Roxanne

In entry #3 above you find a link to (one of) a fix for the GoG/steam problem, another option is on bean dog. Once EET comes out it will be moddable and allow you to install converted mods. For the BWS you can study the discussion on SHS. its worked on and probably ready in time.

BGT worked around the issue of *patching* the game parts together with adding a short cutscene of your capture. Then CtB tried to fill the gap between BG1 and BG2 with some flashback cutscenes and CtB scores mod. Yes, it worked but always there were some missing parts, same for the BG2 to ToB transition. EET really tries to make it a continuous game, both technically and story wise. SoD fits in well, it gives Irenicus the chance not to just jump out of nowhere but to spy out the hero of Baldur's Gate and decide to lay the trap for him/her. It also gives a number of NPCs chance to develop further and to provide more meaningful transitions into BG2. And like K4thos pointed out - it makes EET a much better modding platform with a consistent set of resources and references for the whole extended trilogy + IWD. The scenario for not including SoD into EET would mean to disrupt all of this and create two games (one with and one without SoD) and a lot of work for all modders to work around the gap (or ignore it and just provide mods for one of them.) You can argue that the game without SoD as a trilogy would simply remain BGT (which is not gone - it sure will stay for a long time still, with a large number of mods only available there but not - yet or never - in EET).

In the end it is for the EET author to decide - however, from the discussions we had, I understand that there is also a technical background, as EET requires the v2.0 improvements and they come with SoD in package. But you can of course use the current 0.9 beta version of EET and you will have the game you look for (even if the version is not the complete EET envisioned it is a playable game - I did it from Candlekeep to ToB end and it works.)

I already started modding it for EET (when that comes) - with K4thos unzip tool published on these website pages this is no problem. https://github.com/K4thos/UnzipSoD Like many others I have no intention to use it as *extension* like it currently is published (you import your party like in old BG2). But when EET comes in a little while and makes it all one game, then SoD really functions as the link between BG1 and BG2 and provides a much better plot and feeling why you end up in Amn after Sarevok. You do not have to like every side-quest or new bean dog NPC, but from the concept in an overall ONE GAME like EET it will have its place. And forget all the big advertisements as well as reviews from people who did not even play it. It is neither the Biggest Thing since the game came out nor is it as as bad as the rest of bean dog's addons to the game. Once EET has integrated it, it may feel like it really belongs there. And like in the old game, it may again be the modders that will provide this integration by having their NPCs and plots continue in the new extension.

You could make an example install and ... ouh yeah I think it was you that did, just didn't maintain it, and wanted to get rid of the whole thing. You do know that you just throw your shit over the 80% of the moding community ? Good job. Imp, in case you did not notice yet - he and his two buddies have to fill their weekly quota of insults to modders...

Sounds to me that you confuse the NPCs character to what happens in battle.The NPCs battle script and override&dialog script are two different things. In a override script you can do this, but ONLY in case it's ran very limited times in game, not every 4-6 seconds... cause that would be a OP cheat. You can't do that in battle script(in Near Infinity it's called "Class Script") either*, for the same reason, but that can be changed by the player so they can pick a better one that allows them to actually do things as with the new kit. It sounds like your NPC is the mother of the Player, trying to hold the little baby's hand a little TOO MUCH. See the players have until now, been able to hold their own without your cleric, hows yours going to change that ? *The only caveat to this is that, for example the SCS allows limited use of this cause the enemy also can do the same thing(and it doesn't use the Force... either, but the other instant casting), so as to not break it's own rule, the player is allowed to a premade list of allowed easy to use actions by the SCSs attached scripts, and their quick action keys. I personally never use them though. Thank you - thank you - thank you!!! You put me back on the right track. I made a big mistake with interpreting the tests I made in the wrong way. In fact everything works fine. When I changed my priestess of Mystra to a priestess of Talos, now why should she ever act like a priestess of Mystra again. No, of course not - a priestess of Talos never will get quests from the temple of Mystra - she will not constantly battle with followers of Talos (of course not). She will never receive any items or abilities from the Goddess of All Magic. Ergo, her behaviour after the change is exactly consequental to what the player wants from a priestess of Talos. And the same would be true for the other option, priestess of Lathander. Testing my other NPCs becomes obsolete, they will follow the same pattern and be what the player wants them to be. You change the god she follows and of course you change her plot, to expect something different was my big mistake here. PS - I forgot to report that the neutral good priestess of Mystra nevertheless had the option to become a priestess of Talos (restricted to evil alignments??).

Sounds to me that you confuse the NPCs character to what happens in battle.The NPCs battle script and override&dialog script are two different things. In a override script you can do this, but ONLY in case it's ran very limited times in game, not every 4-6 seconds... cause that would be a OP cheat. You can't do that in battle script(in Near Infinity it's called "Class Script") either*, for the same reason, but that can be changed by the player so they can pick a better one that allows them to actually do things as with the new kit. It sounds like your NPC is the mother of the Player, trying to hold the little baby's hand a little TOO MUCH. See the players have until now, been able to hold their own without your cleric, hows yours going to change that ? *The only caveat to this is that, for example the SCS allows limited use of this cause the enemy also can do the same thing(and it doesn't use the Force... either, but the other instant casting), so as to not break it's own rule, the player is allowed to a premade list of allowed easy to use actions by the SCSs attached scripts, and their quick action keys. I personally never use them though. Thank you - thank you - thank you!!! You put me back on the right track. I made a big mistake with interpreting the tests I made in the wrong way. In fact everything works fine. When I changed my priestess of Mystra to a priestess of Talos, now why should she ever act like a priestess of Mystra again. No, of course not - a priestess of Talos never will get quests from the temple of Mystra - she will not constantly battle with followers of Talos (of course not). She will never receive any items or abilities from the Goddess of All Magic. Ergo, her behaviour after the change is exactly consequental to what the player wants from a priestess of Talos. And the same would be true for the other option, priestess of Lathander. Testing my other NPCs becomes obsolete, they will follow the same pattern and be what the player wants them to be. You change the god she follows and of course you change her plot, to expect something different was my big mistake here.

If you're talking about NPC_EE, from what I understand, it only affects a few specific NPCs, much fewer than L1NPCs. The biggest difficulty in making a mod like L1NPCs that would affect any NPC is handling all of the special situations where an NPC might have custom items or scripts that expect them to be a specific class (or one of several classes, like Kulyok's Xan or Cmorgan's Aran). It's hard to find out all of the peculiarities of every single NPC. (I think that's why L1NPCs has a thread for NPC authors to submit their approval along with additional info like custom items.) It's also hard to test a mod like this, because to witness all of the content of all of the NPC mods would require a huge number of runs through the game. And maybe changing X from a Wizard to a Sorcerer doesn't cause any problems, but changing X from a Wizard to a Bard does. It would be completely fair to blame that mod if it got something wrong. Players should know not to expect miracles and that if they are using a mod that affects NPC X and they encounter a problem, then one possibility is that NPC X is to blame and the other is that the mod affecting NPC X is to blame. Even though I am constantly accused to make statements about mods I have not tested here are my findings from (testing) the mod in question. The selection of kits for single class and multiclass NPC works fine, you get the expected results. When you select a spellcaster (I only looked at mage or priest) of any type, regardless of multiclass or single class, the change removes whatever initial abilities/spells the NPC has and replaces them with features from the chosen new one. As such it works as expected. When levelling up, new abilities gained are from the new kit, just as expected. This is what I tried to express with saying *they will work as the thralls the player wants them to be.* If, however, an NPC would require some initial ability or some later-on-gained ability in the context of its own mod, this feature will be missing and the quest or whatever will not be solved, this is what I tried to express with *mod character does no longer work within its own quests.* Fact is that this is only testable in many cases by playing the NPC mod until some event and knowing what to expect at a given point, i.e. the changed NPC will appear to be working well until you sooner or later come to the point where the missing ability/spell/item usage or whatever plays a role. (Using my own fighter/cleric NPC the test was quite easy, she fails within 20 minutes of gameplay as her healing abilities were removed by the kit change.) And I completely disagree with the Imp to use ForceSpell as an alternative - enemy spellcasters may do that but your own NPC doing such things?? (Imoen vs Irenicus is not a valid example as this is a cutscene and you cannot verify whether Imoen has the spell she casts at that moment). And of course this is completely irrelavant for NPCs that have no such events in their mod (which is the majority of NPCs).

Meaning ? That sounds very much as "if imoen is not a mage, I'll kill 90% of this mod content cause I just can." a thread. And not, "If Imoen is not a mage, so what, she'll still talk as if she was." -like every one of the other mods do. Cause they don't script idiot checks of the character classes but only if the wished person is conceptually present(via death variable), in what ever incarnations they decide to be in today in this age. Again - this is not about critisizing or preventiing mods to do something to other mods. This is all about gaining information about what kind of changes are done to mod-provided creatures. Because, is something seems to be bugged in your mod, people will make a report to the modmaker - so it is good to know that the source of a specific problem may lie somewhere else but in the mod itself. Just one recent example - some mod added random walk to all creatures it could find in the game meeting specific criteria, including mod-provided quest creatures. So there were reports about two mod NPCs shouting all across the city (they were no longer standing side by side but wandering all over town) or guards having left their post to take a stroll. You do not get to the source of such problems unless you know that a mod introducing random walk exists. This is the only reason to see what a new mod adds to the game. Here, Level1NPCs had a defined list of NPCs it could affect while the new mod is a global tool. I understand what it does and can take it into account when troubleshooting. This is the only reason for having asked for information here. Nothing else.

The Readme already says that - this is just a tool and the use/mis-use is up to the player. My questions were just for information and not *to declare war on mods or tools*, but just to see what to expect in the new EET environment. Anyone is free to change their NPCs in the way they want and use them as they wish. Even NPCs depending on their scripts stats, equipment etc are not excluded, they will simply not work within their mod context anymore but they will work as the thralls the player wants them to be.

The abilities and stats are important for the re-kitted characters too. Say, is there a specific reason why LR Irenicus could not be one of the 8 specialist wizards ? He has the stats for most of them, or even a Sorcerer. The others are also likely going to have similar things... say Tiax class, why not give him a kit too... rat catcher, or something to do with Cyrics clerics, cause in my opinion he is not wise enough to actually be a real cleric.. these are small tweaks that a mod like the NPC_EE can do, without making any of them too OP. The ShadowKeeper and NI usage has the damaging effect that actually if you use them, the character is likely to going to get a head more than if its class/kit is set by a mod... the reason being that you might not want to reduce the 2 extra hitpoint, notice them and so forth... the whole process is actually very work intense. But if it's done by a mod... you pretty much have to do a good job or your mod get's the OP flag. I give the explanation so you can go and proceed with the bug checking and reporting them here and elsewhere. Yes, this is me: And respect. The questions I had were not even related to any existing mod but were focussed on some code K4thos was suggesting for an EET conversion...so you are (intenionally?) miles off from the topic.

You might not notice it, but the original code kinda did the same thing. As this is a mod that applies a new kit to the NPC, you need to remove the old, aka effects that it might have so the new ones can be applied without the old one still haunting you. Just check the first spoilers.1. And ? 2. That's usually the best way to ensure that the player can set the proficiency etc after level 1. And in most cases it also fixes the save throws, and other things ... when you level up. This is in BG2, so the char will level up automatically ... well after the player gets the char, and levels them up, as they are well over the 5000 xp that any xptable ruleset might need to level them up from 1. 3. That's what you do with mods like this. 4. Yeah... as it's not the old kit anymore, but a new one. It's very much like the Level 1 NPCs, but to EE games and with far more limitations. But you hate that mod... so what, it's not like everyone else does. After all it brings more replay-ability to the 15 year old game. No one is updating the Level 1 NPCs .. cause it's quite complicated for most of us. Hey, I do not hate mods...some mods have side effects not intended by the author - like changing mod-added creatures into something else. Branwen may not be the best example here, but there are mod characters that are very much depending on their stats, effects, abbilities and kits to work within their own scripts and plots - take Tsujatha, Longer Road Irenicus, Tiax, Ajantis etc. Of course its a players choice to do what they want - if not by mod they can tweak in shadowkeeper or NI. Just if you mod another modders resources you should advertise that and also take all the responsibility to handle the complaints if that mod character does no longer work within its own quests. PS - I was not critisizing any mod - I was just asking some questions for understanding. Thank you for answering them.

@ K4thos, just to understand what your proposed code for EET does - (hopefully I completely misunderstand it) - You take a creature added by a mod, in this case o#bran (appearing in BG2 part) - You set her level for first class at 0x234 to 1 - You change her kit assignment - You remove effects added by the original mod and put in effects not intended by the mod I am sure, that I make some error here in my interpretation, I am just not sure which.

The problem with this code is that is is everywhere...copied and copied and copied by kit-mod makers again and again. As documented here http://www.shsforums.net/topic/56960-bgtee/page-6?do=findComment&comment=584660 it even comes up once again in brandnew EET.

Actually I was reporting here all the experiences made with the big mods especially converted for EET, not just TDDz. And some observations (like items or XP are mostly relevant when you play the mods in the EET global context). But of course I will stop this immediately.

Update Did another episode Purskal Works perfectly, no issues from the mod itself Again, final XP reward should be just 1/10th given that you already get all the XP from the monsters encountered One issue related rather to EE than to the mod - the final showdown is a long cutscene with a lot of overhead text - this is not really useable due to the ultra-poor way the EE handles cutscenes - hopefully there is a solution to this global problem with the next BG2EE version, otherwise a lot of mods need to be newly written in the long term (and a lot of beandog's own stuff as well). Update Also now finished Eshpurta complete episode - works perfectly from beginning to end. Tapanasacar could use some finetuning, he is completely overpowered for BG2 unless you do the same to your own party - which does not fit into the EET context. (Anyway you have the option to leave him out without losing any content - it may just give the mod as a whole a reputation that it does not deserve.) In summary, the part of TDD already available for EET through the TDDz works fine. I sincerely hope the rest will follow. Thanks a lot to shadowlich for the work. New version TDDZ v.1.1. is now released, see release notes here; http://www.shsforums.net/topic/58521-mod-the-darkest-day-z/page-2?do=findComment&comment=587490 Adds new episodes from Riatavin and beginning of final quest (plus Robilard NPC option). I finished first of the Riatavin episodes, Orgoth's Tower, flawless conversion for EET. One minor issue for soldiers in area DDCT33.are with script demgrdrx.bcs IF See([0.0.DEMONIC]) Range([0.0.DEMONIC],15) THEN RESPONSE #100 Attack(NearestEnemyOfType([0.0.DEMONIC])) END They just stand around without attacking nearby demons, maybe distance trigger needs to be increased? o

Update Did another episode Purskal Works perfectly, no issues from the mod itself Again, final XP reward should be just 1/10th given that you already get all the XP from the monsters encountered One issue related rather to EE than to the mod - the final showdown is a long cutscene with a lot of overhead text - this is not really useable due to the ultra-poor way the EE handles cutscenes - hopefully there is a solution to this global problem with the next BG2EE version, otherwise a lot of mods need to be newly written in the long term (and a lot of beandog's own stuff as well). 0

Update Did another episode Purskal Works perfectly, no issues from the mod itself Again, final XP reward should be just 1/10th given that you already get all the XP from the monsters encountered One issue related rather to EE than to the mod - the final showdown is a long cutscene with a lot of overhead text - this is not really useable due to the ultra-poor way the EE handles cutscenes - hopefully there is a solution to this global problem with the next BG2EE version, otherwise a lot of mods need to be newly written in the long term (and a lot of beandog's own stuff as well). 0

0

0

I am testing a lot of mods as I go through the whole EET trilogy to test the re-build Sandrah mod but I am still in the BG1 part of it (as this is the hardest bit to do integration with). And NO - I will definitely NOT install, play or test FFT after that very ugly clash with the mod's author on SHS (http://www.shsforums.net/topic/58508-permission-to-continue-fft/?do=findComment&comment=586764) last week.

Those two areas (they make the *Nine Hells* episode of the mod) always appeared as an oddity - they may very well originate from a very old version of the mod or even some older source. They are not really connected to the rest - but the way the mod is constructed you need to pass through them to get to the real quest, unless you decide to modify the mod in a way that this episode is left out (doing this would in deed add to the mod, as this initial overpowered episode has brought the mod a large part of its negative reputation). But maybe this suggestion is more than you may venture to do. Finished the remainder of Drizzt Saga without further issues. Except for that *Hell Episode* the converted mod workds well with EET.

Those two areas (they make the *Nine Hells* episode of the mod) always appeared as an oddity - they may very well originate from a very old version of the mod or even some older source. They are not really connected to the rest - but the way the mod is constructed you need to pass through them to get to the real quest, unless you decide to modify the mod in a way that this episode is left out (doing this would in deed add to the mod, as this initial overpowered episode has brought the mod a large part of its negative reputation). But maybe this suggestion is more than you may venture to do.

nah, it's simply bug in the mod. Not related to EET. Same thing happens when the mod is installed on vanilla BG:EE. I am halfways through Drizzt Saga by now and all else is fine until now - so it just affects those creatures that come with F_6666.are.

all creatures with F_ prefix have correct names in my game. Please check the problematic CRE filename and than see if the problem shows up in NI. Yes, I checked and confirm that the F_xxxx creatures are correct. It affects the other ones, e.g. all in area F_6666. I could identify Belhilfet = #bel.cre, I checked changelogs for both BGEE and BG2EE but nothing changed it. The other ones I cannot even identify, as they all appear as *none* in NI, and their names are random strings from dialogues. Maybe it is the way they are attached to the F_6666.are file? Looking at Drizztsaga/cre it seems they were not part of the Drizzt mod but have a different source and Drizzt just used them - that other source may not (yet) be part of EET? Anyway, the creatures exist, there is no CtD for missing cre/animation or such. They also have the animations/abilities/XPs/dropped items etc they used to have in BGT. I assume it is something in the way these very old mods were constructed which is a bit different from what we do now...