Bartimaeus

On 7/6/2019 at 12:07 PM, subtledoctor said:

I thought Ruby Ray is an Alteration spell in the vanilla game...?

Yeah, the BG Wiki does list it as Transmutation/Alteration, so that's not changed by SR, I guess.

@amitlath Uh, AR2000.bcs is the Trademeet area script. Don't possibly see how your game could be lacking it, seeing as how a whole lot of vanilla quest stuff in that area would be broken without it (including the Skinner, Mazzy Fentan, and Dao Genie questlines). My copy of BG2:EE certainly isn't lacking it.

I'm unsure of what the "ERROR: cannot resolve trigger 0x40de" error pertains to. Doing some Googling, it seems like the two errors might be related, and that a critical identifier file, trigger.ids, may have been corrupted by a mod you installed, leading it to do...something. My quick and dirty suggestion would be to move trigger.ids from your override folder to somewhere else and test installing it again - if it installs correctly, then another mod would indeed seem to be the problem with it and I'd probably suggest doing a changelog on it to figure out the culprit.

6 hours ago, grodrigues said:

Is there a rationale for Secret Word belonging to the Enchantment School instead of Abjuration like other anti-spell protection spells? Noticed when Dynaheir could not learn it. If it is a bug, the docs should also be amended (but maybe they are generated automatically?).

The latest version of SR has it as Enchantment as well, and it's probably been that way for a while. Not an SRR change. Spell Thrust is Abjuration, Secret Word is Enchantment, Pierce Magic is Abjuration, Ruby Ray of Reversal is Transmutation, Khelben's Warding Whip is Evocation, Pierce Shield is Abjuration, and Spell Strike is Abjuration. If I had to guess, the rationale for changing Secret Word, Ruby Raby and Reversal, and Khelben's Warding Whip was probably loosely related to their concept, but more to do with balancing the specialist mages out a bit (...and making it so that Transmuters weren't completely anti-magic-less).

16 hours ago, Mike1072 said:

The main issue with writing over the entire text field can be solved like this:

WRITE_ASCII 0x76 ~ISCRL1R~ #8

This is likely to work if the file hasn't been changed between when SR is installed and your mod is installed.

However, it's good practice to not rely on this, and there is a safer way to code this sort of thing.

The icon will not always be stored at offset 0x76.  The icon field is part of the extended header section of the file.  An item may have one or more extended headers, also known as abilities.  They are each 0x38 bytes in length and they may not be located directly after the header.

We can find out how many abilities there are and where they start in the file by reading that information from the header, in offsets 0x68 and 0x64.  Then we can loop through each ability and change its icon.

Here's the full code:

ACTION_IF (FILE_EXISTS_IN_GAME ~scrlw801.itm~) THEN BEGIN // SR Wraithform
  COPY_EXISTING ~scrlw801.itm~ ~override~
    PATCH_IF (SOURCE_SIZE > 0x71) THEN BEGIN // protects against invalid files
      READ_LONG  0x64 abilities_offset
      READ_SHORT 0x68 num_abilities
      FOR (i = 0; i < num_abilities; i += 1) BEGIN // loop through abilities
        // update icon
        WRITE_ASCII (abilities_offset + 0x38*i + 0x04) ~ISCRL1R~ #8
      END
    END
    BUT_ONLY
END

 

I've used that sort of setup for spells, but I hadn't considered that items with more than one extended header (or none at all) might also change the location. That #8 for 8 bytes is also very helpful to know. Thanks!

That's because I'm a dummy and didn't convert between a...variable(?) and...hex-text. Yeah, like I said, I'm not the best with weidu. Also, as mentioned in my edit above, it's probably not even a good idea to pursue my idea anyways due to the length being different. I am sure somebody who actually knows how to cleanly do it will help you - anything I know of is probably going to be a little hacky (and actually I want to know how a person who knows what they're doing would do it for my own future reference).

ACTION_IF (FILE_EXISTS_IN_GAME ~scrlw801.itm~) THEN BEGIN // SR Wraithform
COPY_EXISTING ~scrlw801.itm~ ~override~
PATCH_IF (SOURCE_SIZE > 0x71) THEN BEGIN // protects against invalid files
WRITE_BYTE 0x76 "ISCRL1R"
END
END

This should write your icon directly to the file in what I think is the correct spot. (e): Although perhaps this won't work, because the "write_byte" command will only overwrite what you put in (I think), and since "ISCRL1R" is only 7 characters long vs. "SPWI603A", which is 8 characters, I imagine the "A" might be left at the end and effectively make your field "ISCRL1RA". I'm not sure how you define a blank space for that byte. A replace text command might suffer the same issue...except it might destroy the entire file as a bonus? I'm certain there's an easy way to do it, but I'm probably too much of a dummy with weidu to do it.

@grodrigues Fixed, thank you!

@Hoverdawg Apologies for the delay in response. ring30.itm is the Ring of Human Influence, and it seems you have the BG1 NPC Project installed, but are not in a BGT/EET setup, which I apparently did not foresee. Fixed and thank you!

4 hours ago, Antipatiko said:

Hello Bart,

 

Found a minor bug  in spell_rev/languages/english/setup.tra that affects the name of the components.

 

Lines:

@10002=~Cure Sleep Fix~
@10003=~Mirror Image Fix~
@10004=~Dispel Magic Fix~

Should be:

@10002=~Mirror Image Fix~
@10003=~Dispel Magic Fix~
@10004=~Cure Sleep Fix~

 

Thank you for taking the time to fix and enhance this great mod!

Best regards.

Nice spot and it has been fixed, thank you! Also have fixed what @DavidW described here, so a thanks to him as well.

21 hours ago, Luke said:

You could set probability2 to 1 and probability1 to 15, maybe it's clearer....

I considered it, but didn't like the inconsistency it would create for items where you'd *need* to start at the 0 due to additional effects (e.g. Flail of Ages).

@Kilgor

Can't confirm on a clean ToB + IR install. Spawned SENKEN01.cre via console, CTRL+Y-ed them, there they are on the ground. You may have to changelog SENKEN01.cre.

7 hours ago, Kilgor said:

Silver Sword +4 vorpal effect is 14% instead of 15%.

Axe of the unyielding +5 vorpal effect is 14% instead of 15% and missing the 3d8 slashing dmg with a succesful save.

Their probability is 0-14%, which is 15% (as 0 is the first percentile). You're right on the 3D8 slashing damage, though, so thanks!

@Kilgor

Thanks, confirmed. Inherited from base SR, will get a fix on the master git sometime soon.

Sort of related: do you have atweaks' improved fey creatures installed? I have wanted to get to the bottom of the insane sirines in BG1, and I figured it was that component in atweaks that was making their strength and behavior so crazy. Their endless kiting tactics are so ridiculously over the top, I don't think even most players would stoop to the lows they go.

7 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

And yet, have those fixes been submitted to the mod?  (Sorry, pet peeve, I can't help the dig.)

Yes. A large portion of my text work was integrated into base IR a few years ago, in mid-2016, though I've continued to work on it since. It's the only thing I have directly submitted for integration in either IR or SR, so the sniping doesn't even really make sense. It's also why my name is listed under the "contributor" credits in IR, .

@DavidW Something to also keep in mind is that SR changed Goodberry to have a duration of only 8 hours (i.e. disappear on rest). Vanilla's last for forever, while SRR's last for a more moderate 24 hours, so the dynamics of creating them and easily using them are a little different for SR users.

@Jarno Mikkola Actually, Goodberry is a level 1 spell in SR.

"Who cares?" Me, . I didn't spend many, many hours cleaning up both IR's and SR's language files to be free from inconsistencies and vagueries because I didn't care. If you want to establish an order outside of that, be my guest...but this is SR within the Revisions series of mods, and I'm working within its rules where it has been overwhelmingly consistent to that and where I do not think a quantity of 2 fits. That is all.

SR's Cure Wound Spells all have a base heal of XD8 + X per level (where X equals spell level, e.g. Cure Moderate Wounds would be X = 2), maxing out at level 10, regardless of whether X is 1 or 4. So Cure Light Wounds would be 1D8 + 10 at level 10, for an average of 14.5 points of healing. Your Goodberries would be 21 points of healing per cast that does not require mid-combat spellcasting, and can be prepared in advance - however, it is split into three different uses. That's kind of the problem with instant healing here - you want Goodberries to be worth the cast, but you don't really want to have it outshine Cure Light Wounds for mid-combat healing, which is probably why a regeneration-based approach makes more sense (and possibly you actually meant this to be regeneration-based, in which case, those numbers make much more sense).

6 hours ago, Kilgor said:

Ah okay

 

Btw i want to thank you for keeping the mod updated, so i can continue playing this great game

No problem.

As for Insect Plague, Insect Plague should also have to target someone the same as Creeping Doom, so I'll fix that. Thanks!

Virtually nothing in this game comes in two like you are suggesting. Special "per day" abilities on items come in 1 or 3. Goodberry itself historically comes in 5. I would never pick 2 because it doesn't fit - 1, 3, or 5 would, and you already said that 1 removes an interesting mechanic of the spell in having splittable quantities, and 5 is too many because it splits the effects between too many uses. So...3 would seem to be the closest to what you want. Rule of three exists for a reason, after all. I thought this was obvious.

3 hours ago, Kilgor said:

Blade of Roses doesn't seem to apply any of the Singing Sword bonuses.

Should go in the IRR thread, . Anyways, it does, but it works oddly. The character with the Blade of Roses must actually be attacking for it to sing. So simply standing around with it out will not be enough. I'm trying to recall why it's like this instead of the always on passive, but I'm struggling to remember...

I mean, by that logic 1 is even lamer. Would you rather use 8 healing potions that heal 1hp each, or 1 potion that heals 8 hp?

I can make this a mod for you. Instead of 1 healing potion, stores will sell you a stack of 8, and you'll have to use them 8 times to actually heal yourself. It'll be fun: we can take bets on how long it will take before you put your fist through your monitor.

(j/k - the answer is "never," because carpal tunnel syndrome will prevent you from actually making a fist.  )

tl;dr: play the game both ways and then tell me which you think is "lamer"

Uh, okay.

Hi @pebnugget, I'll respond here since you PMed me as well with your new account. I am a little confused by your problem, since the error doesn't really make sense to me. IRR and SRR are definitely compatible with BG2:EE (I tested the current versions of IRR and SRR just last week with both BG1:EE and BG2:EE as a matter of fact), but I must admit that it's difficult for me to troubleshoot MacOS-only problems seeing as I don't have MacOS. Also, please note that IRR and SRR are actually separate branches from the main IR and SR mods - that is to say, the link you gave in your previous post actually leads to base Item Revisions, and you must also download my Item Revisions Revised as well. I realize that this is somewhat confusing, but that's the price I pay for stacking IRR and SRR on top of the original mods.

However, I will give you combined archives for you to test to see if you still get the same errors, so you do not have to go through the trouble of combining them: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/6s4ozebczx78bta/IRR and SRR MacOS.zip Let me know if you continue to have that problem, although I'm unsure as to what exactly I can do about it. I'd probably have to ask for help from elseones who are more familiar with MacOS.

It's hard to quantify exactly why, but I absolutely agree. It just feels wrong to me, :P.

They certainly are, .

13 hours ago, Salk said:

Hello again, Bartimaeus.

I thought SCS already offered a component that removed the Stoneskin effect on the caster? Or perhaps I am misunderstanding and you meant removing the visual effect of the spell on the caster?

What I was suggesting was to have the character protected with Stoneskin change the color of its body to the Stoneskin color once the combat would start.

Cheers!

That's correct, but unfortunately, as I mentioned in the previous post, I'm relatively sure it's either an .exe patch or through ToBEx. I will check now to make sure. Yep, that subcomponent is only available on ToB games, and yep, it's only available through ToBEx. Literally all that component does is

REPLACE_TEXTUALLY ~Disable Stoneskin Grey Colour=0~ ~Disable Stoneskin Grey Colour=1~

in the ToBEx ini file. Already an option when you install ToBEx, I guess it's if you were too lazy to install ToBEx before installing SCS? Either way, the visual effect is hardcoded to the Stoneskin opcode. So you'd have to enable the ToBEx Disable Stoneskin Grey Colour flag, then you'd have to simulate the grey color through various Stoneskin effects yourself. Which is not impossible...I guess I'd need the exact palette color of Stoneskin to even test adding it to just the mage Stoneskin spell.

2 hours ago, Salk said:

Hello, Bartimaeus!

Have not been very active around here the last months but I am glad to see there is constant improvements being made to our beloved game.

Let me just say I think the idea above is really good and, if it was not suggested somewhere else by someone else, I would like to see it apply to Stoneskin as well.

Keep up the excellent job!

Thanks.

I think Stoneskin's graphical effect is tied to the stoneskin opcode itself, unfortunately, and can only be removed with an exe patch/ToBEx, and once you do that, there's no opcode to actually bring it back (although maybe you could simulate it with a mass amount of color palette opcodes?). That would've been a good one to do, too.

@K4thos: Thanks for the table. I have been working on remedying this problem, but for various reasons, progress has been slow. But I'll get there eventually.