Jump to content

Bartimaeus

Members
  • Posts

    1,835
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bartimaeus

  1. Oh hey, you're right, it did originally last for two hours. Right now, SRR's version lasts for 1 turn, which is already too long. Two hours is the equivalent of 10 turns, which is basically just a death spell at that point. You're not really supposed to be able to use the current Dispel/Remove Magic against high level mages, though. A third level dispel by a 10th level party is not supposed to completely trivialize a near epic-leveled mage battle, after all. The saving throw option is really more intended to be a "common sense" option and get rid of the silly level vs. level mechanic and have it work in a more transparent fashion against groups of similarly-leveled buffed enemies. The "lesser breach" dispel option, on the other hand, will work regardless of the level or saving throws of the casters involved, which gives it more consistency and *could* help against high-leveled mages...but doesn't offer nearly the same potential power as the "dispel everything or nothing" approach. Anyways, they're optional for a reason, . It's just a matter of verbiage. "Hold" is meant to be more of a mental command or status, usually induced magically or psionically...while paralysis is more of a physical status induced by natural (or, as it were, unnatural) abilities. It'd have been nice to have actual separate effects (i.e. opcodes) to distinguish between the two, though. I think SR and IR kinda try to, because there is a Hold Person 1 and Hold Person 2 (and a Hold Person 3 but that's meant to be used against e.g. undead that are normally immune to it), but it's not consistent. It's a spell I've personally never liked using because it has the maximum cast time and it's most effective when used right in the middle of a fight where you're most likely to get interrupted. Its duration is also pretty short (1 turn), which makes it a little difficult to use pre-battle as you would, say, Bless (5 turns). As for "throwing their voice", I don't think Chant actually has anything to do with the caster's voice, at least based on the description and of those I can find for actual D&D. Perhaps, but it's actually a change that SCS, AFAIK, will allready do itself (if it doesn't detect you playing an SR game, question mark?) and I think having the option makes sense given that many struggle with or don't enjoy high-level mage battles. Yeah, I always disliked spellcasting HLAs, Like, yeah, you can't cast Dragon's Breath or Comet over and over, but the end result is that you actually have your 9th level spell slots available for other spells while still being able to use the HLAs the same way other classes can.
  2. Blindness: I'm not a hundred percent sure, but in SRR, it's druids' Obscuring Mist that is ADD_SPELL-ed, while the arcane will still replace Blindness. The issue with arcane spells, of course, is always the scrolls: any time you add a new spell (or decide not to replace an old one), it means you need a new scroll and places to patch it in (identifying places is not fun in of itself, especially when you consider that patching them in between all the different possible, say, area codes, with having BG1EE, BGT, and EET games can be...annoying, to say the least). Unfortunately, I'm pretty serious about where I like to patch them in too (I really prefer to identify proper and fitting places), so it's especially difficult for me. Web: Yes, agreed, it's a good alternative option, but that's precisely why I leave it disabled by default. Chant: Yeah, I only recently implemented this at the request of @Hubal, so I haven't had time to test if it even works properly with AI. Blindness: It's even more problematic because Blindness is -4 THAC0 in EE games and -10 in ToBEx games. This was the personal request of Salk, and again, it's left disabled by default in SRR. I did not do anything with it beyond restore it to its vanilla state, but you're right, the duration would have to be cut down if it were being seriously considered. I might even do something with level scaling, where it's maybe 2 rounds to start with, but goes up a round every two levels or something up to a max of 5 at 7th or something like that. Globes: Uh...what other options have you come up with? I thought I covered all the bases...
  3. That'd be pretty wild. At this time, updating IR is not currently on the table (only SR), so it's kind of moot, but what was previously set in stone for years (that SR could not have creative changes) is no longer true today, so... I could possibly see a situation where the two branches are ultimately reconciled with something like that, where I would just keep using my current IRR install base for working on it (because lord knows I'm not switching over to trying to modify items purely through patches!), but then could use your tool to automatically generate the differences between the main version and my version and then just stick everything that it generates as an optional component to base IR that people could install directly after the main component. Neither here nor there right now, but it's possible that it could be in the future, so definitely hold on to it! (e): Also, I presume that this could be adapted for...say, spells?
  4. These are all taken directly from the SRR readme that are optional depending on what you select in settings.ini. If there is any interest, some of them could be ported to base SR. In SRR, generally but not always original behavior is preferred (note what the "default x" says next to each one), and depending on interest and discussion, perhaps some of them could become the default behaviors. It now occurs to me that there may be too many in this one topic. #1. Optional (i.e. disable-able) revised saving throws: #2. AoE Lower Resistance: #3. Friendly spells pierce spell protections: #4. Imprisonment allows for a saving throw: #5. Restore Blindness to mages: #6. Web slows instead of holds: #7. Spellcasting HLAs: #8. EE Enchanted Weapon #9. Two-Handed Polymorph/Shapeshifted Weapons: #10. Targetable Chant: #11. Pick your familiar: #12. Alternative Remove and Dispel Magic: #13. Anti-magic spells pierce improved invisibility: #14. Globes of Invulnerability behavior: #15. Petrification behavior: My own thoughts are that... 1. Petrification should become its own component (i.e. not in the main component) with a number of different options. 2. Globes of Invulnerability should default to 1 at the very least (in base SR, the current behavior is 0, and that seems a little silly to me especially since other spell protections are not subject to Dispel/Remove Magic). 3. The alternative dispel/remove magic mechanics should perhaps be available as options but the default behavior should be that of vanilla. 4. The EE 2H polymorph/shapeshift bug/exploit fix should be the default at the very least. 5. It should be possible to revert Enchanted Weapon back to its non-EE version because IMO the EE version makes this spell worse, not better, but at the very least you should be able to choose even if one is the default over the other. 6. Spellcasting HLAs should probably be an option but absolutely not the default. 7. The alternative Web should be an option but probably not the default. 8. Chant should be investigated more before any decision made (particularly in regards to how it would impact e.g. SCS AI spellcasting of it - if it breaks the AI, then it should not be used regardless). 9. The saving throw for Imprisonment *must* be an option at least, given the lack of any way to resist Imprisonment as it stands. If Demilich's Imprisonment/Soul Trap does not currently have a saving throw, it should as well. 10. Friendly spells piercing through spell protections should MAYBE be the default, but absolutely an option at least. 11. AoE Lower Resistance seems like a no-brainer. 12. The revised saving throws table should the default but disable-able. 13. Anti-magic spells being able to always pierce improved invisibility should definitely be an option for those who struggle with mage battles and want to simplify them some, but should not be the default. If there is meaningful discussion of these, I will probably bring up other SRR tweaks to discuss at some point in the future. But you don't have to weigh in on all of them by any means!
  5. A few spells are missing from it entirely, others' get some functionality bugged/broken (think Wail of the Banshee never being able to play its signature sound effect anymore - that's because the AoE Spell Deflection component breaks the targeting of that sound, and so it needs a workaround). I think some spells are missing because stuff would break if you tried to add them...it's a little bit of a pain. And then there's also IR/R resources to add as well... Yeah, I guess. I suppose I really dislike the idea of what happened with grodrigues, which is that he submitted a pile of fixes to the main branch of SR, I reviewed and gave feedback on said fixes, we weeded a few of the more questionable ones out and figured out a few more, and then...they were untouched for nearly two years after that, he decided to take a different approach in coding up that insanely exhaustive "fix SR after it's installed" mod so it wouldn't be reliant on the base mod getting fixed, then had to try to backport those changes to the base .spls after that. I would probably have given up modding entirely if that had happened to me. So yeah, no kidding I enjoy dictatorial power - I see an issue (either one that I find or one that someone else finds), I immediately fix it, do some basic testing to try to make sure it doesn't break anything, and out into the wild it goes for other people to use and provide feedback on. Yes...and no. You don't want to keep up with SRR or any changes that might benefit SR that I make, but I should keep up and do everything in service of the original mod that I have not meaningfully touched in years. A comparison between main_component.tpa looking like this is about enough to send me into a state of catatonia (yellow different, white same, grey missing...): If someone downloads SRR, installs it, and finds something broken, yes, my greatest concern is fixing SRR first, not SR, whose development had all but halted for years at a time. That's just...like, how it's always worked. Hard for me to change that when SRR is my baby that I know inside and out while SR, well, I just don't. Yes...worse, it's been so long since I played the original mod I don't even remember all the changes I've made over the years. But again, in regards to IR, it doesn't even matter, since it's neither here nor there currently. Wasn't really much of a choice in either of them at the time, though, at least not from my perspective. As for building it, I did build it...but maybe I built a little too much. There should be, and I've figured out (I think) everything with the other components that isn't Revised Armor, but a field like this... "Armor Class: 2 (3 vs. crushing, 1 vs. piercing and missile, 0 vs. slashing)" ...is a little beyond my skill to dynamically patch when those values can be positive, negative, be missing, can go from positive to negative (or the reverse) depending on what Revised Armors does with them...
  6. Didn't realize the thread was ancient until you just mentioned now. Would explain why Arthas posted it, since I was pretty sure he'd posted stuff in the IRR thread before. I was providing context for one specific thing IRR offers over IR. Of all places, wouldn't a thread specifically asking about IR vs. IRR make perfect sense for that? Am I having deja vu? It feels like about the fourth or fifth time we've had large discussions on this subject. I originally wanted exactly what you wanted - to make the official versions be the best they can be. But I was told no - Demi's not currently around, there's an issue of authorial intent and creative design decisions that simply, you know, can't really be worked around. Can do simple bugfixes (assuming they can be reviewed and confirmed by...someone or someones, I'm not exactly sure whom, there hasn't exactly been much of a concrete process to get stuff fixed over the years with a number of PRs sitting open in e.g. SR for literally years), which I compiled a huge amount for the official versions to get fixed which they mostly eventually did after...some time, but anything else is pretty much off-limits: do IRR/SRR for anything else outside of that very narrow scope. Okay, I get it, that's perfectly fair and I'm happy to work with that. Now SR (and for the time being, only SR), very recently, has been opened for some creative decisions to be made by you, grodrigues, and myself, pursuant to some kind of consensus on those decisions. So this entire discussion in regards to making the official version of IR, you know, solve these problems is kind of irrelevant anyways, because right now, we've only received permission for SR, so anything you do, as far as I know, would have to be an after-the-fact patch anyways. Even considering just SR, it is difficult to bring over a number of fixes in anything approaching an easy manner from SRR - I've already been contemplating and mentally groaning trying to back-port my AoE Spell Deflection component fixes, which will require going back and working with the original .spl files and re-implementing a number of workarounds with those files and it's all just very time costly, and for...what benefit? It's already done. Same thing with the recent EE invisibility/breaking issue that recently came up: I've already fixed all that for both IRR and SRR items/spells via my own patches. I don't know if you'd like how I coded it, because you have a tendency to code stuff in a different manner than I do, but it's already done and already working from what I can tell. We could use it for the official version of SR...or we could keep doing what we've already been doing anyways, which is repeating a lot of work and time spent. And for the request of @Cahir, it's something he and I already corresponded a number of times back and forth on trying to fix it (unfortunately, trying to figure out the sub-AC types and how to dynamically patch item descriptions when you don't know what the AC will already be and when the values can be anywhere between like 8 and -5 and your patching function has to be able to read that value no matter what it is was beyond me). I have a prototype of literally the exact idea you had (alternative item_descriptions.tra file in the EE style)...but what can be done with it outside of IRR, right? It's the same story as always. It's beyond frustrating to me to be asked to help fix things when I've already put so much time and effort into own, 99% of the time already working implementations of these things, and nobody can even point to any specific faults with the way I did anything, or even really complaints about the specific creative decisions I made. Why don't we just use my already working, already implemented files and solutions and then just revert the creative decisions that you or others find questionable? Wouldn't that be so much easier? Maybe I'm crazy... Well, obviously I am, but I mean in this specific regard, . Yep - and lots of stuff looks different between the version of 1pp that IR is built on and the latest version on top of that, so trying to determine what would simply be a "fix" vs. a "change" is very murky indeed, and is why it'll likely have to be an after-the-fact patch. @Gwendolyne I totally get it, I do, which is why I was willing to change my approach to how I handled everything (...well, that and and I had no choice if I wanted things to keep working, ). Would've been a crazy amount of work for you to do on a mod you're not even familiar with - it makes sense. That's why I went with the "I'll just detect what the user selected and patch stuff how I like them from there".
  7. I'll re-quote myself here, but also add something I had forgotten until just now: I have my own custom-selected colors for probably close to two hundred items(?) that do not match either 1pp or the EEs in addition to a number of custom icons that I myself made (and tweaks to existing icons) as well as other design choices/selections that I personally made. Presumably, you do not want those changes and would prefer the official 1pp/EE choices for everything: therefore, if you are making an after-the-fact patch to correct these issues, it would probably make the most sense to instead run DavidW's handy little comparison code there from the current official version of IR to the vanilla state of BG2:EE, and then just make whatever corrections that need be after you actually test out how it works in practice. Most things will probably work O.K. if you take that approach, at least for EE players. The original games would be a different matter, because making assumptions about what a player installs for 1pp would be dangerous...but if your concern is mainly the EEs to begin with, then you can just make it an EE-only patch that only power users could enable for the original games at their own risk. @DavidW That is pretty cool! Thanks for including the code, .
  8. You can start with animations and icons. Aegis Fang would be a bad example, since its graphics are entirely my own creation and not from 1pp/the EEs at all (and there are a number of those mixed in with the other 1pp stuff, by the way - if you're thinking of just taking my IRR or SRR-specific resources wholesale to create your own after-the-fact patches, that's something you should probably beware and carefully consider) - look at shields and helms would be my suggestion, since they're generally the most trouble and the most glaring issues. I can't remember off-hand if there's any weapons that need their animations "fixed" (as opposed to simply changed to take benefit of 1pp/the EEs). As for the rest of what you wrote...no, I am good. Mike was pretty adamant regarding his feelings on the matter regarding the specific issues I brought up however long ago, but he was also more than gracious to let me host IRR and SRR here, and that's literally all I ever asked for and it's happily what I received. At no point have I ever intended to "replace" the original mods - my entire preferred installation of method of forcing both of them to require the base packages (and thus forcing users to consciously realize what they're installing) should be proof enough of that. As I've said a number of times, I did not ever intend for them to even be public in the first place, they were originally simply personal projects to fix and change things as I saw fit, and it was only from the gentle suggestions of Salk that I changed my mind after I realized that some others were dissatisfied with the current state of things. With the help of many others' bug reports, feedback, ideas, suggestions...the scope of both IRR and SRR expanded greatly and are better than they would have ever been versus purely my own ideas and efforts, and so if the option is to "spend a lot of time and effort re-doing work on the base mods or spend that same time and effort continuing to work on what I believe to be current areas of interest to me and others", well...I mean, that's just a danged easy choice for me. If there are current users of either IRR and SRR that hate certain things I've done with them compared to how they are in the base mods, they should really speak up, because I haven't much heard them. I'll be happy to at least have a discussion about those things, as I always have and will always do - the IRR and SRR threads aren't both steadily approaching near a hundred pages long each for no reason, after all, even as tumultuous as they have been at times. It is only because of exactly one particular user's repeated prodding of me to in someway resolve this situation over the years that this subject even keeps coming up. Contrary to what you might think, me saying "yep, I thought this was an issue too which is why I tried to improve it" to someone who is currently experiencing a problem or frustration is not an invitation for yet another complaint and argument on how you don't see why IRR or SRR exist in the first place or how you can't even see why someone might prefer them or...anything else, really. I mean, you can keep doing that, but eventually I'll run out of my own limited patience and stop engaging. So I'll repeat my suggestion from the other thread if that stance continues to gall you. Nobody's preventing you from working on your own PRs for SR to solve any issues in the official version that arise, and I'm always here if you want feedback or specifics on how I implemented something, or anything of that nature. I was planning on some of my own PRs once grodrigues finished his current work, but the more I'm forced to talk about this crap, the more I ask myself why I would even bother? I am good with where things stand, as I've said many times before, and I want to be done with talking about this ever again. And you are happy with IR and SR as they are right now - isn't that enough? They're not going anywhere: IRR and SRR are still the unofficial versions you have to already know about and seek out if you want to install them. Occasionally people mess up and post comments about them in their own threads instead of the IRR or SRR threads, but I try my best to handle them.
  9. Anyways, I hope this is the last time we ever have this particular discussion again, because I believe it has been well and truly played out over the past few years. Perhaps the easiest way to resolve this entire situation would be to simply have a few people who hate the entire idea of IRR existing at all to actually play it and then point out all the things they hate that are different from the base version, then having me revert that stuff (or at least having a discussion about it) and then make the result of all that become the official version. That would be *much* easier for everyone involved, I think, and it's about the only way I can see this finally being put to rest. Until and if that ever happens (and it probably won't and I have to be honest, I'm pretty okay with that, especially since I do rather enjoy dictatorial power even given that I do try to listen to all feedback), I'll just keep truckin' along...
  10. Meant to respond to this: as I remember, what part of 1pp is in IR right now is like...a customized sub-section as chosen by Demi/Mike(?) that came from 1ppv2. The difference between 1ppv2 and 1ppv4 was massive, and even basic stuff like animation slots were changed, which is why if you install 1pp on top of IR, really bad stuff like...I want to say bucklers looking like large shields starts to happen (but don't quote me on that, because it's been a very long time since I played normal IR). Stuff must be reverted in order for the system to work, unfortunately, so that's exactly what I did. It's why I've been adamant that I cannot repeat any of what I did for base IR - it is too herculean an undertaking for me to even consider. And of course, I prefer all of my additional tweaks, changes, and additions anyways, so why would I even want to repeat the effort? If you like how IR is as it is right now, then there is no issue - if you're a crazy bastard like me or @Salk and this stuff matters to you, (e) then maybe (/e) IRR is your option, .
  11. It would be a mess, since it assumes they're in the reverted form. It would basically be the equivalent of installing 1pp on top of IR right now, which is, as I recall, very strongly recommended against by the IR readme because of the problems it would create. I remember waaay back before I started IRR, I still did just that and then I would just manually correct the issues as I saw them in-game...obviously, you can't do that if you want to be able to reinstall (needs to be weidu-ized for re-installation!), though, which is the entire reason why I hijacked the entire IR install platform and started making corrections at the source, particularly because I didn't have any experience with weidu at the time anyways. Obviously, I've learned a bit since then, but I'm still nowhere even close to the same level as you or DavidW - I learn based on what I see other people do, . (e): Unless your mod looks like SCS and turns what is usually very easily readable code into...uh, not so easily readable code, .
  12. That sounds like a very interesting idea, but...assuming I'm understanding you correctly, an issue I can already with it is that you don't know for sure what the "original item" will look like. Is the user playing on a non-1pp ToBEx game, an EE game, a ToBEx-with-1pp game...and if they're using 1pp, what options are they using? There are a number of different settings that customize items in different ways. If you set items to use 1pp resources when they're not there (because the user hasn't installed them or didn't install all of the same options as you intended), the game will blow up. That was the struggle for me. So instead I reverted all items back to their base vanilla appearance (to maintain compatibility with non-1pp/EE games), install those .itms, and then use a very long series of conditional patches that will update their appearance depending on what options were installed when the user installed 1pp (and if you're using an EE game, it simply acts as though you installed all of them). I'm sure there's a better way to have done it that someone very clever with weidu coding (e.g. you) could've figured out, but I'm more of a "work harder, not smarter" kind of guy, . @subtledoctor I would think more than that. All weapons, all projectiles, all armor, all helmets, all shields. Anything that sets colors on the character, anything that is paperdoll/sprite-affecting, most any weapon that shoots a projectile. 1pp changes everything (new animations, new colors, new weapon projectiles). Some animations and even colors cannot be used for the original game (1pp/the EEs expanded the color palette, wrong colors will crash non-1pp/EE games unless you enforce the expanded color palette, and of course missing animations will do the same)...uh, it's just a lot of stuff, really. It was a bit of an undertaking, to say the least, but maybe you can figure out a clever way to code it. (e): Meant to say an EE game but wrote "1pp" instead, whoops.
  13. Like...on an automated basis? Input .itm, get weidu code-ized version of it spit out?
  14. Most of the same issues occur with 1pp as they do with BG2EE. Lots of stuff is overwritten, lot of inconsistencies. No bastard sword or flaming short sword or short bow or new staff animations, original BG2-style helms, very strange mix of shield animations, some items have some kind of wacky colors... BG2EE, by and large, is simply BG2:ToB with 1pp installed directly over it - so almost all of the same issues are present as if you were trying to install IR over a 1pp-BG2:ToB game. The screenshots I just took, after all, were in a BG2EE game with IR installed on it. But you're right, if that stuff really doesn't matter to you (or you prefer how IR makes everything looks - this is valid too!) and you want IR just as it's always been, there is really no need to even contemplate IRR - just go with what you know and love. Easy peasy. When I talked to the current maintainer of 1pp, I was told the opposite of what you're thinking. That all attempts at compatibility between the two should be the result of IR(R) being installed *after* 1pp, and therefore it is totally up to IR(R) to fix whatever problems might arise between the two. Basically, the logic was that 1pp should always serve as the base while a mod like IR(R) should simply customize items after the fact. And that's, uh...well, you've poked around in IR before, that would essentially require all changes to at least the major item categories (helms, weapons, armors, shields) all become patches instead of overwrites as they currently are. It'd be nutty - no way I'd ever do anything like that, heck no, it's already enough trouble maintaining the base .itms and .spls as it is, never mind converting all that to weidu patches. I used to do unofficial maintenance of 1pp myself - some of my fixes were integrated into the latest version of 1pp, some were rejected. This change in how these two mods are supposed to interact resulted in me having to tell users to install 1pp before IRR now, whereas for years it had been the opposite - install IRR first, then use 1pp to customize everything how you like it! Couldn't do that anymore with the latest version, so it was a bit of a paradigm shift that required a pile of more changes on my part. As I understand it, it's just one person, Gwendolyne, doing the maintenance, and they've got a lot of other stuff on their plate, so it's understandable...but it does have the effect of making things even trickier.
  15. Certainly, you might prefer the 1ppv2 graphics. I cannot *stand* the BG2 helmets, however - I am not joking in that I would prefer to use the Anthology Tweaks "disable helmet graphics" component rather than use the original BG2-style graphics. 1ppv4 made huge strides in that regard. And why the heck is the Helm of Balduran not even the right icon, colors, or graphic? It's like the most iconic helmet in the game... Lots of other oddities like no flaming short swords, icons that are the wrong size because Beamdog never adapted 1pp icons for the EEs (really, why are Boots of the Gargoyle, Amulet of the Cheetah, Belt of Beautification all so tiny?), icons that are just wrong (why does Cloak of Bravery have the icon of the old Apprenti robes, why does Shield of Harmony have the Small Shield +2 icon, why does Casiel's Soul share the same icon with Casiel's Soul Plate of the Dark...piles of stuff like that). Some compromises will always have to be made, of course, but at least we can fix the obvious problems. I get grumpy when I look at some of these inconsistencies...undoubtedly why I was driven to try to 1pp/EE-ize everything. (e): And why is Aegis Fang an axe... (e): And why does an unenchanted medium shield have an enchanted medium shield icon...
  16. Included in the linked post... Literally my next post as discussion on the subject continued... I do apologize for getting on your nerves: it's an unfortunate situation all around. There is a solution, however...because I'm not likely to stop mentioning specific areas that I believe to be issues that I have tried to improve as they come up as a result of others' posts, .
  17. Purely on a visual level: same save game with IRR vs standard IR. Obviously, that's just on a visual level (and if you prefer BG1-style shields, IRR has an option to enable true BG1-style icons and graphics instead). If that doesn't matter to you and you're perfectly happy with the latest version of IR as it is and you want everything to be just as it's always been, then no need to even contemplate IRR. I started IRR only because I wanted modern 1pp (now part of EE) graphics (e.g. shields, helms, bastard swords, flaming short swords, the new staff animations, a number of new icons, other stuff). Along the way, I fixed (...and broke but then also fixed) some things and added some of my own as well as others' requested additions and tweaks.
  18. ¿Que? (No, don't even think about trying to explain, I don't know anything about "CLAB"s to begin with, .) The good news is that even if you don't get it fixed, it is a relatively minor issue that only affects...like, one or two characters?
  19. I do like to talk about the things that I perceive myself to have improved as a result of my own effort, particularly in the context of them presently being an issue for someone else(s), which is why I attempted to improve them in the first place. They're very often small things...but too many small things not working or being described quite as they should can prove to be an inconsistent or outright frustrating experience. You, as someone that has had experience digging into some of the intricacies of the mod, may understand just about all that there is to know about most of it...but that's not the case for everyone else. Heck, sometimes, I don't go far enough and further improvements need to be made to completely solve the issue for some users. Regardless, I haven't worked on both IRR and SRR for literal years for no reason. I was also mistaken - I forgot that I had actually included a fixed version of your "set spell schools" function back whenever the latest beta came out (a couple of years ago?)...which, as you may or may not remember, arose out of me submitting a large list of scroll and spell school inconsistencies that I had found and fixed myself and made note of for the base mod to fix. Seeing your feelings on this sort of matter, I have removed said function from SRR. Apology accepted, let that be the end of this. More grumpy than helpful, but you're welcome, .
  20. Oh, right, dynamic positions of new spells: this is actually Cause Light Wounds instead of Sunscorch. I'm afraid I can't make sense of why Cause Light Wounds is in this spot in order to determine where Sunscorch is, though. sppr114.spl seems the most likely to me instead, but I can't say for certain. If you can figure out what Sunscorch's resource name is (somewhere between sppr110 and sppr120 almost certainly), please attach that instead and I'll fix it - sorry for the trouble!
  21. Alright, sounds good. I'll be working with a *true* clean install this time...
  22. Looks there is, good call. That's my bad - guess something didn't quite fully uninstall at some point when I was doing a number of different tests. Anything else you want me to test with a ToBEx while I'm at it (...but better and more cleanly)?
  23. I received a number (though more like ~50) of parse errors like this... [tb#_compile_eval_buffer/weidu_external/workspace\ssl_out\dw#hlgla.baf] PARSE ERROR at line 878 column 1-46 Near Text: ) [CheckStat] argument [MIND_BLANK] not found in [Stats.IDS] ...when installing General Smarter AI on a game with a weidu.log that looks like this: ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #100 // TobEx - Core: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #101 // Apply Concentration Check On Damage [WIP]: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #102 // Awaken On Damage: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #103 // Blindness As Spell Description: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #105 // No Spell Interruption On Zero Damage: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #106 // Use Caster Level On Mirror Image [C]: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #107 // Allow All Races to Dual Class: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #108 // Allow Equipping Armor in Combat: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #109 // Disable Experience Boost: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #110 // Disable Force Inventory Pause: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #111 // Disable Silence On Charm: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #112 // Level One Proficiency Restrictions: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #113 // Remain Hidden On Pickpocket Success [C]: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #116 // Enable Animation Attack Sounds: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #119 // Remove all race-class restrictions: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #120 // Drop Inventory on Disintegrate: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #121 // Drop Inventory on Frozen Death: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #122 // Drop Inventory on Stone Death: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #123 // Enable Auto-Pause On All Screens: Beta 0025 ~TOBEX/TOBEX.TP2~ #0 #124 // Make All Attack Animations Genuine Attacks: Beta 0025 ~BG2FIXPACK/SETUP-BG2FIXPACK.TP2~ #0 #0 // BG2 Fixpack - Core Fixes: v13 ~BG2FIXPACK/SETUP-BG2FIXPACK.TP2~ #0 #1000 // BG2 Fixpack - Game Text Update -> GTU Light (by Wisp): v13 ~BG2FIXPACK/SETUP-BG2FIXPACK.TP2~ #0 #3 // BETA Core Fixes (please check the readme!): v13 ~BGT/BGT.TP2~ #0 #0 // Baldur's Gate Trilogy - Core: v1.21 ~STRATAGEMS/SETUP-STRATAGEMS.TP2~ #0 #4099 // Allow player to choose NPC proficiencies and skills: 34 ~STRATAGEMS/SETUP-STRATAGEMS.TP2~ #0 #5900 // Initialise AI components (required for all tactical and AI components): 34 ~STRATAGEMS/SETUP-STRATAGEMS.TP2~ #0 #6000 // Smarter general AI: 34 General Smarter AI was the only one that I installed. I did not make any changes to any of the .inis. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/y0h3qdk96ep6scd/SETUP-STRATAGEMS.DEBUG
  24. ...Have I not been the one checking and actually testing the newest fixes to SR while suggesting some of my own? What in the actual **** are you talking about? Good lord, man. (e): And who went and reviewed all of grodigues original PRs and provided feedback on all of them...when he posted them over a year and a half ago, while they literally never got resolved? Oh yeah, that was me. That's right, that was me. Huh. I mention these things because they've been problems for years. I "fixed" them, but there was never any clear way to fix them in the official version of SR. People responsible for maintaining the mod either weren't active or didn't want any of my changes. I think I'm well within my rights to mention it being a problem once again when it's literally being a problem right here and right now once again. It's not like this is the first discussion we've had about improved invisibility and Non-Detection over the years...or even the second. It's not like I'm mentioning it out of nowhere that it is an issue...and please, don't stuff words into my mouth: while I have mentioned specific improvements that I made specifically as a result of problems that have cropped up over the years, never have I said anything approaching that SR is "hot garbage". Frig off with that crap, man. (e): And speaking of mudslinging...who's the one that's been badmouthing IRR and SRR at just about every turn over the last few years while I've been taking it on the chin and calmly explaining why things are the way they are every time you bring it up? Like, really? I've just about done had enough of this. Maybe DavidW was right... And why did I ever even bother keeping lists of literally dozens of things for the official versions of these mods to fix if it's somehow going to be turned around on me as if I stole work from the base version instead? Good lord...count me out from working anymore on the base version if this is going to be the utterly asinine abuse I get. About the only thing I ever truly "stole" was Mike's ADD_SPELL-ing of everything, which at that point was an absolute necessity anyways (which I had to re-do all of once I saw the format on how it worked anyways, seeing as I am not the best weidu coder) - the base version of this has taken more from me than I have from it past the point of where I started working on it. Feel free to do a comparison of main_component.tpa if you want to see how impossible it'd be for me to just "steal" anything to begin with. So I intone once again - frig off with that crap, man.
×
×
  • Create New...