lac Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 The ring of danger sense, found in the planar sphere, increases detect trap ability by 25% and is usable only by thieves and monks. Should it not therefore be only equipable (is that a word) by them instead of by anybody as it is now? Link to comment
Miloch Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Good catch. Even with the Fixpack, it's usable by everyone but wizard slayers. Link to comment
CamDawg Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Ah, we had a classic Fixpack discussion on this one. Link to comment
pro5 Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 I'd say leave it, and devote attention to real bugs instead. Link to comment
Miloch Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'd say leave it, and devote attention to real bugs instead.Yeah, that might seem the "easy way out" but obviously this has come up before, which means it'll probably come up again.Ah, we had a classic Fixpack discussion on this one.Bleh. I'd almost have to agree with SimDing0 on this one. What it says in the description is what it should have for usability flags - (multi-)thieves and monks are the only ones who can get benefits from it. In almost all other cases I'm aware of, usable = equippable. So what if it's on the mage .chr file - someone screwed up there. If you're going the other way though and interpreting the current usability flags to what it should be, at least correct the description's usability section to "Not Usable By: Wizard Slayer." For that though, you'd have to believe Bioware thought it'd be cool to give everyone a Find Traps bonus without giving them the ability to use it. Link to comment
Miloch Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 I still think this should be fixed one way or another (either change the usability flags or the "Usable By" description). Neither of those things is really a tweak though, so maybe this is in the wrong forum. Link to comment
CamDawg Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 It's usable by all and indicates no usage restrictions in its description... what needs to be fixed again? Link to comment
Miloch Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 It's usable by all and indicates no usage restrictions in its description... what needs to be fixed again?It's usable by all but wizard slayer and its description says usable by thieves and monks. I'd recommend setting the usability flags to match the description, but one way or the other here (no action is not an option ). Link to comment
Salk Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 The item usability should be limited to thieves and monks for two reasons: the description hints to that and (2) the only classes that have a real benefit from the item are those two. Link to comment
pro5 Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 Any character can benefit from it - if they have all inventory slots filled, they can free one by equipping this ring. Link to comment
Nythrun Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 Any character can benefit from it - if they have all inventory slots filled, they can free one by equipping this ring. Well said Link to comment
CamDawg Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 It's usable by all and indicates no usage restrictions in its description... what needs to be fixed again?It's usable by all but wizard slayer and its description says usable by thieves and monks. I'd recommend setting the usability flags to match the description, but one way or the other here (no action is not an option ). Action: remove the GTU string which changes its original, correct description in which no restrictions are mentioned. Link to comment
Miloch Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 Any character can benefit from it - if they have all inventory slots filled, they can free one by equipping this ring. Well said It is? I thought it was just a sarcastic comment, so I didn't come back with a flippant "any character *but* a wizard slayer" or "they could get the same benefit by chucking it, selling it or giving it to someone who can *actually* use it" . It's usable by all and indicates no usage restrictions in its description... what needs to be fixed again?It's usable by all but wizard slayer and its description says usable by thieves and monks. I'd recommend setting the usability flags to match the description, but one way or the other here (no action is not an option ).Action: remove the GTU string which changes its original, correct description in which no restrictions are mentioned.So are you removing the wizard slayer restriction too then? Luckily, this doesn't appear in BG1 so I don't have to care too much (maybe I'll add a correct version of it to Lost Items ). Link to comment
Nythrun Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 I thought it was just a sarcastic comment Nobody gets any benefit from a Flamedance ring either, and yet the item description does not read "Insurmountably powerful magic keeps you from placing this ordinary unenchanted ring on your finger". The analogy is apt. So are you removing the wizard slayer restriction too then? Why would anyone do that? The wizard slayer kit description already makes mention of its restrictions, there's no reason to follow Dorner in his quest to redundantly and inconsistently add this to all items and sundry. Luckily, this doesn't appear in BG1 so I don't have to care too much (maybe I'll add a correct version of it to Lost Items ). Tweaker. Optional But Meddlesome component plz. Link to comment
Miloch Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 Nobody gets any benefit from a Flamedance ring eitherEh. That's jewelry, not a magic item. So... no, it's not that great of an analogy. The wizard slayer kit description already makes mention of its restrictionsBy that reasoning, why mention Shapeshifter or Kensai restrictions on armour, or any kit or class restrictions for that matter? Wizard slayers can use ioun stones (why I don't know), manuals, tomes and a handful of other magic items. There is a difference between "Usable By: All" and "Not Usable By: Wizard Slayer."there's no reason to follow Dorner in his quest to redundantly and inconsistently add this to all items and sundry.A lot of that is inherent in BG2 I thought. And for better or worse, Baldurdash is kind of the standard inherent in Tutu and the Fixpack (based on its description anyway), so why not follow him (as long as we make some attempt at consistency)?Tweaker. Optional But Meddlesome component plz.I'm talking about adding it to a *mod* for BG1/Tutu, not a Fixpack, but a mod whose original goal was to restore certain BG2 items to Tutu, particularly those that would benefit monks. So it'd be entirely reasonable . Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.