Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ulb

  1. Bug Report for v32.4: Alatos Ravenscar had (none existant) DW#RND10 assigned in an item slot which caused my game to crash upon entering the thieves guild. Replacing it with a duplicate of DW#RND87 fixed the issue for me.
  2. ..actually I did not solve my problem yet. Tenya works just fine now.. but for some reason Littlun gets turned neutral as well... I'm confused as to why the samer actions get applied to both creatures..
  3. Found another bug I think. I couldn't get Tenya to return to neutral with Littlun in the party. Now, Tenya has always been a bit touchy but even after 10 careful tries I had no success. I went ahead and looked at her dialogue and changed this line SetGlobal("GV#LITTInterjectTENYA2","GLOBAL",1) to this ClearAllActions() SetGlobal("TenyaHit","GLOBAL",2) ChangeEnemyAlly(Myself,NEUTRAL) SetGlobal("TenyaStory","GLOBAL",1) SetGlobal("GV#LITTInterjectTENYA2","GLOBAL",1) I'm basically clueless when it comes to dialogues but I think with your addition it was somehow skipping/intercepting the original action set for a respone and only applying the action from your interjection. In anycase this fixed the issue for me.
  4. Well, this is only a problem if we agree that the IWD1 part absolutely has to be access- and re-access- able like any other area. If you handle that part like a one time episode you have to finish before you can return to the main campaign (just like the Underdark or Brynnlaw in the original game) this problem doesn't exist. Take my two wish suggestions from the post above. Both have a clear 'goal' (make Belhifet suffer/stop Belhifet's plans) at which point the wish would be resolved and the party would be returned to the main campaign. Compared to how bad the book solution is, this really still is the best solution.
  5. Personally, I think the wish implementation would be the best solution by far. - It feels natural and makes total sense form an in-game perspective. A wish is powerful enough to do the time travel/alternate time line/elaborate illusion in a poket plan/what-so-ever thing. - It can easily explain away any inconsistencies with later/earlier content and the whole point of the wish spell is to get misinterpreted so it is a perfect fit. - It makes the whole IWD 1 adventure appear more like just another quest the party has to solve, despite the time travel aspect. - It actually enhances the wish mechanic as a whole by adding more depth/content to it. The book impementation on the otherhand is just terrible. You're going to use a story telling device that is usually used for an intro or outro right in the middle of the game and tie it to an in-game item. On top of that, you might even cut off experience/item gains and offer NO actual in-game motivation for the party to 'experience' the book? At that point, why do you even bother to implement IWD1 into the BG saga then? If it doesn't affect the BG party, neither from a story (the party never went there, they've just read a book like any other) nor game-play (no exp/items) perspective and has no in-game explanation for happening at all, you can just start a new IDW1 game and get the same experience without adding something that screams 'terribly implemented, immersion breaking mod content' to your BG campaign. Sorry for going a bit off the rails here, but I really hate that book idea. Anyway, to end on a positive note here are some quick suggestions for wish options that could be added after SoD: 'I wish to see Belhifet suffer some more.' 'I wish I could have stopped Belhifet's plans sooner' *edit: spelling*
  6. Ulb

    No Flara?

    Edit: Okay, looked at the area code. So, Flara is supposed to be only recruitable during Chapter 2? IF Global("GV#FLARExists","BG4809",0) GlobalLT("CHAPTER","GLOBAL",3) THEN RESPONSE #100 SetGlobal("GV#FLARExists","BG4809",1) CreateCreature("GV#FLAR",[420.240],S) // Flara END IF Global("GV#FLARExists","BG4809",1) GlobalGT("CHAPTER","GLOBAL",2) Global("GV#FLARRecruited","GLOBAL",0) THEN RESPONSE #100 SetGlobal("GV#FLARExists","BG4809",2) ActionOverride("GV#FLAR",DestroySelf()) END
  7. resource = dx#trap // BAM resource AFAIK This opcode can use. bam and .vvc files (preferring .vvc if both resources exist with the same name). Are you using a .vvc file here with the proper (looping) flags? I don't think using a .bam file allows for custom durations. (..and even if you could, without a .vvc you can't set proper blending modes and such..)
  8. Alright, thank you. I'll probably stick to doing it manually then since I've already started and will go over every line anyway.
  9. Sorry, this is probably a stupid question but it should be well established by now that I really suck at coding, so here we go: I'm toying around with the wild surge table right now and would like to replace a large number of strings. Since compatibility is no concern in this instance I will most likely even opt to just rebuild the whole table. Now, I can do that but it would require me to set each new string, put it in a variable and then append that line including the variable. All in all rather tedious, thus I'm wondering if there is a way to tell weidu to simply 'RESOLVE_STR_REF' all text lines that are put between ~~'s in a file?
  10. The description clearly states that the caster's level is added as bonus to the surge roll but there is no surge roll bonus in the spell. Am I right to assume that the bonus is simply hard coded? (Seems weird to me since there is a surge bonus opcode.)
  11. Thank you, I was already pretty hyped for your new NPCs before and those snippeds certainly didn't lower my excitement. Dave is an interesting one. Judging from this dialogue I wouldn't really have put him on 'chaotic evil', so I'm looking forward to seeing your take on that alignment.
  12. I like the new map, though I'd really like to see an option to install a version without the clothify filter once this mod is released.
  13. @Ojack I'm not taking any responsibility here but you should be able to use EETtweaks to change xp cap values and quest / killing mob xp in your current install just fine*. (Without having to un- and re-install all the mods you used after EETtweaks. Of couse you can also just let WeiDU un/re-install, would just take some time..) If you already used EETtweaks in your installation you'll have to delete your WeiDU log from your game files or delete the lines referring to EETtweaks from the WeiDU log*. This will effectively make WeiDU 'forget' it already installed those mods and it won't try to uninstall/reinstall anything and just use the mod again. Since changing xp is effectively just a loop overriding those values there should be no harm in using it again. Be warned though that doing this will screw up your installation in the sense that you'll no longer be able to properly re/un-install any previous mods since WeiDU has no idea what's going on anymore. (If the alternative is a new install anyway though, there is no harm for you in doing it this way.) *Try removing the WeiDU log first and see if it works, if EETtweaks has some check for EET installation that relies on the WeiDU log you'll have to put it back and remove the EETtweak lines from the file instead.
  14. Awesome, I wanted a mod like this for years. Thank you! Maybe compiling a list of NPC mods which are/aren't compatible (dialogue wise) would be convenient for people.
  15. No, I'm not talking about summoned creatures (exclusively), I'm talking about turn-able undead NPCs (I'm not going to debate about what the term 'NPC' entails and what not, it is perfectly clear from context what I was referring to.) I've mentioned the turn undead issue to DavidW in the past (though I was specifically talking about Liches then, which probably obscured the fact that this is also an issue with undead creatures that are turn-able without 'mods' buffing up the turn undead level.) In any case, the way I see it, evil clerics should have a bit of an edge when it comes to turn undead while in reality they currently often feel inferior to good clerics. Adding a 'self-destroyx' ability to undead would rectify this issue.
  16. Tweak idea: Give all turn-able undead npcs a 'destroy self' special ability. Especially when using AI mods *cough* SCS *cough*, turning undead with an evil cleric is no fun at all. Turned undead won't follow a given order for more than a few seconds and even if we ignore that issue, it makes no sense that an evil cleric who supposedly has full control over the undead (especially if its a mindless one like a ghoul) has to restort to forcing it to attack something else in order to 'kill it'.
  17. @kjeron Thank you for the detailed explanation.
  18. Hm, I tried 216000 before (should be 3 days in-game time, right?) and it went perma on me..
  19. No, I'm talking about 0x0028 in an effect's header i.e. the duration of the effect.
  20. Using the instant/limited timing mode (timing mode 0) with long durations seems to convert them to absolute duration. What is the maximum duration that timing mode can 'hold'?
  21. I do remember a large group with multiple spirit trolls right at the beginning of the druid grove though. And that would be from quite a while back, so I'm not convinced anything changed there.
  22. I think Bob has a point, making clerics too similar to mages (defense wise) doesn't sound great. (Though I am not sure if your changes are at that point.) I like the idea of priests getting a healthy amount of magic resistance and then having them utilize (and possibly buff) their anti melee protections (globe of blades etc...)
  23. Poisoned arrows (DW#KOB02.ITM) are unusable for shamans (RC8)
  24. Awesome! Side note: That was a bad move, now we know we can pressure you into adding features by complaining!
  • Create New...