subtledoctor

I only meant that roxanne did not omit tweak mods because they don't work. Many should work just fine. I don't quite get this. Changing EET does not, itself, tweak any rules. So there should be no intersection between it and tweak mods. Several BG1EE items get renamed by EET, which causes item revisions to miss them... but that just means IR will need a small patch for perfect compatibility. But even with those missed items, the game is perfectly playable. Likewise, changing the values in xplevel.2da, or changing the effects of weapon style specialization, or adding new kits or spells, should not have any impact on EET. (In fact several of those "content mods" in Roxanne's list make all sorts of such tweaks, and they seem to work fine.) So I don't see any reason to shy away from such mods (personal grudges aside). The only way to discover exactly how compatible any of these mods are, of any category, is to play them!

Suffice to say, roxanne does not like to apply house rules (i.e. tweaks) to her game; she just likes to add new content. There is nothing at all wrong with those mods, but I cannot speak to their compatibility with EET. aTweaks, IR, SR, SCS, and Anthology *should* all work fine. Hopefully I'll get EET working soon and I can report back (since I like to use a lot of tweak mods).

Yeah, i like mixing the two mods. especially on the bard side, I love having something like: - Bard - Blade - Jester - Skald - Dirgesinger - Gallant - Loremaster - Meistersinger It's like, all of the kits from the 2e Complete Bard's handbook! So fun. I actually played half a game of IWDEE with an all-bard party: Gallant and Skald up front Blade and Meistersinger in the middle Loremaster and a cleric/thief in back It was pretty fun! Not easy though.

Depends. The S&S thief kits cannot be made to work with the M&G feat system. But the feat system doesn't work with IWDEE anyway. (Yet. it requires EE 2.0+.) So, setting aside feats, you can absolutely mix 'n' match the thief and bard kits from both mods. The Sharpshooter and Sniper step on each other's toes a bit, but you can use whichever you prefer.

Yeah don't get me wrong, once IWD-in-EET is ready that will likely become the main way I play the game. But it's just not there yet. And in the meantime there's no need to wait.

IWDEE-in-EET is not ready yet, pointing him there is not helpful. If you want to to use the Song & Silence mod with IWDEE, worst-case scenario, you have to open the .tp2 file with a good text editor and do a find/replace operation changing "bgee" to "bgee iwdee" ...everywhere there is a "GAME_IS ~..." clause. Best-case scenario, you don't even have to do that. Just install it and play. I forget whether it's necessary, but I have definitely played IWDEE with S&S so it's certainly possible. You won't get the items or stores, but you'll get the kits and tweaks. If you have a hard time making it work, and you want new kits for thieves and bards, try Might & Guile, a mod I made to replace S&S when it wasn't compatible with the EEs.

OMG please learn to use [ spoiler ] [ /spoiler ] tags when posting that kind of thing...!

I will upload when I get a chance (not sure when) but I highly highly doubt the files are different. I suspect it simply exists in a different place (like the executable) and EET is not pointing the COPY or whatever commands to the proper path. Actually, I was just reading over in the Beamdog UI modding forum that UI.menu needs to be in /override in order to edit it? I tried to install EET on a stock BG2EE game, maybe UI.menu is still buried in the game files? Is it required to extract it into /override in order to install EET?

Should probably be posted in the NPCKitPack forum also, since the problematic code is there.

Ah - quite right.

Well, tweak the names and you tweak what effects are associated with those new names. If you make the effort to change the names, it's worth making the (comparatively smaller) effort to re-think how they all work. IMO.

Easy enough to loop through kitlist.2da, starting *below* the row containing the Blackguard, and for each paladin kit, add a 319 effect to these items targeting those kits. Or just add the 319 effect for every paladin kit, and then go in later and DELETE_EFFECT the one for Blackguard.

I have a component called "saving throw overhaul" that treads much of the same ground as the SR save differences. It wouldn't be hard to turn it into a complete overhaul, the basics of the code is there. I'd be happy to contribute code and/or combine efforts, if the SR guys wanted to spin the saving throw stuff out as a separate component. But there are several problems I've run across: 1) Patching spells descriptions (generally by means of REPLACE_TEXTUALLY) in a way that allows for easy localization is a big PITA. 2) It's hard to catch every spell. My mod doesn't catch every AI-only spell, nor does it catch mod-added spells (aside from SR. From a coding perspective, it would be great to figure out a way to arrive at a system that uses effect matching to assign saves - like, every Charm effect uses a save vs. Will, every Fire Damage and Wing Buffet effect uses a save vs. Dodge, etc. But, as I think about it, that's probably not possible. So if a static list is necessary, the array in my mod could be the starting point: https://github.com/subtledoctor/Scales_of_Balance/blob/master/scales_of_balance/spells/save_list_base.tpa Changing which spell uses which save is a simple matter of editing that .tpa file, and changing their names to Will/Fortitude/Reflex etc. is doable as well. If people are aware of any SPIN and SPCL spells that should be added, feel free to mention them. (This probably deserves a new thread, though.)

Still won't install on OS X. Got further this time, though. Here is the end of setup-EET_CORE.debug: EDIT - maybe it's this code: ///// Exe patching \\\\\ ///// \\\\\ COPY ~Baldur%exe%~ ~Baldur%exe%~ REPLACE_TEXTUALLY ~NITEDAY~ ~~ (7) REPLACE_TEXTUALLY ~DAYNITE~ ~~ (7) REPLACE_TEXTUALLY ~SPIN649~ ~~ (7) REPLACE_TEXTUALLY ~SPIN822~ ~~ (7) //change default campaign REPLACE_TEXTUALLY ~SOD~ ~BG1~ REPLACE_TEXTUALLY ~Never Show Nuisance BG1~ ~Never Show Nuisance SOD~ REPLACE_TEXTUALLY ~Edition/BG1save~ ~Edition/sodsave~ REPLACE_TEXTUALLY ~usingBG1StartMenu~ ~usingSODStartMenu~ BUT_ONLY At least in my GOG version of BG2EE, there is no executable in the game directory, it is somewhere else. (And frankly, I'm skeptical about where executable patching will work on different platforms anyway.) I've commented that bit out of EET_core and I'm now reinstalling, will report back. EDIT 2 - now everything installed correctly, but when I run the game I get a few different versions of this error: MENU ERROR Invalid token in menu: [useOverlayTint] on line 4813, character 3 I can hit okay a few times and the game startup begins, then there is a quick CTD. EDIT 3 - I deleted the references to useOverlayTint in UI.menu, and now the app opens without any errors, but still crashes after the Nietzsche quote. So something is causing it to crash when it tries to go to the main menu.

Honestly I wouldn't bother doing this for OS X. I don't think most users keep this kind of shortcut on their desktop. I coukd probably write up a little AppleScript that can be called by Weidu, but I doubt it would be used/appreciated by anyone, so I'm hesitant to put in the effort.

If you bought from Beamdog directly you don't use Modmerge. That's irrelevant.

Erhm, the SoD containing BGEE or BGEE containing SoD, does it actually matter 1 f&/% ? Yes it matters because the SoD game/folder contains BGEE, but the BGEE game/folder does not contain SoD. So if the user mods BGEE and then EET pulls resources from SoD, it will not get any of the modded stuff. Get it?

No - if you bought them from Beamdog directly, SoD comes as a completely separate game (which happens to contain all of BGEE within it). So these people have separate "BGEE" and "SoD" games.

Jarno you never heard of spoiler tags??? Come on, man.

Admittedly I only tested on BGEE/SoD. But with the value set to 1, I could not ever interrupt a spell. Seemed like it wasn't taking damage into account. (Hits for double-digit damage would not interrupt. I think it works with the value set to 2, but the chance to avoid interruption is very low on that value (and is actually impossible on spells of 6th level and higher).

pew pew! One of my preferred ways to nerf Skull Trap is to change it from magic damage to slashing damage - make it literally pieces of bone exploding from an actual skull. Then you can protect yourself with Armor (with IR, YARAS, or FPPS) but the armor is of no help against fireballs. The problem is with scripts, when the AI expects ProMagicEnergy to make it immune to Skull Traps. Then I tried to lower its range - so you actually have to set it like a trap, and move away from it before it triggers. But then the AI just committed suicide. What should really happen, is this should simply be taken away from the AI. Override the .spl file to be a clone of Fireball, add it to hidespl.2da, then ADD_SPELL a new short-range version of Skull Trap that actually works like a trap (!) for players only, so the AI won't use it to commit suicide. And switch the scroll to learn the new version. It's worth bearing in mind that concentration is bugged on the current version of the EEs, and who knows if it will be fixed in v2.4... (if only there were some Beamdog employees around...)

I think the Bladesinger uses the fighter/mage class flag, and the Archer kit flag. Scrolls really shouldn't be flagged as unusable by kits (right??). If necessary I can add some code to make sure all wizard scrolls are usable by the Archer kit - doing so should cause no problems otherwise because they will still be unusable by Rangers generally (including Archers).

Don't take this the wrong way but I'd love it if this didn't happen. I really really really want to use all these SR-specific improvements to SCS, but a bunch of mods that I use are not compatible with KR. So if KR becomes a *requirement* to use this, I will sadly miss out. --- The tension between ADHW/ST doing "necromantic" damage and MM doing "magic" damage, but those two very different-sounding damage types being the same, still ought to be resolved somehow IMHO. I see three options: 1) Change necromantic damage to some other type. Cold makes the most sense, as it's somewhat underused in the game, and cold is literally a lack of energy, a draining of energy, just like necromantic/negative energy. 2) Change Magic Missile to do missile or piercing damage. Isn't this what the PnP spell actually does/describes?? Think about Mord's Sword: it's a blade of pure magical force... but it does slashing damage, not magic damage. Why shouldn't magic missiles be exactly the same? The "magic" doesn't have to described the damage type, it can just refer to the fact that they are magically created out of thin air, and magically aim unerringly at the target. 3) Consider "magic damage" to encompass *both* positive energy (the traditional magic force that comprises MM/Mord's/etc.) and negative energy ("necromantic" damage from ADHW/ST). Just spell this out much more clearly in the spell descriptions, and spell out that Pro Magic Energy blocks both positive and negative energies. I actually surprise myself by leaning toward option 2. It makes sense from a lore perspective, and it would be a bit of a check on the best spell in the game, without nerfing it into oblivion. Just copy the MM protection from Shield into ProMagicEnergy so gameplay doesn't otherwise change. (And hey, if ProMagicEnergy can block physical darts of magical energy... why shouldn't it block a physical sword of magical energy? Make it protect from Mordy... that would be interesting...) --- Re: vamp Con drain & Restoration: I suggested in another thread that Restoration spells should cure all stat drains. (And even diseases.) Makes sense from a lore perspective, more convenient for the player, but won't seriously affect gameplay much. What's not to like?

Oops, missed that.

Looks nice. Basically it just unpacks a lot of the bonuses from 18 to 18/90 and shifts them to lower scores, so having (say) a 15 STR is actually useful and meaningful. Only thing I would change is to make 19 be +3/+5 - it's a step up from18/00 (if you roll 18/00 and read a Tome, you get 19) so there should be a difference.