Shin

Maybe all of this is due to me installing the mod on a game in progress and force-booting it to begin with, but still: There seem to be some issues with the Nashkel mines part as well. If you've already cleared out the mines, the guards will block the way back in and you have to charm or otherwise move one of them to gain access. Inside the mine many of the miners (all but Bob) will fail to spawn. When console spawning Marvin, talking to him doesn't seem to set the proper global, Global("CDJames","MYAREA",1), so even after getting the information from him you can't advance the quest. Setting the global through the console moves things along again. On top of this being back inside the mines feels a bit out of place as the guards and miners act like nothing has changed, even with Mulahey long dead. Maybe the quest just isn't meant for a party that already cleared the mines -- but then, unless the mod changes the way you meet Melicamp, I'd think many players go to Nashkel ahead of running into him. Edit: Also, when you are to transform miss Cotton back, the script in the ar3202.baf contains: IF Global("CDBracerQuest","GLOBAL",20) Global("CDIncantationRight","FW3202",0) THEN RESPONSE #100 StartCutSceneMode() CutSceneId(Player1) ClearAllActions() ActionOverride("cdiris",Polymorph(THIEF_FEMALE_HALFLING)) PlaySound("%tutuvar%halff5") ActionOverride("thalantyr",ForceSpell("cdiris",CUTSCENE_DAMAGE_1)) // Iris Cotton PlaySound("EFF_M20") PlaySound("%tutuvar%halff6") Wait(4) SetGlobal("CDBracerQuest","GLOBAL",21) EndCutSceneMode() ActionOverride("thalantyr",StartDialogueNoSet(Player1)) END IF Global("CDBracerQuest","GLOBAL",20) GlobalGT("CDIncantationRight","FW3202",0) THEN RESPONSE #100 StartCutSceneMode() CutSceneId(Player1) ClearAllActions() ActionOverride("cdiris",Polymorph(THIEF_FEMALE_HALFLING)) PlaySound("%tutuvar%halff5") CreateVisualEffectObject("ICRMPARI","cdiris") // Iris Cotton PlaySound("EFF_M20") Wait(4) SetGlobal("CDBracerQuest","GLOBAL",21) EndCutSceneMode() ActionOverride("thalantyr",StartDialogueNoSet(Player1)) END Here "FW3202" should probably be "MYAREA", at least in my install it won't produce the cutscene as the area names don't start with FW. Edit 2: I'll just assume my installation was off from the beginning. There are too many strange bugs.

Trying to start this quest in an ongoing game with Melicamp already transformed, Thalantyr isn't offering it. Is the initiation dialogue "We must endeavor to find those bracers, etc" tied to what he usually says right after performing the antichickenator? If so, I'd suggest putting the initiation speech in as a regular dialogue option when talking to Thalantyr instead, e.g. asking him about the bracers. This would seem to allow for the quest to be started at will at any time after Melicamp is turned back into human form. In my current state, SetGlobal("CDBracerQuest","GLOBAL",1) and SetGlobal("CDPlayerHasCalling","GLOBAL",1) seems to get it started, minus the initial dialogue. Compatibility wise, while the quest is ongoing at least, Thalantyr's dialogue options are limited - so you can access his stock, but not other mod-added options like from Thalantyr Item Upgrade.

Note that this will not bring about the relatively massive enemy groups you get on SoD insane, but probably make a little bit of difference.

It's being worked on in this thread as far as I can see.

It mainly improves the nighttime maps by adding lights, e.g. like light shining out through the doors and windows of various buildings. There was an issue with it causing artifacts on several modified maps however, as can be seen earlier in the thread. I don't think it was ever fixed.

What happened to compatibility with the G3 anniversary mod, http://www.gibberlings3.net/g3a/ ? I recall it used to be part of the BWP-patched compatibility list earlier, but now I can't seem to find it. Also the github update - https://github.com/Gibberlings3/g3anniversary - would appear to include BWP fixes and EET compatibility.

Back on topic, that's a very interesting point. Makes good sense. And easy enough to set up an ambush/teleport from the undercity, while looking for an exit to the surface after beating Sarevok. In SoD, only need to remove that one conversation with the thieves. To avoid EET-dependence ( ) it could actually be a pure SoD mod, which actually starts you off in BP1 and only sends you to the SoD start after escaping the Pits. Eh, clearly there are multiple ways to make it work... I still favour the option to do it during BG1 with a bit of a choice margin, but early SoD still feels more suitable than the underdark part of BG2. By that point many parties could (and will) have beaten two dragons, some liches, Kangaxx, and the Twisted Rune. Possibly also an entire beholder lair. The BP1 challenges and theme just don't seem very relevant against that backdrop.

My suggestion would have three basic aims: 1. Put BP1 relatively early in the trilogy, preferrably inside the BG1 part. This would avoid heavy balance changes and make BP1 still feel like BP1, and also imo keep the pacing somewhat level. Putting it in the underdark would seem to place both BP episodes in the later parts of the trilogy, which feels weird because there's supposed to be a big power gap between them, signifying that a fair amount of time should pass during which the player grows stronger. 2. As much as possible make it an open choice for the player to start the BP content at will at any point in the playthrough. 3. Keep the transition between the rest of the world and BP short and to the point. And yeah, Baeloth does present a bit of an issue. If we assume BP1 would be somewhere inside BG1; that game has Baeloth literally appearing out of nowhere, so could in theory be handled by altering his spawning conditions so he only spawns once BP1 has been completed. SoD is trickier as he's part of a larger event there. So with BP1 accessed from a BG1 area it would be theoretically possible to recruit Baeloth in SoD then go back to the BG1 areas and start BP1 with him in the party which is undesirable. It could be solved e.g. by disabling the BP1 trigger event once you get that far into SoD, or making the BP1 access area one of the BG city areas that end up closed off anyway after progressing to SoD. Either way this would reduce the options of the player in some ways, like you can't get Baeloth before doing BP1, and you'll eventually reach a point where you'll be forced to do BP1 if you want to do it at all. So it seems there's bound to be some restrictions on when the player will have to engage BP1, but I'd say this would still give more freedom of choice than having to do it while captured by the illithids or not at all. As for how to implement it, I can think of two thematically different ways: - Put a trigger event in some secluded and vaguely suitable part of BG1. There aren't all that many subterranean areas: the undercity, the Nashkel/Cloakwood mines and the Candlekeep catacombs come to mind, but they're all closed off for big parts of the game. I'd suggest either the firewine or the ulcaster ruins, and upon the player reaching a certain point or interacting with someone having a party of Baeloth's henchmen appear and capture the player, akin to the EET-ending of SoD. - Do it all through dialogue, like e.g. Thalantyr or Shandalar talking to the player about something they urgently need done in the underdark, and then teleporting the party away much like Shandalar does with the ice island. Maybe they didn't tell the player everything about the complexity of the situation -- again like with the ice island, like the players could be tasked with obtaining an item from one of the characters/opponents inside BP1 -- or maybe they were given an unrelated task but Baeloth had wards set up to intercept anyone teleporting nearby. I'll admit none of these ways are super refined, but I also don't see that they absolutely need to be. I mean, the exposition for the original BP1 is pretty weak as it is. I guess it comes down to whether it's considered more important to have the transition into BP as natural and integrated as possible, or to preserve as much of the BP experience as possible.

It would be great to have it in, ideally the ultimate goal should be an EET supporting inclusion of both BPs and IWD. Why put BP1 as far back as in the late stages of SoA though? As it's already more or less designed and balanced as BG1 content, this just seems like creating extra work.

I'm only up to chapter 7 in BG1, but so far it's been smooth; no crashes of that kind, just the occasional minor bug.

Just to chime in I had this crash just the other day too in my EET playthrough (fairly heavily modded), though I didn't experiment nearly as much. It crashed twice upon killing the necromancer, then I Ctrl-Y'd him as soon as the fight started which worked out well.

Using the item import mod in the compatibility list doesn't seem to stop EET from removing all my items upon transition to SoA (as far as I can see EET creates a new bag for import of certain items and removes everything else). Is it no longer compatible, or is it more likely a mod conflict?

Has this issue been addressed in some way? In my current playthrough I noticed that regular carry-over items like the pantaloons, the helm of Balduran etc are nowhere to be found in Irenicus's dungeon, and if the above is still the case I guess no items at all have carried over. Easy enough to add them manually, but it breaks immersion somewhat.

may be related to DSotSC (well, it almost 100% is). I will check it out, thanks. I just want to tell you that this bug still occurs (just in case you wonder ) This one worked without issues for me. Using both SCS that adds to the number of gibberlings spawned and BG romantic encounters that adds dialogue with Laurel, so maybe one of those mods address it.

The UI itself is included as an option in the EET closer installation (default is BG2EE UI), though can't be certain all UI mods will work on top of EET.

Ah, I see. Thanks, the tweak at https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/61138/tweak-bgee-1-3-ish-dialog-box does indeed seem to work.

That's what I'd recommend doing really, along with looking closely at the readme while progressing through the install. This gives you some info on each separate component of the mod, and about as much overview as you can get with a mod of that size.

Minor thing about the UI: with the new dialogue window style that expands upward to show dialogue history instead of allowing direct scrolling up and down like in the past, longer blocks of dialogue introduced by certain mods (as seen in the screenshots) take up so much space that the area containing your replies starts to shrink. If the incoming text block is lengthy enough, the reply area disappears altogether and there's no way to change window sizes around to bring it back up. Of course, more than likely this isn't an EET issue but a result of the new UI style; but since the EET offers a choice of UI on installation, is there any way of bringing back the old, scroll-style dialogue window?

don't understand what you mean. SoD directory IS BG:EE directory. SoD is not standalone expansion but part of the BG:EE, so of course you should install mods on a game with SoD and use that folder for resource importation I see what happened. I didn't realise the SoD folder contained a separate copy of the whole BG1 game. I installed the BGEE mods in the old (Pre SoD) Baldur's Gate EE folder, not the SoD one. I have now installed the BGEE mods into the SoD directory but EET is still not picking up Lydia in the inn. Do I have to start again and reinstall EET and all the other mods? By the sound of it, yes. The procedure is, install SoD, install mods onto SoD. Then install BG2EE, install EET (this is where content and installed mods from BG1/SoD are imported), and any EET-compatible mods you want onto BG2EE. And then finally run the EET closer.

The last version that kreso uploaded since my post does indeed work (i.e. install properly) with ascension and EET, tested it the other day. The issue afaik was largely that to be stand-alone compatible it had to both include the hotfixes that allowed installation, and the BWP fixpack patching that allowed it to register and install on both the BG1 and BG2 parts of the game.

Thanks, ended up doing that. Making it default or just adding something about it in the readme/changelog would seem fine to me.

A general question: How does the new SR component that makes HLAs one use only by default work with the enemy spellcaster HLA component of SCSforSR? More specifically are enemy casters also limited to a single use of each HLA by default, or should "Force_No_HLA_Repeats" in the .ini be used to make the AI play fair with this? Or, should the SCS component that makes HLAs work as one-use innate abilities be used as well, even though SR now provides this function? That would presumably at least make the SCS AI realize it can only use HLAs once.

Hm.. I've found now it also skips the BG1 components when installing on EET, so unless it's just me, it could be something isn't right with the compatibility yet. Edit: Possibly fixed by adding eet to the relevant GAME_IS checks in the .tp2

Still an issue with installing this on EET, seemingly the same file that was causing problems earlier due to some incompatibility with the Ascension beta. While installing SCS v30 onto EET this was solved through the BWP fixpack patching, but that isn't applicable for SCSforSR afaik: Compiling 1 script ... [stratagems/initial/baf/ds52329.baf] loaded, 462 bytes Processing 1 dialogues/scripts ... [override/player1.dlg] loaded, 63948 bytes Processing quests and journals ERROR: No translation provided for @314 Stopping installation because of error. Stopping installation because of error. Stopping installation because of error. Edit: Solved by adding player1.tra to stratagems.tp2 so the .tra that contains line 314 gets processed.. but doesn't exactly feel like a great solution.

Pretty exciting just reading about it. Great job; really looking forward to EET compatibility for an even more complete experience.