Bartimaeus

Your debug file indicates you used weidu v 23700 to attempt to install SCS. Tweaks Anthology v9 comes with weidu v 24600. I'm not certain if it'll make any difference, but as per argent's advice, it may be wise to attempt to use that as your setup-stratagems.exe instead.

In the SR folder, there is a plaintext (i.e. editable by Notepad) file called settings.ini that contains a number of alternative settings to use. One of these is called the "dispel_globes" setting, which is automatically set to 1. When set to 0, it makes it so that M/GoI cannot be dispelled by Dispel/Remove Magic, effectively providing immunity those two spells for the one who has cast M/GoI on themselves. I created it (though I think subtledoctor came up with the idea) for a user who was trying to solo with a sorcerer (...or something like that) and was finding the lack of a Spell Immunity: Abjuration to be making SCS quite ridiculous with their constant high level Dispel/Remove Magic spam, though I thought it was a rather novel idea even ignoring the solo sorcerer bit (though it probably makes Minor Globe of Invulnerability a little bit too powerful - again, an experimental alternative option for a reason). So it's only if you enable that settings.ini switch that this would affect you, which I presume you have not. A little bit of coincidental beauty here is that SI: Abjuration was a spell protection the same way a Globe of Invulnerability is, so setting the flag for SI:A means enemy SCS spellcasters should attempt to dispel it with Secret Word and the like, which is exactly how a Globe of Invulnerability is dispelled as well. As for Kangaxx, the flag is dispelled with the Globe if countered with an anti-magic spell like Secret Word, so he should indeed resume using it. Also, to be honest, I'm not even 100% Kangaxx's Imprisonment is even abjuration off-hand, because as I recall, it's actually called "Soul Trap": might actually be Necromancy, don't know for sure. As for Glyph of Warding...remember that this is merely a flag: the intent is to basically tell the AI "hey don't cast this at this particular character with the protection spell quite yet". They should still take aim at other characters/summonables, and that flag wouldn't even protect them if they happened to get hit anyways. It's a pretty minor inconsistency in the grand scheme of things, I think.

I use that option as well, but I use it for the AI's sake, since I don't use backstabbing in general (I don't find it to be an enjoyable mechanic, especially with how easy it is to abuse it), and not coincidentally at all, I don't ever use pure thieves either. So I guess I never noticed it. Glad it's fixed now, though.

Note that what we're talking about only applies to the alternative, anti-Dispel Globes of Invulnerability enabled by a settings.ini tweak, not the normal Globes in a standard install. They're an experimental and alternative option for a reason, . Hostile abjuration spells that aren't anti-magic spells (and therefore exempt from this): Glyph of Warding, Imprisonment, Lower Resistance. That's it. Do enemies ever use Lower Resistance? I would imagine not or close to, since it would be a waste of a spell slot by SCS in 99% of situations as the player does not basically ever have really substantial magic resistance. Glyph of Warding is just a low level AoE damage spell that isn't worth worrying about...Imprisonment is definitely the big one here, but even that's not used that much outside of Kangaxx, who has access to a variety of anti-magic spells that he can use to dispel the Globe anyways (and probably would, seeing as the spell in SCS is marked as being both SI: A and a GoI). It's possible there's room to abuse it, but like I said, experimental alternative.

...That might explain why that option always horribly broke my game, since I almost always have player AI off.

Yeah, I applied the flag to both MGoI and GoI. If SCS differentiates between MGoI and GoI to begin with, I don't see any reason why it wouldn't.

I think SCS's version of it is permanent - you can rest and it remains.

Isn't it a curse? Shouldn't you be using Remove Curse, not Remove Disease?

I would expect not. That's a good consideration, I don't know if SCS has some kind of flag I can set that says "don't use Dispel/Remove Magic here". Perhaps SCS has a flag for Spell Immunity: Abjuration that would accomplish much the same thing? Yes...indeed, I think it does - scripting state 6, value 1. One side-effect of this would be that enemy spellcasters would probably not cast stuff like Lower Resistance and Imprisonment at you either, but that would probably not be the end of the world as such spellcasters are likely to have antimagics that would strip such spell protections and attempt to do it afterwards. (e): I've experimentally added the flag.

I didn't consider shields, that's a valid point. There probably should've been an option to apply spellcasting failure/speed penalties only to armor, not shields...

Wouldn't it be...literally none? Armor disables spellcasting entirely in the vanilla game, so no enemies expected to use arcane spellcasting should have armor equipped.

Zipping files was just an aside to me for archiving the game, not to do with fixing anything. Yeah, it should only be the icewind.ini. The others are...to do with...like controls and maybe something else, IIRC. When you do a full game install via the CD, this just means the files are transferred from the CD into the game directory so that the files can be read off of your hard drive instead of the CD-ROM (CD/DVD drives are horribly slow). As for making the game no-CD, uhh, I don't think so, I just have a program that removes the CD check from all the Infinity Engine games (although it requires doing a full install, of course, as otherwise there'd be missing files).

No doubt - because I never installed the game on this Windows format. However, as established, it's an unnecessary problem to fix, since the game works perfectly fine without, . @WinRAR: I'll take your word for it, Jarno, but nevertheless, I think I'll stick with 7zip.

@Jarno Mikkola @pochesun No, actually, this was my fault, and this was coincidentally the target of the the patch I previously mentioned. I did not even see that error in your previous image - all I saw was "sppr735.itm not found" (and the DEBUG file shows it is actually 731, which is a real file). So that should be fixed with the newest 1.2.4. As for your install order, that's correct, .

Okay, so for example, my Icewind Dale folder is located in D:\Icewind Dale\Icewind Dale (...because Icewind Dale II is in the first Icewind Dale folder, and I love nested, organizational folders). I change the second Icewind Dale to be "Icewind Dale1", and try to launch IDMain.exe (Icewind Dale 1 doesn't have a launcher .exe - now that I think about it, I think only BG1 and BG2 do): I get an assertion error and it fails to launch. In the Icewind Dale directory, there is a "icewind.ini" file - if you open it up with a plaintext editor (e.g. Notepad), you'll see the "HD0=[path]", "CD1=[path]" lines under Alias. You'll note that the paths specified go to your previous location of the game directory - change all of them to the new one, save, and launching IDMain.exe magically works again. The same principle applies to all of the games. You don't actually need a given system to go through the "installation" via the installer CD/exe - just need to make sure the .ini points to the correct path if you actually have all the game files already. I apparently haven't had BG2 properly installed for years - I opened the launcher and it thinks it wants to install instead of play.

I would've mentioned this if I thought you had access to a Windows 7 computer, whoops. I made clean backups of my IE directories and put them in zip files to prevent reinstalling a long time ago, and you don't even need the games to be "installed" if you just run them through the game .exe instead of the launcher (...and make sure their main .ini files point to the correct location).

@pochesun IRR should be installed after SRR, actually. It's not the end of the world if you don't, but there will be some minor inconsistencies for some item abilities in IRR. It should be extract IR, extract IRR and overwrite - same for SR and SRR. I'm not sure what extracting SR would've overwritten if this was a clean install. sppr735 is not referenced to at all in SR or SRR, so I'm unsure why this would be the case. I did notice a text problem just now for Earth and Fire Elemental Transformations that I just fixed with V1.2.4 on github, but it's not the critical error described in your image. Still, might be worth giving it a go.

There should be no issue with that, .

main_component.tpa under spell_rev\components. Be warned that you may run into problems depending on exactly what you modify.

@pochesun It's better to attach the DEBUG file that's created when the installer is run (should be right next to the setup-spell-rev.exe)...especially seeing as I can't quite read the image. From what I can tell, the image says it tried to install but could not find a file called SPPR735.itm in spell_rev\sppr7##...and seeing as there's no such thing as SPPR735.itm, I can only conclude that I am not reading it right, .

That was how I initially interpreted what you meant actually, but Giant Spiders in SR (...Monster Summoning IV, I want to say?) don't have a webbing ability, so that didn't make sense. Sadly, as you can see, the "wrong text" problem affects more than just SR for BG1:EE, .

I looked more into it. Basically, the ANTIWEB item that all spiders seem to have grant an immunity to projectile 319 (or 320, depending on how it's enumerated), which is called "webtrav", which I initially did not believe to include your bogstandard web projectile (63/64). Then I realized that wait, web would use a secondary projectile that actually strikes creatures, and what do you know, it's project 319 in BG:EE. So okay, what is probably happening is that @Hoverdawg is NOT on an EE game, and...is seeing spiders not get held, but maybe get slowed by a secondary effect that the ANTIWEB item doesn't protect against?

Thank you very much for your time and trouble, it seems to work perfectly now, .

They are equipped with an amulet called "ANTIWEB" that comes with the vanilla games. In BG2:ToB, it protects against web effects. In BG2:EE, it inexplicably has been changed not to. I guess I'll have to make my own and give it to them.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/1wf5bqooo9fhxow/pre-commit ...for item_rev.tp2 in IR_Revised\item_rev (where IR_Revised is the name of the github repo) targeting "VERSION ~V4 Beta 10 (Revised V1.2.8)~". "echo "New version: $NEWVERSION"" right before the "sed" command displays 1.2.9 correctly every time, but it's just not updating with the sed command itself (...although it's clearly accessing it, because its "last edited" time keeps updating every time I make any sort of commit).