Angel

I checked the lore on this.  As stats go, BG2 planetars are fairly close to their P&P incarnations except in hit dice (14 for P&P, 25 for BG2) and thac0 (7 for P&P, 5 for BG2).  And yes, P&P planetars do indeed have high rate of regeneration at 4 HP per round, so lore-wise at least the devs got that exactly right.

30 minutes ago, subtledoctor said:

The SFO seems to make mods so... slow... to... install...

The first COPY operation in MiH_EQ takes a solid 10 minutes to work, on 11,000 files. Then it's loaded everything and the rest of the mod moves at a moderate pace. But boy do you need patience for the beginning...

26 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

IMO, it especially sucks for the MIH mods because they come relatively early into the install, and it's a hassle to work around, particularly if you've had to rebuild several times. SCS at least has the decency to come very close to the end of the install where, if nothing has gone wrong up to that point, you're likely in the clear.

I'm working on it, future versions should install faster.  If you are feeling brave you can try to install from my masters, but I wouldn't recommend it for anything other than a test run.

It's not like I can't.  I just dread every single time I have to do it. ^^

On 11/2/2022 at 7:29 PM, CamDawg said:

I think this is worth addressing. It's a problem that players can conceivably run into with only a mod or two, and especially since it can conceivably be fixed with a little IDS padding.

Yep, I have ran into it multiple times.  That's how I discovered Faerie Fire and Dancing Lights even exist in SoD. ^^

On 11/2/2022 at 7:29 PM, CamDawg said:

I'm not as sold on this. Stated at its simplest: modders already work around this, and we risk forcing them to change existing workarounds, so that future mods don't have to use workarounds. Whether we're adding, removing, and/or re-ordering, we're introducing a non-zero chance of breaking a mod--not for a bug fix, but better organized IDS files.

Just as a note, both EET and MiH: F&R contain code to automatically remove unused or duplicated entries from spell.ids.  Doing so has the advantage of freeing up several slots for new spells without hitting the 50+ spells per level bug.

Taerom's dialog is a mess with non-trivial weighting even in an unmodded game.  There is a very good reason why I chose to have my own smith in MiH Item Pack.  It has caused quite a few headaches for The Calling too.  I should know, I was the fool who volunteered to fix it. ^^

I do think we should strive for some sort of consistency at the very least in what does and what doesn't work against certain monsters.  Monsters should not suddenly work differently between BGEE and BG2EE for no good reason.  Yes they are two separate games, but still set in the same world, so I think that world should at the very least be internally consistent.  P&P compliance is a whole different beast and IMHO not the subject for a fix pack.

So I support GENERAL=PLANT, RACE=SHAMBLING_MOUND, CLASS=NONE, GENDER=NEITHER/SUMMONED, SEX=NEITHER.

If this doesn't make it into EEFP I probably will toss it into MiH F&R. ^^

10 minutes ago, jastey said:

There is a German soundset. Do you mean English soundset, or really voiced like ever y first line of dialogue?

Any voice at all would be an improvement.  He's completely silent in English.  But yeah, I mainly meant voiced dialog.

23 hours ago, Guest Morgoth said:

Angel, are you an English native? I'm wondering how good Breagar's translation currently is.

No, I'm not.  I speak English fairly well but it's not my native language, that would be Dutch.

That said, so far I haven't come across any glaring errors.  I wish he was voiced though. ^^

Not a bug per se, but I am a little disappointed that Volo in Saradush has nothing to say about my favorite dwarf warrior.

19 hours ago, CamDawg said:

[bg2] Removing shadow doors after Shade Lord dies added (clearing the one lingering shadow door) - This closes a loophole (who's powering the shadow doors without the Shade Lord?) and is exactly the kind of QoL fix BD would make

Well, I'm a little biased here as this is my fix.  (Although admittedly I nabbed the idea from the Oversights mod.)  Anyway, my reasoning for labeling it a fix instead of a tweak was the same as Cam's, while it's not a technical inconsistency it's definitely an inconsistency in the plot.  Also, why did the devs make it a door if it can never be opened at all?  They could have made it a simple info point, but they went through all the trouble to make it a door, hinting that it was meant to be opened at some point.

19 hours ago, CamDawg said:

[bg, bg2, possibly iwd and pst] ] Gnoll STR boosts - MiH bumps the strength score for some gnolls from 9 to 13 so that they can legally wield their halberds (which require 13 STR). I broadened this into a general search and ran it against BG and BG2, looking for any creature that lacked the stats to wield their weapons. I got ~100 or so hits on both BG and BG2, all for STR. Generally these were minor (generally bumping 9 to somewhere in the 10-13 range) where the change would make no material effect. On the other hand, quite a few creatures use composite  longbows, which would boost the STR up to 18. While this makes no difference when they're using the bow, it's a substantial effect when they swap to melee. So on the one hand I want to fix this, but OTOH following through with consistency has unintended consequences. (Yes, we could swap the composite longbows for something appropriate to their STR, but then we're making negative, material changes to their primary combat capabilities.)

While I am actually not against the idea of raising the strength of appropriate creatures, I can see how this would lead to some backlash.  Perhaps an alternative would be to give them bows appropriate for their strength and then give them a small dex boost to compensate?  ...Mm, I might take that route in my own fixes, something to think about.

By the way, the reason I did this for gnolls and not the others (yet) is because I am considering an Improved Gnolls component for EQ so I was examining their current abilities.  That's also when I stumbled across their alignment inconsistencies and the flindbar issue.

14 minutes ago, Quester said:

How funny then that that's what I ended up giving them, without knowing the PnP rules. I went with spears 2d6, katanas 2d6, and scimitars 1d10. Feels right to me. (My base scimitars do 1d6 but have a 19/20 critical range, per an optional IRR tweak based on 3e).

I found a ruling on katanas, it says it should be 1d12.  I'll put that and the two-handed spear correction in the next version.

It's trickier with scimitars, wakizashi and ninja-to because they all share the same proficiency in BG rules so I can't easily distinguish them.  Scimitars and wakizashi all have 1d8 against both normal and large, but ninja-to are 1d8 versus normal and 1d6 versus large (exactly the opposite of a short sword).  But given that the number of ninja-to is very small, I can do those as single item exceptions.

Seems bastard swords also have an issue similar to spears in BG.  The base damage they use in BG is 2d4/2d8, but that's for two-handed wielding, one-handed they are the same as long swords 1d8/1d12.  But I think Tweak Anthology already addresses that one with its two-handed bastard swords component.

22 minutes ago, subtledoctor said:

  Actually, per PnP rules, two-handed spears like the ones in BG should do 2d6 damage against large creatures. (I strangely don't have the PHB handy but I'm looking at DMGR3 "Arms and Equipment Guide" which I think has the same data.)

I checked, the weapon list in the PHB and DMG are different.  (Or maybe I have different prints, I do not know if 2e was ever revised.)  The DMG mentioned two-handed spears, the PHB does not.

But if I go by that, then the base damage of spears is also wrong.  For two-handed spears it should be 1d6+1, not 1d6.  Something to toss in my Fixes & Restorations, I guess. ^^

1 hour ago, Quester said:

I have edited my local file to increase spears to 1d12, as I think that makes more sense. They should be pretty good against large creatures.

How would I go about adding katanas and scimitars to this? I want to give them a small boost as well.

For katana, item type is 0x14 (large sword) and proficiency 0x5e (katana), for scimitar its 0x14 and 0x5f (scimitar/wakishasi/ninja-to) respectively.  Come to think of it, you should probably install this tweak before any of Tweak Anthology's proficiency system changes.

21 hours ago, DMF said:

This is the P&P description for Spell Invulnerability. From Forgotten Realms Adventures (1990).

Seems underwhelming for a 9th level spell.

Yes, I have the P&P description in the Wizard's Spell Compendium.  I wish I knew what the BG2 devs intended to have it do in-game though.  But unfortunately, the strings related to it in dialog.tlk are incomplete and give no clue.

The options I have been pondering so far are:

• 100% MR and immunity to having it lowered, essentially making the caster immune to any spell that is affected by MR.
• Protection similar to a Scroll of Protection from Magic.  (Current version.)
• Protection similar to a Globe of Invulnerability, but for higher-level spells.

1 hour ago, Quester said:

Definitely a few spellcaster xvarts. I also don't think it's unreasonable to give some of the regular xvarts slings in addition to short swords. Like, maybe 1/5th of them? And make those favor ranged attacks as far as possible. If it's possible to somehow simulate some of them using nets to hinder enemies, that's cool as well (no net animation unfortunately).

The xvart village is actually quite far away, so I doubt anyone reaches it at lvl 1...I know I don't. It would be a very deliberate destination in that case.

https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2022/06/dd-monster-spotlight-who-xvartd.html

Good read there.

Maybe give some of them maces or flails instead of short swords?

Giving them weapons other than short swords doesn't work quite right, they don't have the animations for anything else.  @CamDawg already explored that avenue for one of his mods, and I found it out myself when I tried to give Nexlit the flail +1 that was rusting in the nearby cave.  (Which is why I opted for +1 short sword instead.)

1 hour ago, Quester said:

If it's doable, that would be perfect for both gibberlings and xvarts.

Doable?  Yes.   But it's going to be tricky to keep it from getting out of hand when there are many of them on screen.  I have considered a similar approach for my hairy spiders.

5 hours ago, Quester said:

I think the xvart village could use some more help. Even with your Improved Xvart Village installed it's still pretty much a walk in the park.

I was thinking, kobolds get both commandos, guards, chieftains and shamans (are all those from SCS?), why not add some equivalents for the poor xvarts?

Yes, that's SCS, although I think it in turn borrowed it from Dark Side of the Sword Coast.

5 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

Give them all slings. And double their numbers. Have like 60+ xvarts hurling rocks at your head at the same time.

Heh, I don't want to make it too crazy since you'll typically do this battle at level 1-3.  Currently I make the xvarts around the village 2 HD (xvart2.cre is no stronger than xvart.cre, but is worth 35 xp instead of 15, almost a bug fix this), make Nixlit a 4th level fighter with a magical short sword, and add a bunch more xvarts around the village.

I did hunt down a 2e source on xvarts (Fiend Folio) and it says that they favor horde tactics, sometimes use nets to hinder foes, and some of them are shamans or adepts with 1st and 2nd level spells, so I suppose I could do something with that.

Well, no promises, but I'll see what I can do.  I share the opinion that raising party members feels a little too trivial at times, and adding a bit of a cost could add some spice to the game.

If there is one, I don't know of it.  It's also not trivial to do, since the magic system of BG does not have any provision whatsoever for spells that require components.  Other than removing these spells entirely and replacing it with some sort of dialog (which would require revising a lot of spells and items, both vanilla and mod-added), I don't see any way of achieving this.

EDIT: I thought about it a bit more on my evening walk, and checked the 2e rules on raising the dead.  There are a couple of things that can be done:

• Increase the cost for raising dead party members at temples. (Trivial)
• Restrict which temples even offer resurrection services. (Easy)
• Implement the permanent constitution loss on death under P&P rules. (Easy)
• Implement a resurrection survival chance. (Easy for a flat percentage,  near impossible for actually con-based.)
• Take away the free Rod of Resurrection in Merkath's Lair. (Trivial)
• Reduce the number of charges available to Rods of Resurrection.  (Easy)
• Implement a cost in diamonds, gold or some other item for player-cast spells. (Difficult)

So when you say you wish you wish to make raising the dead more difficult and costly, just how difficult and costly were you thinking exactly?

10 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

The Cure Affliction ability uses op79. It's possible I didn't use... maybe I only thought I did, because the status icon disappeared?

tl;dr: I don't mind the disease at all. It's a good addition. The only thing I would complain about is the short duration of the status icon. I don't know why it is limited to 60 seconds; I assume it is  a mistake. It should probably have timing mode 1 just like the weapon's op78 effects. That way the player can have visual feedback showing whether the character is cured or not, without delving into savegame files.

You're right, the timing mode was incorrect.  Fixed in master.

3 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

Glancing at the weidu.log, probably MiH's "Revised Corporeal Undead" component. I don't think it's an interaction though, I don't have many other mods that would affect it - no SCS Durlag's, no tactics, no aTweaks undead, etc. I'm a big proponent of "choose a mod to change something, and stick with that one mod."

It's by design.  A ghoul lord's bite inflicts a rotting disease that lasts until cured, it doesn't go away with rest.  I'm actually glad to read this as it means my dual wielding hack for claw/claw/bite routines works.  Anyway, a Cure Disease, Neutralize Poison or an Elixir of Health should all do the trick.  I actually toned it down a bit from P&P (Ravenloft MM Compendium I) where it is even worse and results in steady con- and cha loss and more damage.

Can't speak for aTweak's "Cure Affliction", I think that only cures disease at a certain level?  Anything that uses opcode #79 Cure: Disease should do the trick just fine.  Guess I'll have to look into that icon issue though.

27 minutes ago, Mordekaie said:

@polytope How does you mod Purist Demiliches synergise (or even is compatible) with the component "Revised Liches" from mih_eq ?

I haven't yet tested your mod but i will definitely give a look.

It looks like we do the same thing but in different ways when it comes to demi-liches, so likely they will conflict in some way.

I too restore the demi-lich curse but with different effects (a heavy penalty to thac0, AC and saves), and I alter their damage resistances to make them 90% resistant to all types of damage.  I also add a save penalty to the demi-lich howl.  The mechanic of their soul trapping is currently unchanged by me.  I also don't change their battle script, the curse is controlled by a new script and only fires once at the start of battle.  I currently do not make demi-liches vulnerable to any spells, although that is on my to-do list.  Note that the two demi-liches in Black Pits 2 *are* vulnerable to certain spells, I will likely extend that same vulnerability to all demi-liches but I haven't gotten around to doing that yet.

5 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

I’m not sure what the concern is, or which component specifically you have concerns about. I currently have these components installed:

 

~MIH_IP/SETUP-MIH_IP.TP2~ #0 #0 // Made in Heaven: Item Pack: v7
~MIH_IP/SETUP-MIH_IP.TP2~ #0 #1 // Icewind Dale items for Baldur's Gate 1 & 2: v7
~MIH_IP/SETUP-MIH_IP.TP2~ #0 #2 // Planescape Torment items for Baldur's Gate 1 & 2: v7
~MIH_IP/SETUP-MIH_IP.TP2~ #0 #8 // Change item type of Holy Symbols -> Holy Symbols are Belts: v7
~MIH_IP/SETUP-MIH_IP.TP2~ #0 #9 // Turn generic Full Plate into Field Plate: v7
~MIH_IP/SETUP-MIH_IP.TP2~ #0 #10 // Turn all Dragon Scale Armor into Scale Mail: v7
~MIH_IP/SETUP-MIH_IP.TP2~ #0 #11 // P&P Mace of Disruption (and similar items): v7
~MIH_IP/SETUP-MIH_IP.TP2~ #0 #12 // Improved Tome of Golems: v7
~MIH_IP/SETUP-MIH_IP.TP2~ #0 #13 // Miscellaneous Item Improvements (see readme): v7
~MIH_IP/SETUP-MIH_IP.TP2~ #0 #14 // Add Potions of Extra Healing in BG1: v7
~MIH_IP/SETUP-MIH_IP.TP2~ #0 #16 // Sensible Shops (see readme): v7

 

They are installed after IR’s main item-replacing component, but before IR’s later tweak components (Store Revisions, Functional Weapon Changes, etc.). 

You're brave, that's my master.  I haven't even tested the improved tome of golems yet, no idea if it works. ^^

On 7/18/2022 at 7:00 PM, Chitown Willie said:

Not to add salt to wounds, but I think you applied the ju-ju zombie characteristics to all zombies:

  resist_crushingGT    => 50
  resist_piercingGT    => 50
  resist_missileGT    => 50
  resist_cold        => "if resist_fire < 100 then 100 else no_change"
  resist_magic_cold    => "if resist_magic_fire < 100 then 100 else no_change"
  strengthGT        => 18
  strength_exGT        => 10
  constitutionGT    => 16

According to the Monster Manual, ju-jus:

Regardless of the magic on the weapon, edged and cleaving weapons inflict normal damage, while blunt and piercing weapons cause half damage.

This is by design.  I basically give zombies their 3.5e bludgeoning resistance, at least as close as a 2e engine can approach it.

Again, I haven't playtested this part yet, it may change in the future if I think it's a little too much.  But vanilla BG zombies are a joke.

7 hours ago, Mordekaie said:

About Made in Heaven: Item Pack, the last version available in Github is the V6.
https://github.com/AngelGryph/MadeInHeaven_ItemPack/releases

Is there also a v7 to consider ? I think i have seen install orders which such version of mih_ip. So i am wondering ?

Not at the moment.  And while I am trying to get a v7 release done, I do not give ETAs.  If you're feeling brave you are welcome to try and install my master, but keep in mind that this contains untested and unfinished code.

7 hours ago, Mordekaie said:

I read from the readme : "The bundled item tweaks may be incompatible with mods that have similar tweaks, like Item Revisions. As an item pack, this mod should be installed fairly early, before any 'tweak' mods. The included tweaks should preferably be installed after other item mods."

Is it still not recommended to install this mod with Item Revisions ? (the items are compatible with IR but not the item tweaks from mih_ip ?)

The honest answer is that I do not know.  I do not test with IR.  At all.  Nor do I strive for any sort of compatibility.  I do things similar to IR, but in a different way.  Those who combine the two do so completely at their own risk.  If someone asks nicely I may attempt to fix any compatibility issues that arise, but it won't be high priority for me.

If you really want to know, find someone who has done this and see what their results were.  My recommendation remains to not do it.

25 minutes ago, Graion Dilach said:

Ries's Winter Wolf Hide armor dialog tree is buggy.

You use NumItemsParty("misc01",2) instead of NumItemsPartyGT("misc01",2) when he offers the option to create one, so having more than 2 will fail the question.

There's no other option to trigger the dialog as well besides the initial attempt.

Thank you.  Ries is the result of my recent introduction of lore-friendly changes and I haven't tested him at all yet.

I'm still amazed at the bravery of people installing the poorly tested code from my main tree. ^^

Oh my, I never expected this little thing about skeletons and zombies to attract so much attention.  To be honest I haven't even tested this part very well yet.  If it's too much I will certainly tone it down of course.