best stat.ids entry to highjack

[K4thos]

Thanks subtledoctor. I have few issues with the proposed implementation, though:

- it sounds like a hell to implement and test (can't say I understood all of the stuff you've mentioned)

- the system is meant to be used alongside classic BG functionality, not replace it (you can still play with NPC using some awesome kit alongside another NPC or player character that follows IWD2 style rules hybrid)

- grouping proficiency together would likely conflict with many mods and would force IWD-in-EET to be installed at the very end in order to implement those changes, which is not really something I would like to be the case (like EET, the mod is meant to be open platform that other mods can expand)

- updating item descriptions etc. sounds like a nightmare (can be implemented though)

 

All of these headaches just to make items that can increase all skills? Sounds excessive to me considering I've just finished testing this idea and it works as expected. Still not sure why you've mentioned that "Repeating 272 and invisicres are things I try to avoid at all costs. Combining them is my modding nightmare." when it's actually extremly easy to implement (took me like 5 minutes to test it) and seems reliable, unless I'm missing something.

 

edit:

How about 187/195 or the two stats holding titles (class strings)?

those class strings seems like a good idea, considering the characters that follows progression system introduced in this mod don't really need them (we can adjust what is displayed in record screen etc.), but what exactly sets them? Can they be altered via opcodes, detected in scripts, accept values instead of strings?

Edited August 15, 2018 by K4thos

[Grammarsalad]

 

Here's what I would do:

...

- Now you have freed up about a dozen proficiencies, which happen to be stats. Yay!

Have you actually made a single successful test of this ?

I've started the process here:

https://github.com/Grammarsalad/Proficiencies/blob/master/proficiency/data/components/Setup_proficiencies.tpa

 

Edit: also see e.g.:

https://github.com/Grammarsalad/Proficiencies/blob/master/proficiency/lib/armor_prof.tpa

 

Edit2: and yes, it works. I haven't set npc proficiencies yet and its kinda funny how full plated npcs walk around at a snail's pace

Edited August 15, 2018 by Grammarsalad

[Jarno Mikkola]

unless I'm missing something.

The thing you are missing is the 1000+ other invisible creatures that aren't in your game, but will be at there when a player playes the game, and thus create LAG, exlosions and slaughter.

Aka, just because one is good, doesn't mean a 1000+ is. I myself have used invisible creatures... for dozen of things, but there's a limit on what to do with them. Especially with repeating effects !!!!! Cause if the script doesn't complete in one round, it's not just a dozen of invisible creatures you'll be dealing with, in failure state.

[K4thos]

I've just checked the 2 stats mentioned by lynx (Class String Override Mixed, Class String Override Lower) and they seem like a perfect fit for 2 skills that absolutely require to be stats in order to work as expected:

- these stats can be modified by opcode 282 (Modify script state)

- they are not used by any mod yet since changing them alters what is displayed in record screen - not a problem for this mod, I can alter what will be displayed

- they don't have limited ranges like profiniencies

- can be checked in scripts via CheckStat()

 

Overall perfect, without any drawback that I can think of. Thanks!

[subtledoctor]

Have you actually made a single successful test of this ?

Not exactly sure what you're asking. Have I made k4thos' mod for him? No, no I haven't. Have I used all the techniques I described in that post? Yes, everything there is in my mods in one place or other. It would be EE-only, of course.

 

Thanks subtledoctor. I have few issues with the proposed implementation, though:

- it sounds like a hell to implement and test (can't say I understood all of the stuff you've mentioned)

I don't mean this as offense - really! - but the stuff you're contemplating seems WAY more complicated and intrusive into the game environment than anything I've ever made. Granted, you are WAY more skilled at this stuff than me. But the point it, it's not crazy, it would (could, anyway) successfully replicate a 3E proficiency/feat/skill system, and it runs entirely on opcodes, so no extra summonses gumming up the works, no chance of scripted actions being skipped because there's too much going on some scene, etc.

 

- the system is meant to be used alongside classic BG functionality, not replace it (you can still play with NPC using some awesome kit alongside another NPC or player character that follows IWD2 style rules hybrid)

Again, I don't mean this as insult, but rather as constructive inquiry: why?? You want to have a 3.5E character running along with a 2E NPC? I don't see the allure of that. Why not simply give players the option to play in a classic 2E environment, or in a simulated 3E environment. They seem pretty incompatible with each other... just giving players that choice would be an incredible mod on its own.

 

- grouping proficiency together would likely conflict with many mods

Grouping proficiencies together is something that is done by several mods, and they are generally compatible with everything else out there.

 

and would force IWD-in-EET to be installed at the very in order to implement those changes,

Wait, are you talking about implementing this 3E contraption as a core, mandatory part of IWD-in-EET??? Because I for one want no part of such a thing. If you already have the content being imported, and playable in the base EE 2E engine and ruleset, why not let players play it that way? Why not give them a choice?

 

All of these headaches just to make items that can increase all skills?

All of that because 1) that's how 3E proficiencies work, and my understanding is that you want to implement 3E rules; and 2) it gives you more than 10 stats that can be used like skills, that already appear on the character record sheet with no need for UI overhauls and platform-dependent .exe hacks, and which can be modified by script or opcode and thus can easily represent all of the 3E skills.

 

Sounds excessive to me considering I've just finished testing this idea and it works as expected. Still not sure why you've mentioned that "Repeating 272 and invisicres are things I try to avoid at all costs. Combining them is my modding nightmare." when it's actually extremly easy to implement (took me like 5 minutes to test it) and seems reliable, unless I'm missing something.

Hey, you made a thread, and I told you how your goal could be achieved. You can freely use however much of it - or none - that you like.

 

But yeah, implement 6+ character all spawning summonses every 6 seconds, each one running scripts to check and react to and alter local variables (for what, ~15 stats?), with regeneration and poison and disease and contingencies and other timed effects, in the middle of a major battle with 20-30 creatures on the screen casting their own spells and running their own scripts. Do it in a megamodded game where crufty old mods have increased BALDUR.BCS to 10 or 100 times its original size. Maybe that sort of thing is fine in the new 2.5 engine. Maybe your computer is nice enough that there are no hiccups. Maybe my aversion to buggy opcode 272 and skippy scripts are a relic of a bygone era.

 

But I can tell you that there is ample evidence that those techniques have been found to be unreliable in the past. Whether they still are is an open question, but in the meantime I'll prefer to use techniques that I know are reliable, rather than those where it's an open question. I mean, why do you think there was never a mod changing the primary stat bonuses? We've known how to do it via scripting for about 15 years. There have been at least half a dozen modders who dabbled with it, usually to implement a 3E system. And they all fell by the wayside, or the mods went unused. My mod is the first such mod to gain real traction, and I don't think it's because I'm better at this (I'm not), I think it's because it uses a more reliable implementation.

 

But of course there are lots of ways to skin a cat. Everything I write here is meant as a constructive attempt to give some insight into what I've learned. We have all learned about different bits of these games... it's easy to get bogged down in methods you're already comfortable with. E.g. I spent a looong time hacking at stats and states to try to create a tiered, extensible armored casting mod, before I realized it could be done really simply with stuff that's been in the engine since ~2001. I had to change my approach to the problem to arrive at a much better solution.

Edited August 15, 2018 by subtledoctor

[subtledoctor]

(can't say I understood all of the stuff you've mentioned)

 

I don't have much time, but I'll give you a quick sketch of how this can be done. Note, unlike actual 3E weapon groupings, this method can't have overlap. SO you can have "short blades" as short sword/dagger/dart and "druid weapons" as staff/club/dagger. But that's not the end of the world, worst come to worst you give druids access to proficiency with short blades, but restrict their usability of short swords. Or something like that. Easy enough to work out the little details. Anyway:

 

The first step is to consolidate. As I said, this can be done in way that is very compatible with other mods, just check the Tweaks Anthology code (or mine, but Camdawg's is likely better). We'll consolidate short swords, daggers, and darts into stat 91 (PROFICIENCYSHORTSWORD).

 

Every proficiency has 32 bits. Only the first three are actually used; in combination, they give you up to 7 proficiency points in a weapon (1+2+4). 3E only uses basic proficiency for classes so we only actually need the first bit of the first byte for this. Now, for reference, we'll assign short swords to bits 9 through 16 (x << 8), daggers to bits 17 through 24 (x << 16), and darts to bits 25 through 32 (x << 24).

 

Now, with whatever UI hack you use to create a feat system (I assume some cannibalization of the HLA menu, or something), you can offer

- Weapon Focus: short sword

- Weapon Specialization: short sword

- Weapon Focus: dagger

- Weapon Specialization: dagger

- Weapon Focus: darts

- Weapon Specialization: darts

 

Weapon Focus gives a bonus to thac0, and Specialization gives a bonus to damage. You can do up to 4 ranks in each; bits 9 through 12 would be the 4 ranks of Weapon Focus: short sword, and bits 13 through 16 would be Specialization. Bits 17 through 21 = dagger Focus, 21 through 24 = dagger Specialization; 25 through 28 = darts Focus, 29 through 32 = darts Specialization. Note: I jumped to bit 9 because we have to leave bits 4 through 8 alone, they can cause crashes.) So in each weapon group, to give full specialization options to 3 weapons, you need bit 1 for the group, and bits 9 through 32 for further specialization.

 

Your Focus and Specialization feats apply spells that uses opcode 233 to increment stat 91 by the appropriate bit(s).

 

Then you patch all weapons of each type (probably best to create an easy-access .2da list when you first consolidate them), adding 8 while-equipped 177 effects. These will be the 4 increasing thac0 bonuses, and the 4 increasing damage bonuses. Finally, at the beginning of the list of EQEffects, you add 8 opcode 324 effects, each one blocking one of those .EFFs conditionally if your stat 91 is not bit-equal to the relevant bit of the stat.

 

Bob's your uncle: now you can take ranks in Weapon Focus: Dagger or Weapon Specialization: Dagger, and whenever you equip a dagger it will provide you with the appropriate bonuses. And, now you can do anything you like with stats 96 (PROFICIENCYDAGGER) and 106 (PROFICIENCYDART) because they are no longer relevant to any weapons. Simply edit WEAPPROF.2DA and you can change the strings to "Alchemy" or "Use Magical Device" or whatever.

 

EDIT - Note, I came up with this while thinking about the NWN2/3.5E proficiency system. But 2E also has optional rules in the Complete Fighter's Handbook that allow proficiency with groups of weapons and further specialization with individual weapons. This same method could be used in a less radical application, to simulate those 2E rules.

 

Poop, now I want to do that!

 

EDIT2 - I don't know if you edited the first post or I just missed it, but INTOXICATION is also a great find, that is an excellent option for use with a skill!

 

Btw I love that idea for implementing UMD by using different effects as you have different skill levels

 

EDIT3 - although, now that I think about it, a problem with using weapon proficiencies as skills is that, unless you modify the Record screen, they appear under weapon proficiencies, and the UI can only display up to 7 points. So these work better as feats, with a half-dozen ranks, rather than skills with up to 20 points. You might want to actually convert some of the skills into feats anyway - frankly, the difference was always fuzzy to me and made 3E overly complicated. Is, say, UMD really so fine-grained that we need 20 different levels? Can't we just divide up scrolls and wands into 5 categories, and assign each to one of 5 ranks in the feat/skill? Functionally, isn't that just as good?

 

EDIT4 - final thought for now: if this really is meant to implement 3E rules, you could cannibalize the weapon styles. They don't correspond to 3E rules, and they are hard-coded to apply STYLBONU.2DA. You could zero out the entries in that file, apply fighting skills like Finesse and 2-weapon fighting separately, as feats. And voila, there's 4 more stats you can use.

 

Heck, those 4 stats are listed in the Record screen in their own category, so with some modified strings you could: move ALL weapon groups into the current "styles" category... change the string to say "weapon proficiencies" instead of "styles" and you could have major groupings:

- simple weapons

- rogue weapons

- martial weapons

- ranged weapons

 

Allow individual focus/specialization as described above, however you see fit. (You're not actually limited to 3 weapon categories per group... that was just a simple way to organize things. You could use the upper bytes of various other stats as well, it's totally arbitrary.)

 

Then you change the current string for "weapons proficiencies" to "feats" or "additional skills" or whatever, and now you can use stats 89-107 as feats or skills or whatever you like!

Edited August 15, 2018 by subtledoctor

[K4thos]

subtledoctor, don't worry, if I will be able to implement this system (as mentioned I'm not even sure if the system will be possible the way I've envisioned it considering it depends on Bubb implementing control over spell casting level and access to disabled cleric scroll), there will be a stand alone version with more options as well. And I don't have a problem with component that removes 2nd ed progression rules all-together from game for example, if there is demand for such feature. The system itself could be also used as a base for other mods. I'm open to collaboration too (keep in mind that work on it will start once I finish IWD-in-EET, not now).

But yes, currently I'm designing it with IWD-in-EET in mind first and foremost. There are for example tons of skill checks in IWD2 dialogs, so instead of converting them to ability score checks like I did before, now I'm thinking about keeping them as they are, with this system in mind. For now I'm probably going to convert IWD2 dialogue skill checks into variable checks which will be set passively based on character's ability scores and existing skills. This way it will be easy to implement active skill selection once the system is implemented. IWD2 creatures (even non-humanoids) uses feats, so I've decided to port them over and assign those feat features into cre files. Exactly the same feats would be selectable for player when the system is implemented. etc.

but the stuff you're contemplating seems WAY more complicated and intrusive into the game environment than anything I've ever made. Granted, you are WAY more skilled at this stuff than me.

If by "this stuff" you mean Lua than maybe. All the other things I'm pretty sure you have more knowledge about. The core of this idea is not really that complicated - most of the leveling system stuff would be handled via external lua code, not really intrusive patching of vanilla spells, items etc. (the only intruisive skill that I can think of would be Item Use, feats are not intrusive at all, multi-classing working like in IWD2 doesn't really change that much, acces to items is handled by using W/M/T class as a base for character following this system, even though we're not using progression of that class) Think about it more like a kit that brings new possibilities (pretty much "create your own kit as you play") not something that will turn the gameplay upside-down.

edit: didn't notice your second post, will reply to it once I finish reading.

Edited August 15, 2018 by K4thos

[bob_veng]

about skill checks, i have a simple idea:

 

those that already exist: Search, Disable Device, Hide, Knowledge Arcana, Move Silently, Open Lock, Pick Pocket, Wilderness Lore --- not a problem

the missing skills stats:

Alchemy - can be represented by intelligence

Animal Empathy - can be represented by ranger class

Bluff - can be represented by intelligence + wisdom

Concentration - can be represented by, let's say, wisdom... and/or morale break? (dunno...)

Diplomacy - it's practically already represented by charisma in bg, so it should stay that way for IWD2 content imo

Intimidate - barbarian class / charisma + constitution?

Spellcraft - mage class / intelligence + wisdom?

Use Magic Device - arcane class / intelligence + lore

i think that this would be the most appropriate interpretation of IWD2 content for a normal EET with BG rules

Edited August 15, 2018 by bob_veng

[bob_veng]

Weapon Focus gives a bonus to thac0, and Specialization gives a bonus to damage.

 

so "focus" somehow means thac0 and "specialization" somehow means damage. imho this is not good. not worth it.

EDIT - Note, I came up with this while thinking about the NWN2/3.5E proficiency system. But 2E also has optional rules in the Complete Fighter's Handbook that allow proficiency with groups of weapons and further specialization with individual weapons. This same method could be used in a less radical application, to simulate those 2E rules.

Poop, now I want to do that!

 

 

this would be good.

 

maybe every class could have a preselection of specialized weapons, while all classes could freely pick the group. (edit: so "focus" is freely selected, an "specialization" is preselected)

 

so if a paladin picks "small blades", he would instantly (or after some level) have focus and "specialization" in short sword, but only focus in dagger (paladin's "class weapons" could be: short sword, long sword, mace, halberd, crossbow...).

 

this looks like less choice than the existing system, but if you only ever get to pick 1 to 3 groups, than it's actually more choice, because the choice is more consequential

 

for example, druid's "specializations" would clearly be the weapons he can use in 2e: daggers, staves, slings, spears, clubs, scimitars and darts

 

so the druid class would incorporate bonuses to these weapons.

 

and then, "mastery" could be a feat, available only to appropriate classes

 

looks like a legit hybrid to me

Edited August 15, 2018 by bob_veng

[Jarno Mikkola]

so "focus" somehow means thac0 and "specialization" somehow means damage. imho this is not good. not worth it.

No: Focus means +1 Thac0, while specialization means +2 damage..,., specialization needs focus, so ... you don't like the original spects.

2DA V1.00    HIT   DAMAGE  SPEED   0   0     0       01   0     0       02   1     2       0 <- this 3   3     3       04   3     4       -15   3     5       -3

Yes, the 2ed's also has the class weapon "bonus" penalties that only applies when the char has zero prof points in the EE game, which is why the above table has no difference, in the normal game, this is hard coded to the .exe.

[K4thos]

bob_veng, that's exactly what I meant by "variable checks which will be set passively based on character's ability scores and existing skills". Until active skill selection is implemented it has to be simulated with what already exists. What existing stuff should contribute is open for discussion of course.

 

Everything I write here is meant as a constructive attempt to give some insight into what I've learned.

which is appreciated I've finished reading your post and I found a lot of valuable information in it, thank you. Will think about merging some proficiencies together and other proposed stuff once I start implementing this system.

[bob_veng]

^ (jarno)

 

hey man I know that lol, but if you read subtlesoctor's post carefully you will see that in the relevant part it suggests "focus" AND "specialization" being independent of each other, like two trees of specialization where one boosts thac0, and the other boosts damage. that's how I got it, at least

Edited August 15, 2018 by bob_veng

[Jarno Mikkola]

^ (jarno)

 

hey man I know that lol, but if you read subtlesoctor's post carefully you will see that in the relevant part it suggests "focus" AND "specialization" being independent of each other, like two trees of specialization where one boosts thac0, and the other boosts damage. that's how I got it, at least

STD equated the choise menu to a HLAmenu... which has optional dependencies. As do dialog trees, and scripts etc... so I would put that idea to a rest.

[subtledoctor]

so "focus" somehow means thac0 and "specialization" somehow means damage. imho this is not good.

It's just how 3.5E uses those terms. I'm

not saying it's a good system, I'm just describing how to represent 3E proficiency rules.

Edited August 15, 2018 by subtledoctor

[subtledoctor]

Btw I must confess I've been wondering "why on Earth would you want a Diplomacy or Bluff skill etc.?? You'd have to design whole quests and write whole dialogues to take advantage of then!"

Well, of course I forgot you're talking about IWD2 which has those quests and dialogues already. So what you said before makes perfect sense: for that kind of thing where it's basically being checked in dialogues, then you can rely on things like local variables thst are only exposed to scripts.

I was thinking about the parts of the game that involve action, for which you would be better off using stats and 324/326, rather than 272/invisicres. And then, assuming you need to free up some stats for that purpose, how best to do so. My mind was preoccupied with the aspects of the question that I was already most familiar with...

Edited August 16, 2018 by subtledoctor