Salk

I don't think it'd be fair to remove the winding for enemy Berserkers, although it would be obviously great if the timing for when their rage is activated during the battle could be further perfected. I am not particularly bothered by their drinking a potion or stopping the attack to do anything else. Player-controlled berserkers can do that, after all.

I second the sentiment of Cahir and probably many others. I noticed you have been releasing two very interesting tweaks in the SCS section and while it's very commendable that you produced them I do think they would fit wonderfully in a new version of your Polytweak. It also seem like the most natural thing ever to add new tweaks to an already released modification of yours that is just about that. Please consider updating your modification here, polytope. Thanks!

The original BG hammer for Bassilus was Ashideena. And that was a great weapon for Baldur's Gate 1.

BGT players tastes can vary drastically when it comes to what they'd install so it's difficult for me to suggest a list and at the moment I am not playing the game. About the 2DA tables, yes, that is what I meant with my suggestion. I honestly don't see myself adding any more feature to WTP Familiars in the future. I consider it done, but I think code optimization is still very desirable.

I never tested the EE version so I can't know how well it worked on BGT. Truth to be told, my series of testing was focused almost exclusively on the BG1 part of BGT. About code optimization, I am quite sure it'd be possible to create an array for the level up process similar to how Bioware does with kits but my WeiDU knowledge is practically non-existent so I never dared delving into it.

A pleasure knowing that some other people enjoy this modification, @artyfox I am sure there is lots of space for optimization in the code. Originally, it was not my intention to be the coder and I am sure there is vast space for improvements. I doubt @flamewing will work on his fork again. He's been quite unresponsive and didn't pop in here again for a long time now. So for what it is worth, I would be glad to let you maintain the EE version, if you like. I did make a few changes to my local version of WTP Familiars but it's only about small revisions to the familiar dialogues.

Thanks for the suggestions, y'all! This has been done.

Good job, artyfox. Thank you for helping with EE support.

Please Endarire do not spread such blatant disinformation. It's the second time you post to write that Tome&Blood include this modification or something similar. It's completely false. Not to mention the author is myself and it doesn't seem like I'm so inactive.

The guy in charge of the EE port has not been active for quite some time. I am the author of the original non-EE version and never met that kind of issue during my testing but I am not even sure what you mean with "In BG2:EE this problem doesn't offer". You mean it happens in BG:EE but not BG2:EE?

Hello, Daulmakan! It's a duplicate of a vanilla item (AMUL13.ITM). I created a container and put it into it so perhaps I don't need to add any additional flag to this duplicate item of mine?

Well, I noticed that the container added by the EE has the "EE: Don't clear" (6) flag, which I cannot obviously set for the classic game. Does anyone know what happens if I proceed without it? I found an example in the WeiDu documenation about how to add a container to an .ARE file but I am a bit confused by some of the required parameters: INT_VAR fj_loc_x to the X coordinate INT_VAR fj_loc_y to the Y coordinate INT_VAR fj_trap_loc_x to the trap launch X coordinate INT_VAR fj_trap_loc_y to the trap launch Y coordinate What's the difference betwee the first set of X, Y coordinates and the second one? Thanks!

Well, I didn't check this in-game, jastey, I simply opened the BG:EE .ARE file in Near Infinity (AR4300). The three bodies are listed as "Actors" and have no inventory. The item (Amulet) instead is in a container classified as "Pile". One other class for container is "Body" . And that was exactly what I was hoping for. To make one of the three body the container for the amulet. From what I can see inside NI, I don't think that is what Beamdog did. Or am I wrong?

Hello jastey! Yes, of course. I mean that players can use TAB to highlight map areas that are interactable, including containers. There are many such examples in the game. It could be a particular area from a bookshelf, for example. By clicking just there the inventory for that particular area would be displayed and the player would find a book there. Or it could be a hole in a tree in the forest. You click on it and you find a hidden ring of wizardry...

@Daulmakan, thanks for the advice. If I cannot find a way to go for the best solution (see above), then I guess I could follow your advice but the item is not magical. The current flags are: droppable (2), displayable (3) and not copyable (5). I want to make it a plot item so that it wouldn't disappear if spawned but at the same time, for narrative reasons, it cannot be made unsellable. So perhaps there is no possibility this way.

Well, I installed BG:EE to check how they did things there with the Colquetle's Family Amulet and apparently they spawned three dead corpses representing, Mr Colquetle's son, his wife and their child. And they added a container on top of Mr Colquetle's son's body. I think a much more elegant solution would be to make Mr Colquetle's son's body the actual container; we have several examples of something similar being down by Bioware. But unfortunately I have not the skills to implement via WeiDU so if anybody can help me out with this, I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks for the advice, Graion, but I am working on the classic engine.

Thanks for your help, jastey. If the item is a plot item it should not ever disappear from the map though, right? Do you happen to know how to enable the plot item flag via WeiDU? But if I could edit the item into the area file then that'd be great. But I'd need to create a container for it, if I am not mistaken?

Hello! I was wondering if there is a way for me to spawn an item on the ground at certain coordinates. CreateItem() seems to require a creature as parameter. I guess I could spawn a creature with the item in the inventory and then destroy it? Sounds macabre and quite unintuitive though...

Kudos, DavidW! I will love reading through this. Who knows, I might learn to do something before it is too late...

Thanks for your help, jastey.

Hello! I was going through some old coding of mine (for BGT) and part of it was about editing an existing .dlg file (LOTHAN.DLG). And part of such editing was this: APPEND ~lothan~ IF WEIGHT #-1 ~StateCheck(Myself,STATE_CHARMED)~ THEN BEGIN lothannewstate1 SAY @297 IF ~~ THEN DO ~AddexperienceParty(1500) TakePartyItem("SCRLJALA") GiveItem("LOPOTN20",LastTalkedToBy(Myself)) SetGlobal("MarekMove","GLOBAL",1) SetGlobal("LothanderMove","GLOBAL",5) EscapeAreaDestroy(90)~ UNSOLVED_JOURNAL @235 /* ~Find an antidote for poison. Lothander has given us half of the antidote. He told us that the other half is possessed by Marek, who stays at the Blushing Mermaid.~ */ EXIT END IF WEIGHT #-1 ~!HasItem("LOPOTN20",Myself) Global("LothanderMove","GLOBAL",5)~ THEN BEGIN lothannewstate2 SAY @302 IF ~~ THEN DO ~SetGlobal("LothanderSneakAttack","GLOBAL",1) CreateItem("potn10",1,0,0) UseItem("potn10",Myself) Enemy()~ EXIT END END When I checked LOTHAND-DLG inside Near Infinity, I noticed that the new states I added are at the end of the tree. But their WEIGHT is 0 and 1. I obviously intended for the CHARMED state (State 19 in the image above) to be the first state for the .DLG to check on. In the tree, it does not look like it is so but perhaps the WEIGHT matters and State 19 and 20 (which have weight 0 and 1) are actually verified first? If not, how do I make my added CHARMED state be the very first state being checked on? When I export the edited .DLG file above as .D file, I get the following warning: ////////////////////////////////////////////////// // WARNING: this file contains non-trivial WEIGHTs ////////////////////////////////////////////////// which I assume is due to my messing with the WEIGHTs. State 0 have now in fact Weight 2 and in the D. file there is the following comment with it: /* Triggers after states #: 20 19 even though they appear after this state */ Thanks for your help.

Hello again! There is something that puzzles me a bit and it is the single space that we find after ~ at the beginning of a string when the first character is '. Ex. #2024 ~ 'Tis a hurt of the mind. Only one rich in such powers can heal her.~ This is a consistent occurrence and made me wonder what the reason for needing the initial blank space is. Does anyone know?

Thanks for the suggestion, Cam. I had investigated before posting of course and I knew about the general rule you mentioned. Unfortunately from a cursory glance, it does not seem like it applies here. I will check again tomorrow and see if I can identify a pattern but I am not very hopeful.

I'm trying to figure what kind of standard the BG 2 (EE) text is adopting when it comes to spelling numbers. It seems that any amount of gold is very rarely spelled so I have followed this principle. Numbers seem to be quite consistently used for statistics and percentages as well. The rest (including measurement of time and distance) does not seem to follow a clear-cut pattern. What is the best course of action here?