Jump to content

v11 To-Fight-About List


Recommended Posts

v10 was frozen in early February, so a lot of the more recent stuff reported did not get added. This is a list of stuff for potential inclusion in v11, but the changes need (IMO) further discussion:

 

Usability for creature armor - http://forums.gibberlings3.net/index.php?showtopic=25083

Ring of Wizardry description - http://forums.gibberlings3.net/index.php?showtopic=24985&view=findpost&p=206575

Link to comment

Since no one wants to throw the first brick...

 

The Ring of Wizardry an be created by your apprentices in the planar sphere and the description contains the line "It was originally commissioned by spellcaster , apparently at great monetary and personal cost." Unfortunately, a copy is also available at the Harper HQ when you confront Galvalrey. There are three different approaches we can use here:

  1. Amend the description to be more generic and applicable to both (like, say, the BG flavor text)
  2. Clone the item and use a generic description for the new resource, allowing the original from the sphere to keep the line
  3. Remove the item from Harper HQ or make it undroppable

I don't think #3 is really appropriate--the ring has a guard against wearing more than one of itself after all--and of the remaining two I'd favor #1. While I'd like to keep the nice flavor text I'm worried that a new resource will complicate things, particularly for mods.

Link to comment
The Ring of Wizardry an be created by your apprentices in the planar sphere and the description contains the line "It was originally commissioned by spellcaster <CHARNAME>, apparently at great monetary and personal cost." Unfortunately, a copy is also available at the Harper HQ when you confront Galvalrey. There are three different approaches we can use ...
Erhm 4 actually.... the BG1 also had a same named item, but it's totally different one... the first one gives extra 5th, a 6th and a 7th lvl spells, and the BG1's gave double first level spells... so why not have both ?

Pictures... #1 & #2.

Link to comment

Approach #2 will at least cause trouble with Weimer's Item Upgrade Mod, because it requires a Ring of Wizardry as one of its components. That's why I favor #1 too.

 

Erhm 4 actually.... the BG1 also had a same named item, but it's totally different one... the first one gives extra 5th, a 6th and a 7th lvl spells, and the BG1's gave double first level spells... so why not have both ?

Pictures... #1 & #2.

I wonder why Bioware came up with the BG2 version of the ring, because according to D&D, the Rings of Wizardry only double the number of spells of a specific spell level.

Link to comment
The Ring of Wizardry an be created by your apprentices in the planar sphere and the description contains the line "It was originally commissioned by spellcaster , apparently at great monetary and personal cost." Unfortunately, a copy is also available at the Harper HQ when you confront Galvalrey. There are three different approaches we can use ...
Erhm 4 actually.... the BG1 also had a same named item, but it's totally different one... the first one gives extra 5th, a 6th and a 7th lvl spells, and the BG1's gave double first level spells... so why not have both ?

Pictures... #1 & #2.

This is well, well, well beyond the scope of the Fixpack.

Link to comment
This is well, well, well beyond the scope of the Fixpack.
Erhm how so ? You just fix the fact that the item in the non-sphere is not the one that has the history of the sphere one(personal cost etc...), so simply a description change.

 

Yeah, you could also give that one a slitely different name to to boot, like Ring of Mage... but as long as it's not the same .itm and thus the description, it's all good.

Also you could, if you don't want to incorporate it in the Fixpack, then the Tweakpack could have a component that tweaks this .itm properties ... so even if it's beyond only the fixpack to reincarnate the BG1's item, with both combined, it's not.

Link to comment

Mods check for item codes in dialogue, so yeah - if you mean a different item code for the Ring of Wizardry, we'll be a bit screwed. 1 sounds less damaging to me(as opposed to 2, 'cause I'll deal with users and missing Xan dialogue).

 

(Fun fact: I've been playing the game for like half my life and never ever had or used a ring of wizardry from the sphere; probably not alone in this, since it causes deaths of CHARNAME's apprentices).

 

 

While we're at it:

Does the usability-for-creature armor means that Valygar won't be/isn't able to wear the White Dragon armor? Um. I've always understood the developers wanted to give one -2AC item which is usable for everyone who can wear anything besides robes, so that people who use archers, stalkers, thieves and fighter/thieves will have at least one godlike armor. But that's just me.

Link to comment

Does the usability-for-creature armor means that Valygar won't be/isn't able to wear the White Dragon armor? Um. I've always understood the developers wanted to give one -2AC item which is usable for everyone who can wear anything besides robes, so that people who use archers, stalkers, thieves and fighter/thieves will have at least one godlike armor. But that's just me.

I'm going to copy this over to the pinned usability thread and let this one remain about the rings, but I'll go ahead and ask here--do you have a cite for the dev comment? Because it's an interesting angle to the argument I've not heard.

Link to comment

Repost from my BGEE stuff:

 

Observed behavior:

 

Items with non-damaging but hostile single-target magical abilities (i.e. WAND04.ITM) are not flagged as such. As a consequence, it's possible to zap neutral creatures with the Wand of Paralyzation repeatedly without turning them hostile.

 

Desired behavior:

 

Items with non-damaging but hostile single-target magical abilities should be flagged as such.

Link to comment

More BGEE stuff:

 

Many enemy spellcasters use items to simulate pre-buffs such as mirror image or stoneskin. The problem is that since these effects are granted by equipping effects and not from a proper spell, they lack spell schools and secondary types. This leads to odd bugs like stoneskin not being subject to breach or mirror image not going away from detect illusions.

 

aTweaks uses a workaround where, rather than granting the effects directly, it insta-casts a spell with the proper schools & secondaries set. This allows the pre-buffs to work correctly yet still be properly countered.

Link to comment

Spells like Globe of Invulnerability and Spell Immunity do not protect you from spells you cast yourself. Fixpack already takes care of GoI, but Spell Immunity remains lacking. (Implied "I think this should be fixed, any objections?")

Link to comment
Spells like Globe of Invulnerability and Spell Immunity do not protect you from spells you cast yourself. Fixpack already takes care of GoI, but Spell Immunity remains lacking. (Implied "I think this should be fixed, any objections?")
Erhm, there might be... like say SI:A protecting from PfMW... to me that's absolutely brilliant, but aVENGER and DavidW might disagree just a little bit... Hint hint.
Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...