6, it might be worth temporarily downgrading for the time being until it's figured out (especially since IIRC, they didn't even make that many notable changes for most players in 2.6 anyways?).
  8. At some point in the distant past, I actually reverted the +stat items to be like the old "set to X"-style of the original games. Later, I looked at the strength table bonuses and realized that 2E-style stats are absolute pants - why are strength values between 8 and 15 functionally equivalent, and you get barely anything for 16-18, and then suddenly the second you get past 18 the bonuses become utterly ludicrous? Then I looked at dexterity and realized the same thing: between 6 and 14 are all the same, then between 15 and 18 you get an AC bonus for every single point. What in the world is going on with these terrible 2E-style stats? I eventually realized that 3E-style stats were superior for a number of reasons (most of all balance between enemies and players), and I realized that it seems like IR's stat bonuses seemed to be almost designed for that instead, and ended up reverting my reversion. I haven't looked back since - I'll never play with 2E statistics again. I can only recommend that other players do the same. However...I seriously doubt most players are using 3E-style stats like I am - perhaps it would be worth providing an optional settings.ini tweak to provide the reversion you seek. @Cahir On the subject of EE-only items, it is difficult for me to revise EE items for a few reasons: 1. I do not play on the Enhanced Editions and thus it is difficult for me to fully grasp the consequences of revising said items to begin with. 2. Many (most?) EE-added items are absolute utter garbage designs that feel, look, and sound like they're borderline (or not even borderline) fan-added. 3. This has the added effect of making them even more difficult to revise, especially since many of them have *very* specific names and lores that do not lend to any natural/obvious revisions. 4. The ones that are overpowered I am loathe to nerf because I know how much people like their overpowered items and I literally don't even play the EEs and so again, I can't fully grasp what exactly I would be doing as a result - in terms of where items are located, for what character(s) they're specifically designed for, how soon you can realistically get them in the game, etc. 5. Even if I were playing on the EEs, the first thing I would do is wipe everything the EEs added to begin with. I can't understate how much I despise EE content - NPCs, items, spells, and quests alike. While I did at least add all BG1:EE items at some point so they're at least included in a rough sense (with a few VERY obvious mild revisions for some of them), I looked at BG2:EE items and was even more frustrated with them. I don't really know what the heck to do with any of them - I am more than open to suggestions for any and all EE items, especially because any suggestions I implement literally won't affect me, and therefore I am significantly less inclined to protest any possible changes. In regards to EE-style descriptions, I know we had a dialogue going months ago and you were trying to figure out how to best effect those changes optionally via a settings.ini switch. I personally dislike EE-style descriptions (big surprise!), so I cannot convert the item_descriptions.tra to it. I'm not sure how to resolve that situation either.
  9. The only projectile size that can be reliably ascertained based off of the vanilla game is that 30' (aka 15' radius) is 256 - I investigated a number of other projectile sizes and found them too inconsistent in order to draw any reliable conclusions. Furthermore, it should be noted that SR notes sizes as double what they are in the vanilla games (Enhanced or not) - 15' in a vanilla game is the same as 30' in the SR descriptions. I'm not a hundred percent why SR does this. In other words, that EE-listed size of "4-ft" (actually 3.75?) for Hold Person would be exactly 7.5' in SR numbers. On a side-note, Hold Person has a size of 42 in SR, not 64...and it's long been my opinion that Hold spells should actually have a size of 10' (85). These are official EE numbers for sizes...let me know if they make any sense to you: Hold 4-ft -> 64 Power Word Blind 4-ft -> 84 Fireseed 7-ft -> 126 Invisibility 10-ft -> 160 Delayed Fireball 11-ft -> 200 Skull Trap 11-ft -> 230 Glyph of Warding 12-ft -> 200 Symbols 12-ft -> 230 Various 15-ft -> 256 ...Because they certainly don't to me. In contrast, SR's notation is much simpler: 5' -> 42 10' -> 85 15' -> 128 20' -> 170 25' -> 213 30' -> 256 Nice and linear. Are they correct? I'm not a hundred percent sure - these are supposedly radii (i.e. simply straight lines) and so they should scale linearly, and I feel like I remember exhaustively testing them in-game using video and screenshots to measure and make sure that they do years back, but it is possible someone knows better than I on the matter.
  10. If you're using the latest versions of the EEs, it's also possible that SCS simply hasn't caught up to it yet - a number of mods are having problems and unfortunately need to be updated to work with...2.6, I think it is? But I don't know for certain - I pretty unabashedly prefer the original games, .
  11. There literally isn't a single other item that has a property like that in IR that I can think of - they're always converted to dice rolls. For example (again), Varscona...or Arrow of Fire/Cold, Bolt of Lightning, Stonefire, Frostreaver, Taragarth, Sword of Flame, Flame of the North, and so on and so forth.
  12. I do not wish to restore Ashideena to its original form: the +1 electrical damage is too silly of a property and would not really jive with other elemental-type weapons in IR - it's not like Varscona has its original +1 cold damage in BG1. I wouldn't mind restoring it and giving it a simple 1D4 electrical damage property (although I'd need to examine the icon situation)...but Hammer of Thunderbolts already has that property in the same weapon type class. However, neither Ashideena or Borok's Fist (which are literally exactly the same in terms of properties in vanilla, by the way - war hammers +2 with +1 electrical damage) have lores tied to their properties and so could be given some other type of property if needed. I'm not sure what to do here, exactly, except that I know I want at least one original hammer's name and description restored.
  13. Can I get a copy of your SHLD07.itm from your override? I'm looking at my own right now and staring at a "Protection from Spell: SHLD07A" opcode and wondering how in the world SHLD07A.spl could be applying to the character wearing the shield, especially after testing this danged shield so many times already. So in IR, Ashideena (HAMM03.itm) becomes Rift Hammer, The Knee-Capper (HAMM04.itm) becomes Hammer of Corrosion, and Borok's Fist (HAMM05.itm) becomes Tersyus. Which of those is the least strong? I'm not a huge fan of Bassilus using Rift Hammer either - he's had a tendency to hit that 15% and absolutely clobber my party with it in the past. Honestly, I'm a little tempted to add one of the original hammers back and give it some kind of more mild property...perhaps Borok's Fist with a knockout property...
  14. Yep, let me know. Windows 10 is more sensitive to install location than previous versions of Windows were (well, at least Windows 7 and before...but hardly anybody used Windows 8, so...).
  • Create New...