Jump to content

Bartimaeus

Modders
  • Posts

    2,468
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Bartimaeus

Recent Profile Visitors

6,181 profile views

Bartimaeus's Achievements

  1. I very much suspect that is the case, possibly along with the different people(?) not having the difference made clear to them as they were writing descriptions. If you take a look at the original game text for a lot of area of effect spells in BG1, sometimes a "radius" is mentioned, sometimes a "diameter" is mentioned, and sometimes neither are mentioned...and by the time you get to BG2 which inherited a lot of BG1's text for spells, who knows whether the person(s) who was writing descriptions for the new BG2 spells had any clue how the heck the AoE sizes should be notated for consistency (or rather the lack thereof). Yep, the spwi116d.spl warning is the warning I fixed for Sleep in the latest repository version. The "no weidu.log" error is...curious - the weidu.log is what keeps track of which mods you have installed and in what order, and it's usually generated upon the first run of weidu, if I'm not mistaken, so I'm not sure why it would be missing entirely unless you manually deleted it after starting the SR installer (or unless there's some kind of OS-specific, perhaps OSX, issue that I've not hitherto been made aware of). It is much appreciated, I've been fixing these little BG1 issues for a number of years, but it's been dependent upon a relatively small set of players who have played BG1EE-only games to tell me about them, and they don't necessarily use every spell, so invariably some have slipped through the cracks. I went with "permanently dissipate" instead, but done, thanks. Yeah, the original post's abbreviated "list of changes" is pretty much always sliding into being out-of-date. But I do occasional maintenance on it when I notice egregious omissions, so thank you. I've always used an old mod called The Bigg Tweak Pack for it. Yep, thanks for playing with it, and feel free to continue reporting any other problems!
  2. Installation warning fixed (harmless: it was just a notice saying that Sleep wasn't patched because of the intended patch accidentally being applied to one of its subspells). Enchanted Weapon spell names & item names/descriptions also fixed - instead of using generic strings from from BG2, I decided to manually name and re-descript all of them, including proper statistics for the weapons themselves. Thank you!
  3. Let's take, for example, a Fireball: a Fireball has always been the exact same size throughout all the games and throughout the history of SR, but...is it a 30 foot radius, or is it a 15 foot radius? The original games and SR say 30 foot radius, but the EEs and SRR call it a 15 foot radius. The same goes for Grease: what SR called a 10' radius would only be called a 5' radius in SRR. My brain was also used to a Fireball being 30', but after taking a long look into the incredibly inconsistent size of AoE projectiles in oBG1/2 and how they're stated, I began to understand why Beamdog decided to say that a Fireball was 15' and not 30', so I changed SRR accordingly. Especially because range values also happen (or perhaps were deliberately designed) to be the same: for a spell with a range of 10 feet ("short range") that has an AoE size of a 10' radius in the EE notation, the AoE will just about exactly reach the caster when cast at maximum range...whereas a 10' radius in the old notation will only reach halfway (i.e. 5 feet), which doesn't make sense. SR (and thus SRR) were designed for BG2, not BG1, so there are still some rather annoying "wrong strings" oversights like this that would be correct if installed onto a BG2/BG2EE/BGT/EET game, but need manual correction for BG1EE-only games. I've never played a non-EET BG1EE game myself, so it's never something I've personally bug-tested; fixing those does unfortunately rely on people submitting bug reports for them. I guess I should probably install SRR on a BG1EE-only game sometime soon to see and fix whatever warning (likely harmless, as warnings typically are) that you saw. It should not matter what base version of SR you use: anywhere between the officially listed latest version (i.e. b18) and the latest pre-release version will work fine. When I wrote that in the original post, the pre-release and release candidates et al. versions did not exist, so I did not really foresee it as being necessary to state but I guess it is now. I recommend the latest repository version, but people download the latest full "releases" (i.e. V1.3.900 right now), which isn't the end of the world, but it means whatever are the latest fixes I've made are not included in their versions. Something has gone very wrong in your install if that is truly the case, as it's not possible for SR/R to name it "Sunburst": that text is simply not included at all in the mod outside of the description of Sunray ("[...] undead creatures caught within the sunburst instead suffer 1D6 fire damage [...]"), which I just confirmed with a complete textual search of the entire mod directory. And never mind using the SR and not SRR text of the spell. Hm, I just tested this one on BG2EE and it displays as "Magical Stone +1: 1d4 + 2" in the inventory screen. Not sure why BG1EE would be any different...I'll have to install BG1EE and see. Yeah, as mentioned above, I unfortunately rely on people submitting "wrong text/string" issues for BG1EE; a number of them have actually already been fixed, but there are clearly more to go around. I'll fix these Enchanted Weapon items. No, I would not recommend trying to do that - trying to transplant these mid-installation is very likely to cause more issues and inconsistencies that you would not like. Thank you for the feedback! There are certainly some things that are less than ideal...and BG1EE-only games have been a major source of these kinds of inconsistencies. SR just wasn't ever intended to be installed on a BG1-only game, so there have been historical difficulties as a result.
  4. "AI" might be useful for coding one day, but it'll be through models trained specifically for and ONLY on whatever language you're trying to get it to do something for - not ChatGPT, which is just a language model that has no fundamental understanding of any of the code that it reads or writes, so of course it just spits out vaguely similar-looking pseudo-code. Garbage input leads to garbage output, and generalized models like ChatGPT are 100% pure unadulterated garbage input.
  5. No bother at all: thank you, fixed it! Should now only be added if it's an EE game, just like all the other 324s.
  6. The first one makes sense, since it's an EE-only item and I just over-looked it when transferring it over to IRR; the second one is the Equalizer. The last commit that I made to SW1H54.itm says "The Equalizer was usable by alignments it specifically mentioned as being denied to". The official IR description says "not usable by Lawful Good, Lawful Evil, Chaotic Good, Chaotic Evil"; the IRR description instead says it requires any kind of "neutral" alignment, which although different wording, should mean the same thing. Official IR's The Equalizer allows all alignments (including the supposedly barred Lawful/Chaotic Good/Evil) to use it, which I corrected for with the IRR version, but then I also added these 319s on top of that? I'm not certain why, especially because they're type 10 319s (restrict by character name?) and don't seem to actually reference anything. I'm a bit at a loss for what I was trying to accomplish here with these 319s...perhaps it was just left-over and unnoticed cruft from when I was trying to figure out how best to enforce the alignment restrictions? Regardless, thank you, I've fixed both swords!
  7. I was never really fond of the "RCx" part of the versioning, feel as though it just doesn't make itself immediately clear enough as to which of "4b19" or "4b19 RC5" is later/preferred. Kiiind of thought it should've always just been an immediate increment of the "b"...even if you get up to ridiculous numbers, "b120" will still always sound later than "b15", so that's alright. The only thing I noticed that seemed to be a potential issue is that the resist type of the 232 opcode for Sleep isn't the same as the rest of the spell (type 2 instead of 1). It's an extremely minor issue, as it would lead to a creature that magic resist-ed the spell to get the "awaken" spell cast upon it upon taking damage...which wouldn't actually do anything, but still strikes me as inconsistent (also, does being "awoken" if you're already awake still play the animation? I'm not sure). Alternatively, use this SPWI116 that also has a few more race-selected immunities for the sleep effect: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/scl/fi/pmfeqt3lqtgpwbdvk9yrs/spwi116.spl?rlkey=kt60nke95wrfvbs69p6wb412q&dl=0 From what I can tell, there should be no other differences.
  8. Windows Defender/SmartScreen triggering false positives for Wacatac on perfectly clean rars/zips has been a re-occurring thing over the past few years (and it should be noted that G3's setup .exes are simple self-extracting archives that can be directly opened with tools like 7-Zip). Manually update your Defender definitions and give it another try.
  9. Putting any concept issues aside for the moment, how does SCS handle deafness? 50% chance of making the immediately following Vocalize fail would seem to pretty much make or break that spellcaster unless SCS waits until the deafness is over.
  10. I think it's a loose fit, but I don't mind strongly one way or another. Really, paralysis itself is a rather ill-defined effect: getting held via e.g. Hold Person/Monster is simple enchantment, but the mechanism of paralysis via a ghoul's touch is certain to be completely different, but Remove Paralysis cures both just the same, so yeah, while maybe a loose fit, I think it'd be fine. However, in relation to the earlier problem of Haste and if we need it to be un-reverted back to being single target, I would think Remove Paralysis curing slowness would be a strict necessity, so that's something to keep in your back pocket either way.
  11. The only thing more embarrassing than making a mistake is to let that mistake stand for weeks, months, years at a time because you didn't know or forgot that you had made a mistake, . Especially in instances where I said I figured out what a problem was and fixed it, I encourage anyone and everyone to make mention of it again if it seems in actuality to have either not gotten fixed or simply forgotten about. For doing things the right way, for transparency and stability, for preventing sudden changes that are wildly off-course...collective control/contribution/observation is definitely the way to go, especially for mods that change a lot of things in both large and small ways like IR and SR do. I am very appreciative of everyone and everything that has helped both IR/R and SR/R along the way - even GitHub itself in the way that it allows file and commit history has proved to be a great boon many times over the years. Heck, if I were to ever suddenly disappear, someone else could easily just fork the entire project to their own account and take up maintenance if they so wished.
  12. Fixed, yes...but added to the GitHub repository, no. Thanks for reminding me: it doesn't help that I'm back to manually managing my repositories, as the tool I'd previously used (SmartGit) to keep track of any changes I make went to a very lovely subscription service model that is not really worth the money given that I'm just managing a few mods...
  13. No to both, I'm afraid. I still think strange/murky potions should have a possibility of doing what they're supposed to at the very least, just to make them...I don't know, a little more interesting mechanically, but it would still probably ultimately be just flavor. I don't think players are exactly hurting for potions most of the time, are they? So why use ones you know could screw you over? But it's still a fun idea, something to make them more than pointless. With regards to Rifthammer, there's probably someone who would make a good candidate right at the end of BG1...Tamoko is proficient with and uses a flail (plus she already has Plate of the Dark), so not her, but I just haven't run through BG1 for good ideas since the last time we discussed it and no-one else has brought up any possibilities. If you see a named character that you'd think would make a good candidate, my suggestion would be to tell me and then just manually spawn the hammer yourself as if I officially put it there, .
  14. If you mean that you took a look at the original SPCL742E.spl in your override and compared it to the one I gave you and saw that I simply changed the 177 (Use Eff File) opcode from the wrong Hold Monster .eff to the correct Halt Undead .eff while understanding why/how, then yes, it really can be that straightforward and you can certainly make such changes yourself, . I'd heartily recommend that anyone and everyone be able to do so, but you must find and familiarize yourself with the tools to do so as well as have the time/initiative for it, and it's not something that everyone is interested in when they just want to play their game.
  15. Whoops, I'm running afoul of the "Spell Deflection blocks AoE spells" sub-component here, which externalizes all the effects of AoE spells, such as our Halt Undead, to sub-spell files to make the component work. Rather than change your SPCL742.spl, put this SPCL742E.spl into your override folder instead and give it a try: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/scl/fi/oqbdn4tuqurfbsd63jxjn/spcl742e.spl?rlkey=dalbktiel4mfvqvmvwhfi5pq1&dl=0
×
×
  • Create New...