subtledoctor Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 I wonder if k4thos or anyone else can comment on this. Grammarsalad recently went to great lengths to create a mod that brings the IWDEE divine spells into BG(2)EE. (IWDification has a component for this, but the IWDEE spells are somewhat different and superior.) We are going to make that an integral part of Faiths & Powers, but it occurs to me that it may be problematic if EET also adds those spells. (FnP adds them via ADD_SPELL, if it matters.) FnP is installed with kit mods, so fairly late in the order. I guess this means it should be installed in the BG2EE directory, after EET_core...? In that case, I suppose we should check for the presence of IWD-in-EET, and not add the spells if it is detected? Does that sound right? Advisable? Necessary? Any input appreciated from those with knowledge of how this works... Link to comment
agb1 Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 If integrating the IWD content requires the IWD spells, then IWD-in-EET (presumably a separate install after, but maybe part of EET core) will import them into the game files. FnP should be installed late with other tweak and kit mods, yes .. so I think the right approach would be for F&P to override the imported IWDEE spells, much like Spell Revisions, if they're detected to be already in the game. Edit: And if/when other IWDEE-spell-specific tweak mods come along too, we would install them after FnP, assuming they were less ambitious in scope and only tweak a subset of them. Again, like how Spell Revisions comes first and then aTweaks comes along and maybe revises a few spells like elemental and fiend summons etc. Link to comment
CrevsDaak Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 REQUIRE_PREDICATE !MOD_IS_INSTALLED iwd-in-eet.tp2 0 ~IwD-in-EET already possess IwD:EE spells. Skipping.~You'll have to change the tp2 name and component number, and, it is possible you can detect a core file of the mod/a marker as well/instead. Also check for IWDification while you're at it. Link to comment
agb1 Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 Maybe I misunderstood -- if FnP is just adding the IWDEE spells without any tweaks, then definitely do what CrevsDaak suggested. If FnP is tweaking the spells too, then what I suggested. Link to comment
Grammarsalad Posted December 3, 2016 Share Posted December 3, 2016 Spell tweaks may be a part of fnp. Thinking about it, there is a very good chance there will be some optional tweaks, especially for the healing spells. This will be a seperate component that should be installed after eet ( it'll just be easier). Also, there will be added spells to fill out the spheres; k4thros answered some questions about that here ( in case it helps someone else): http://gibberlings3.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=27871&do=findComment&comment=246260 So yeah, Subtle, unless you have an objection, I really feel that fnp should be installed after eet Link to comment
Grammarsalad Posted December 3, 2016 Share Posted December 3, 2016 As for modifying spells, I'm more inclined to copy existing spells and modify them ( via clone etc.) the main reason is because of opcode 267. K4thos has a good strategy and so I'm going to parasite off of that to save myself some headache! Link to comment
subtledoctor Posted December 3, 2016 Author Share Posted December 3, 2016 If integrating the IWD content requires the IWD spells, then IWD-in-EET (presumably a separate install after, but maybe part of EET core) will import them into the game files. FnP should be installed late with other tweak and kit mods, yes .. so I think the right approach would be for F&P to override the imported IWDEE spells, much like Spell Revisions, if they're detected to be already in the game. Edit: And if/when other IWDEE-spell-specific tweak mods come along too, we would install them after FnP, assuming they were less ambitious in scope and only tweak a subset of them. Again, like how Spell Revisions comes first and then aTweaks comes along and maybe revises a few spells like elemental and fiend summons etc. Spell tweak mods aren't a huge problem - in fact the situation of IWD-in-EET + SR will actually be *better* than the situation of IWDEE + SR, because with EET we can install SR before the IWD spells, as God Demivrgvs intended. BUT I'm not sure what you mean when you say FnP should "override the imported IWDEE spells" if it detects IWD-in-EET... do you mean, that FnP should override itself, and not add the spells? Or, that FnP should overwrite the spells by directly overwriting the file? The latter is SR-style, and we're not going to do that. (SR is in a rather unique position vos-a-vis SCS, and basically no other mod should treat spells the way SR does.) The former will most likely be the ideal procedure. BUUUT... (so many buts!) my concern is that the FnP sphere system expects those spells to be in SPELL.IDS. So I guess the specific question is: does IWD-in-EET add the IWD spells to the IDS table with the same exact IDS names that are in IWDEE? I really only care about the integrity of the IDS names - the RES doesn't matter, since it can vary from install to install. But if IWDEE has, say CLERIC_WALL_OF_MOONLIGHT, and EET adds it as CLERIC_WALL_OF_MOONLIGHT_EET, then FnP will want to add it again with he former name, meaning now both spells might exist, which could be confusing. And perhaps more importantly, could very easily lead to all of the available spell slots being used up and then there will be ADD_SPELL errors, etc. You see (some of) my concern. Basically I would just like some clarity on the proposed procedure here, before I spend hours and hours working on something that will have to be changed... Link to comment
Grammarsalad Posted December 3, 2016 Share Posted December 3, 2016 "So I guess the specific question is: does IWD-in-EET add the IWD spells to the IDS table with the same exact IDS names that are in IWDEE? " Heh, I have a strong feeling that the answer is yes. There doesn't seem to be any reason to change the names and there is at least one reason not to: ease of compatibility with mods like ours. I think agb1's suggestion is superior to the sr implementation ( which just uses a particular spell name.) presumably, we'd have to check spell.ids for the spell name reference and copy the spell as that name (e.g. ~copy/...~ ~override/%resref%.spl~ note that this is from memory--I haven't done any of that stuff in a bit, but it's something like that.) So we wouldn't be doing it exactly the sr way ( were we to copy over existing spells...) Link to comment
Galactygon Posted December 3, 2016 Share Posted December 3, 2016 Some years ago I started a standardized list of ADD_SPELL ids symbols. See linked post below: http://www.shsforums.net/topic/46717-add-spell-in-spell-mods/?p=503882 The list needs to be updated with all manner of spell ids entries for mods that have been released ever since. Link to comment
Grammarsalad Posted December 3, 2016 Share Posted December 3, 2016 Some years ago I started a standardized list of ADD_SPELL ids symbols. See linked post below: http://www.shsforums.net/topic/46717-add-spell-in-spell-mods/?p=503882 The list needs to be updated with all manner of spell ids entries for mods that have been released ever since. Cool, cool. I have a few to add... Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.