Bartimaeus

3 hours ago, pochesun said:

@Bartimaeus wanted to ask you if you managed to make Haste potion being countered by Slow spell? I am about to make a fresh installation, the reason i am asking - i havent seen any changes regarding it in Github commits. If no - consider it as a reminder  

Thanks for reminding me! Just added it to the live repository version.

21 hours ago, jmerry said:

Right, SCS does have an "extra scrolls" component. It adds the following sequence of scrolls (base game version; SR would change some of these) to a random store: Remove Magic, Invisibility 10', Spell Shield, Summon Nishruu, Stone to Flesh, Mordenkainen's Sword, Control Undead, Bigby's Clenched Fist, Bigby's Crushing Hand, Ruby Ray of Reversal, Pierce Shield, Improved Mantle. If the store chosen is Bernard's, those scrolls are added after Incendiary Cloud. Actually, each one is added immediately after Incendiary Cloud, so the order reverses in the final version of the store.

Checking the "scroll shadow" list for the IWD spells component ... while some of those spells do have shadows, none of the IWD spells added start with S. I'm thinking it's more likely that one of these scrolls failed directly. What does SR do to Spell Shield, Summon Nishruu, and Stone to Flesh? If any of those SPELL.IDS references go away, or the spell being referenced no longer has a scroll, the %WIZARD_%spell%_SCROLL% reference doesn't evaluate properly and you get WIZARD_S in the store that doesn't point to an actual item.

It's probably Stone to Flesh, since it doesn't have a scroll in SR/R (function absorbed into Remove Curse AKA Break Enchantment).

7 hours ago, jmerry said:

This also could be a different spell mod failing to evaluate a variable; after all, the screenshot includes Moment of Prescience which isn't in either the base game or the SCS/IWDification list.

Moment of Prescience is SR's renamed/repurposed Improved Mantle, which uses SCRL9C. SR doesn't add SCRL9C to any new locations, and SCRL9C can't be found from either of Bernard's stores in the vanilla game.

6 hours ago, NdranC said:

According toNearInfinity the only illegal store item is bernard's and it's WIZARD_S.ITM

Sorry, I have no idea what this item is, and doing a Google search didn't turn anything up. Might have to do a changelog.

3 hours ago, Person said:

Found one in there: files referencing DVSTENCH.SPL should reference LEAT13D.SPL as well/instead. I don't think IRR uses DVSTENCH.

This is a fix for SRR too because that's where OTYUGHSU/DVNOTYSU come from.

LEAT13D doesn't have immunity checks for slimes or swords.

Thank you, will fix.

4 hours ago, Communist-Cleric said:

I have an issue with a few of the items in IR not giving the correct bonuses. The Gauntlets of Parrying do nothing, and the Gauntlets of Weapon Expertise only provide +1 to thac0 and no damage bonus. Seems like this has to do with the distinction between melee and ranged bonuses as both have to do with being 'melee only'.

I do have quite a few mods on this playthrough, and I'm hardly a mod expert, so I'm not sure if it's IR itself or a conflict, though I don't believe I have any other item mods, just standard mods (SCS, tweaks anthology, etc) and a few components of Scales of Balance (but none of the item related components). Below are screenshot examples showing the issue when equipping.

https://imgur.com/a/KmFLEYh

Gauntlets of Parrying: You made sure to check your character sheet (somewhere near the bottom) to look for the specific vs. damage type AC bonuses/penalties before and after equipping the gauntlets?

Gauntlets of Weapon Expertise: Someone else once complained about this for the IR Revised thread, and I'm fairly certain the issue is that the the bonus melee damage does actually work regardless of the inventory/character sheet display being incorrect. I believe I tested it out by setting the bonus to 100, seeing that nothing changed, then actually attacked an enemy and they immediately exploded because of the +100 damage.

2 hours ago, NdranC said:

I've noticed that Secret Word says it will dispell "Spell Immunity"

Is this a typo or is there a configuration where I can have Spell Immunity with the rest of SRR?

It's not listed in the SRR description, but if you're playing with SCS, it automatically re-generates those lists and may include erroneous entries SR/R can't control for.

Quote

The spell protection spells dispelled by Secret Word are: Minor Spell Deflection, Non-Detection, Minor Globe of Invulnerability, Spell Deflection, Spell Shield, Globe of Invulnerability, Greater Spell Deflection, and Shield of the Archons.

I'm also not particularly pleased SCS decides to go by straight alphabetical instead of by level and then alphabetical, but what can you do?

10 hours ago, jmerry said:

Actually, the way Zhurlong's quest is structured in the EE, killing off one of those hobgoblins removes the boots from the other with no replacement. As does picking up the boots. It might be theoretically possible to get both, but you'd have to do something really indirect like charming the hobgoblin and having a familiar pickpocket the boots, then moving to the other area while the familiar stays out so they never actually enter your inventory until you've got the second copy..

That's what I'm talking about. His dialogue and the journal description specifically say the South of Beregost hobgoblins, so why even allow the Ulcaster hobgoblins to ever drop it? Just replace that one particular South of Beregost hobgoblin with a HOBGOBZH.cre that for sure has BOOT02ZH.itm instead of bothering with this silly scripted nonsense that can change where the boots can drop. It's a pretty bizarre solution.

2 hours ago, NdranC said:

Yeah I already got the boots from south of Beregost (I always keep them and kill Zhurlong). I'm not sure about any other pair since this is the first time I've gotten more than one. So it's intended for them to be different? It's a little bit jarring since when you read the description it's intended as the same item.

Yes...I suppose it's out of some desire to not let the player return any old pair of Boots of Stealth but rather specifically Zhurlong's boots. I don't know why BOOT02ZH would ever appear on anybody but the South of Beregost hobgoblins, seeing as that's where Zhurlong specifically mentions losing them, but for sanity's sake, it's better not to question the thought processes behind a number of things that Beamdog has done to these games. Anyways, I think I got confused here: it seems likely that Nadarin dropped BOOT02.itm (boots that grant 40% Move Silently) while the pair you got much earlier in the game are BOOT02ZH.itm (20% Move Silently and 15% Hide in the Shadows). That would make much more sense than anything else that I can think of. Perhaps I should make a tweak to copy BOOT02.itm over BOOT02ZH.itm for consistency's sake? It's not as though their strength or function is much different from each other, and it doesn't seem as though BOOT02ZH.itm has a different description that specifically mentions Zhurlong, so...

There's another hobgoblin at Ulcaster that has an additional pair, so I'm usually more than happy to let Zhurlong keep his boots.

3 hours ago, NdranC said:

They seem different. He has boot02.itm but they are called Boots of Stealth instead of the Worn Whispers.

nadari.cre 1.11 kB · 0 downloads

 

EDIT: Different question. There is an NPC called Quoningar, he wants a Potion of Mind Focusing. Is there a potion in IR/IRR that would satisfy this quest?

EDIT2: nvm I figured it out, it's the potion of restoration. If it's not too hard it might be worth it to update the dialog with the correct potion name.

 

BOOT02ZH are an EE creation used for completing Zhurlong's quest that are dropped by one of two Boots of Stealth-wearing hobgoblins out in the wilderness (I think one in Ulcaster Ruins, and another...somewhere else, maybe south of Beregost). From what I understand, it is scripted so that BOOT02 is replaced with BOOT02ZH for the first of those two hobgoblins you happen to run into, while the second one will simply drop BOOT02.itm. Did you run into either of those hobgoblins before now?

I think the Quoningar potion quest is added by BG1 Unfinished Business. Should probably look into a text replacement nevertheless.

@NdranC

Can you give me a copy of NADARI.cre? Curious to see what item code is in his inventory.

2 hours ago, NdranC said:

I'm not sure if this is intended but I pickpocketed this guy

 

He is an npc inside one of the warehouses in BG city. Anyway I pickpocketed the Boots of Stealth. They look like the vanilla version of them instead of the IR Worn Whispers, both in their description and effect.

Nadarin (NADARI.CRE) gives Boots of Stealth out as a reward for clearing his basilisk quest (assuming you roll a high reaction). In BG1EE, the item code is BOOT02.itm, which is simply the standard item code that IR/R uses. I just checked an EET game, and it's still BOOT02.itm, so it would seem some other mod has changed the item code to something that is not BOOT02.itm.

2 hours ago, pochesun said:

No thx  I guess things better leave as they are

Glad it will be fixed since Haste potion seemed too OP. Does it mean that effect from Potion of Speed will be also dispelled by things like Carsomyr etc from now on?

No, the effects of potions will remain immune to generic dispelling. Some potions can still be removed by more specific counters (e.g. Breach taking down the various potions of elemental resistance).

4 hours ago, pochesun said:

Regarding how Haste and Slow interract: Its not working quite the way you described, they dont override each other equally.

If my party is prebuffed with Haste spell and opponent cast Slow on my characters then 2 things happen: first Haste spell will be dispelled (100% guaranteed) from all my characters, second - then every character is checked for save vs Polymorph throws and those who failed get slowed, those who dont fail - just remain the same (not slowed, not hasted). Slow is not applied guaranteed (!). And i do like that randomness, its kinda fun and i dont think its required to be mended or altered in anyway. 

Different thing happens when my party enters the fight without any prebuffs and my opponent cast Slow spell on my party and then i cast Haste - Haste will apply on all my party members guaranteed (!). Basically Haste countering Slow is way more effective then visa versa. Thats why i said Haste > Slow, kinda unfair

Your description sounds about the same as mine, only that I failed to communicate Slow's...er, slow effect being subject to a saving throw. If you want to make it more 'fair', I could modify Haste to require your characters fail a saving throw to apply, .

I've taken a look at Potion of Speed, and it specifically gives immunity to the arcane spell Slow. Though the description of Potion of Speed mentions that it cannot be dispelled, when this is said throughout IR/SR, it should mean by way of a generic dispel (e.g. Dispel/Remove Magic, or Carsomyr's Dispelling property), not something like Breach (or in this case, Slow). I've always intended for Potion of Speed to be countered by Slow, so I will be removing that, thanks for reporting it!

4 hours ago, pochesun said:

@Bartimaeus wanted to ask you about slow/haste iterraction. As far as i understand Slow spell can either negate effect of Haste spell (so they cancel each other) or if a target fails save vs Breath - in addition can counter it and make the target slowed. I really like that. But when target gets slowed first via Slow spell and then i cast Haste spell on it - target always becomes hasted. So basically Haste > Slow?  Kinda unfair  

Also absolutely broken thing in my opinion - if my character imbibes Potion of speed then this character basically becomes immune to Slow spell for 1 turn - when Slow is casted on this character - nothign happens, haste effect persists.

Slow/Haste: They both override each other equally. That is to say, a character who is currently affected by Slow who has Haste cast upon them will have the Slow dispelled and the Haste will apply, while a character who is currently affected by Haste who has Slow cast upon them will have the Haste dispelled and the Slow will apply. Though with a caveat that I just noticed: a Hasted character will always have their Haste dispelled by Slow even if they resist the saving throw (or make their magic resistance check!). I'm not sure if that last bit is really intended or not, and I'm not sure what I'd like to do about it.

Potion of Speed: Is this IRR's Potion of Speed? It should be treated the same as Haste, I think.

1 hour ago, pochesun said:

I found an interesting interraction. If a creature covered by Obscuring Mist spell is attacked  from a distance with missile weapon (bow for instance) then the attacker receives -4 penalty to attack rolls, but if the creature covered by Obscuring Mist is protected by any antiblind effect (in my case Helm of the Watcher) and is attacked by missile from a distance then the attack is performed with no penalty  Its kinda similar to situation with rogues that can set traps when they are blinded while enemy enemy is in the vicinity. Overall - pretty insteresting mechanic   

You know, I could swear I've noticed this problem a few times before, but I don't know why I've never fixed it until now. Thanks for bringing it up again.

On 5/4/2023 at 8:24 PM, NdranC said:

I remember 4 years ago we had a conversation about imported items, and how if you import the Claw to BG2 you would end up with 2 Claws in your game. You mentioned you were considering disabling the importing mechanic and force the choice to always be the same. Did that ever happen? Any changes to the items that show up in BG2 from the imported list?

No, I don't think I ever made any changes there. Don't believe I ever reached a good decision on what exactly I wanted to do.

2 hours ago, FixTesteR said:

Yeah ... but why then not +4 to ranged attack, too? Maybe the answer is already in your post but I just fail to see it.

I would presume because being ethereal at range doesn't make any material difference versus not being ethereal at range, so where would any benefit come from? Dodge, deflect, or block the projectile as per usual.

On 5/4/2023 at 9:47 AM, pochesun said:

@Bartimaeus have you managed top check Wraithform? I think it grants +4 bonus to Thac0 for projectiles also. Is it supposed to be this way or its a bug?

Yeah, it does look like it's just a generic THAC0 bonus instead of specifically a melee THAC0 bonus, will fix, thanks!

10 hours ago, pochesun said:

Still the bonus Thac0 +4 remains permanent and i assume also applies to projectile attacks (like darst, for instance), though description says "any melee attack..." Is it supposed to be this way?

If by "permanent", you mean "for the duration of the spell", then yes. The THAC0 bonus applying to ranged weapons would be an error, though.

10 hours ago, pochesun said:

Regarding status: Last time i fresh installed BG with mods was 2 months ago, maybe something changed since then or some additions were made to mastery version. I only use Tweaks Anthology (nothing relating to spells, just some charachters different locations and maxed HP), SRR, IRR and SCS, nothing else. On my installation its says "Spell Immunity". I dunno, i will check it again when i fresh instlal  the mods again and tell you if it gets fixed.

No changes with regards to the character status names have happened in forever, so one of those is changing them. Not sure which.

Yeah, the player can have a pile of mages in their party, can choose their spellbook memorizations, and heck, even if they choose wrongly, they can just decide to fix it and try again. The AI, on the other hand, gets what it gets, and if it can't dispel a Spell Turning, welp, what is it gonna do? Spell Turning just puts the AI into really tough spots.

I wouldn't be surprised if the sticking point that made it necessary to get rid of Spell Turning was the AoE Spell Deflection component though. I said it would leave a gap in a mage's defenses earlier, but actually what happens is that nothing is reflected and AoE spells are simply deflected as if you were using a less powerful Spell Deflection instead. A few fireballs and enemies' Spell Turnings are absorbed without ever having reflected anything. Which...may be better than simply letting them get through, probably, but still not ideal.

as someone who listens to a lot of audiobooks, I have to tell you

an AI impression of David Warner is legitimately better to listen to than the majority of actual real human readers for audiobooks, and this may prove incredible if the right companies can license the right voices

it's not nearly a perfect impression by any means, but it's still better

3 hours ago, pochesun said:

The odd thing to me that Wraithform spell description does not mention any bonuses to Thac0 so i guess it should be mentioned so it wont be misleading  

I guess i framed it poorly also, let me rephrase it: what i meant was that a hidden or invisible creature performs any melee attack that creature receives +4 Thac0 bonus to that attack (only to that attack). Obviously if a creature remains hidden or invisible all other attacks will be performed by that creature with + 4Thac0 bonus also. But, as far as i know, this bonus +4 Thac0 is not a permanent state by any means. SO i assumed since Wraithform kinda (sort of) turns a mage into a creature without any discernable form then this mage can get similar +4 bonus to attack while being in this form - that i can understand. The thing that i failed to understand was why that + 4 bonus to Thac0 is permanent (state like effect). Thats why i think this should be mentioned in description to avoid misunderstandings.

Assuming you're using SRR (you are posting in the SRR thread!), it should. Taken straight from the arcane.tra file where descriptions are pulled from during installation:

"When this spell is cast, the wizard and all of their gear become insubstantial. As an incorpreal creature, the caster moves silently and cannot be heard or backstabbed, and is vulnerable only to magical attacks of +1 enchantment or better (or by creatures otherwise able to affect those vulnerable only to magical weapons). Non-damaging spell effects affect the caster normally unless they require corporeal targets to function (e.g. Polymorph Other, Flesh to Stone, Disintegrate, and Implosion) or create a corporeal effect that incorporeal creatures would normally be unaffected by (e.g. Entangle, Grease, and Web).

While in wraith form, the caster also has a base AC of 4 and is immune to the effects of disease and poison, but is unable to cast spells. Any melee attack made while in wraith form is considered a melee touch attack (+4 bonus to THAC0), while projectiles become corporeal as soon as they are fired. The transformation lasts for the duration of the spell or until successfully dispelled, but cannot be used in conjunction with other shapeshifting spells such as Polymorph Self and Shapechange. Multiple castings of this spell and Ghostform are not cumulative."

A number of spells use similar verbiage, e.g. Phantom Blade: "Strength modifiers do not apply to THAC0 or damage, and attacks with the shadow blade are considered to be melee touch attacks (+4 bonus to THAC0)". If it does not mention it, some other mod has overwritten Wraithform's description.

Spell Deflection: Do keep in mind that you can run Minor, normal, and Greater Spell Deflection all at the same time - a Secret Word will only take down one of them. Can't run multiple instances of the same one, though.

3 hours ago, pochesun said:

Forgot to add. The game uses the same icon: icons of Sepll Immunity (from original game) and Dispelling Screen are identical. Its just that in my current game i have a status (at charachter information page) that says "spell Immunity" instead of "Dispelling screen".

I just did a fresh install of SRR on a copy of BG2EE. Not sure what's happened in your game that strings have seemingly gotten overwritten.

1 hour ago, jmerry said:

Incidentally, patch 2.6 changed this behavior. Now, turning effects can only bounce a spell twice. If a vanilla Elder Orb casts Minor Spell Turning and follows up with a Cause Serious Wounds ray against a PC with the Shield of Balduran equipped, that ray will bounce off the shield back to the beholder, bounce off the MST (exhausting it) back to the PC, and hit the PC for 17 points of magic damage.

That's pretty funny. Probably won't make a huge difference in the grand scheme of things for the poor beholders against that silly shield, but...

17 hours ago, pochesun said:

Also, i wanted to ask why Spell Turning was removed from the game by SR? Seems like very fun spell to play with.

I don't know the official reasoning for it on the part of Demigrvs, but I have a few theories:
1. There's no way to have the "Spell Deflection Blocks AoE Spells" component work with it, I think, leaving the AI with a major gap in their defenses if they choose to memorize this instead of Spell Deflection.
2. The AI doesn't typically have all the tools that the player does: if the AI doesn't have an antimagic spell that can dispel it, its only options are to either avoid the affected character (if it has other targets available!) or to continue to cast magic at them and possibly get themselves blown up. Neither of these are great options.
3. AI will presumably choose to blow themselves up if you aren't using SCS AI.
4. It can cause dumb stuff like instantly exhausting the Spell Turning if two casters both have it running.

17 hours ago, pochesun said:

Also wanted to ask why Wraithform spell grants +4 bonus to Thac0 while active. I presume because it turns caster into incorporeal form which is akin to invisible (maybe) and every attack from invisibility is performed with 4 bonus to Thac0 and since Wraithform is a state effect it also gives the same "attack from invisibility" state effect? Am i wrong about it ?  

A number of spells give that "melee touch attack" +4 THAC0 bonus, and I have to be honest, I'm not really sure what the rationale behind it is exactly, but it's a convenient excuse for making summoned weapons and miscellaneous spells like Wraithform a little more powerful.

On a side-note, I actually didn't know the invisibility state gave a +4 THAC0 bonus. That should really be noted in the description of at least second level Invisibility, where it would seem to be the most relevant.

17 hours ago, pochesun said:

I just noticed that Dispelling Screen imparts "spell immunity" status in charachter information screen (where all stats are and all). I presume, it happens because Dispelling Screen spell was introduced instead of Spell Immunity spell. Not sure if its important at all  Maybe it should be this way.

I thought it used the icon of Spell Immunity but actually said "Dispelling Screen".

Unholy Word: From deafness to silence? But...it's Unholy Word! The entire idea is that it's something you hear, . I can see where you're coming from though, the design of this spell is a bit...difficult to balance. Arcane spellcasters shouldn't be quite as affected from it if you have the 'Spell Deflection blocks AoE spells' component installed, though - sure, you can hit them with it once when their spell protections are down, but assuming you're using SCS, you can't just Holy Word right at the beginning of a fight and make a big group of mages all useless. I never really thought about the fact that a mage can vocalize through silence but not deafness.

Spellstrike: You know, I couldn't ever really put it into words, but I never really liked the idea of Spellstrike giving spell failure, and I think you just made me realize what it is: there's no counter for it. It doesn't matter how powerful of a spellcaster you are, how high your magic resistance is, or what protections you have running*, a spellcaster is just...straight up disabled with no counter by Spellstrike, and you have to just sit there and take it, and if you're a player that can feasibly cast multiple of them in a row, an enemy spellcaster just has...no recourse whatsoever. That's not really very cool.

*Okay, technically, I think Spell Shield will absorb a Spellstrike, but Spell Shield is so easily done away with via a Secret Word that it's barely worth mentioning. I'd actually be more in favor of making Spellstrike kill Spell Shield and the other spell protections as its "unique" factor rather than doing the silly spell failure thing...buuut I'm not sure how SCS AI feels about that.

Dispelling Screen: Don't think this one will change, think it would make it way too unattractive. Maybe a simpler tweak would be to reduce its AoE down to 10' radius (size of a Skull Trap) from 15' (Fireball), making it a bit more difficult to effectively use in an already raging battle.

On 4/15/2023 at 11:01 AM, NdranC said:

I just checked and this seems to be an issue in the base EET install (technically it has bg1 unfinished business, ascension, rr, transitions and bg1npc), maybe even base BGEE although I didn't check. What was the weidu command to search for all the mods that have modified a specific file?

The changelog tool can be found here: https://github.com/InfinityMods/WeiDU-FileChangelog

18 hours ago, NdranC said:

Does IR or IRR remove Lothander's boots of speed? I can't remember is this was the case last time I played but I killed him after he gave me the antidote like I remember doing and he didn't drop them.

I think so, part of a cleanup of weird/inexplicable duplicates I did at some point. But...sometimes, I feel like I should probably revert ones like this, where it's obviously never intended that you kill Lothander in the first place, where a normal player would never find the duplicate anyways - removing Boots of Speed from him is really just putting a damper on the fun of the more exploity players who just want their cheese.