17 replies to this topic

[Turambar]

While I was fighting a vampire wolf, he suddently insulted Skeezer who had hit him with a bow.

Giving 'intelligent' scripts to animals is a good thing, but there shuld be two different, one for talking creatures and one for those who can't talk (the wolfva.cre has the BPWTSIGT script)

[Chevalier]

While I was fighting a vampire wolf, he suddently insulted Skeezer who had hit him with a bow.

Giving 'intelligent' scripts to animals is a good thing, but there shuld be two different, one for talking creatures and one for those who can't talk (the wolfva.cre has the BPWTSIGT script)

Do you wish to make and assign in battle dialogue to smart but nonspeaking monsters? I think horred would welcome the additions.

[Turambar]

Do you wish to make and assign in battle dialogue to smart but nonspeaking monsters? I think horred would welcome the additions.

Ehm... what I mean is that smart and nonspeaking monstaers have already dialogues assigned, and, in my opinion, they shouldn't. A wolf can't say "Help me!!".
So, those creatures would still need a BP script, but it should not contain any text

[Hoppy]

Do you wish to make and assign in battle dialogue to smart but nonspeaking monsters? I think horred would welcome the additions.

Ehm... what I mean is that smart and nonspeaking monstaers have already dialogues assigned, and, in my opinion, they shouldn't. A wolf can't say "Help me!!".
So, those creatures would still need a BP script, but it should not contain any text

In order for the strings to differentiate, a check or multiple checks for the class would have to be inserted in the block triggers. The animal creature file sounds are enough and we don't have to add "ROOOAAAARR!!" or "WOOOF".

[Turambar]

In order for the strings to differentiate, a check or multiple checks for the class would have to be inserted in the block triggers. The animal creature file sounds are enough and we don't have to add "ROOOAAAARR!!" or "WOOOF".

Yeah, I think adding some class (or race...?) conditions in the scripts would be the best... unless the same block which makes them talk has something else in it.

What races should talk? Of course no animals should, but what about undead, for instance?

Edited by Turambar, 16 September 2010 - 07:41 AM.

[Lollorian]

Could a treshold on some stat (INT/WIS) determine their ... talkativeness??

Like among undead, we know Liches talk and we know skellies groan but then there's the skelly in the Ulcaster school in BGI (and the Horace mod )

Said change could also check if the .cre in question has a .dlg assigned to it and appropriately raise its talk-treshold stat to compromise (and all PC-playable races should be talkable irrespective of INT/WIS - thinks about mute 3 INT half-orc babas )

PS: Thinking about it, I'd friggin LOVE a mod that adds lines to cannonfodder munchkins (cannonfodder as in the puny randomly spawning biatches that stand between you and every area transition )

Edited by Lollorian, 16 September 2010 - 08:10 AM.

[Hoppy]

Some skeletons could be at a human level of intelligence or in general have some sort of ability to make speech, albeit limited. Remember not every skeleton in an undead mod will say something which is already scripted like that even if they share the same script.

Animals should be omitted from these blocks and that is the easiest and most efficient way to do it way to do it. Some of of these AI strings are a little more perceptive than others, so you would have to sort out the thief scripted combat strings and what the trolls or hobgoblins use.

What makes it harder is that many classes and races use similar enemy scripts so that is why we see some odd things or repetitive things that may not really match..

[Miloch]

While I was fighting a vampire wolf, he suddently insulted Skeezer who had hit him with a bow.

Eh, what exactly did it say?

I don't think it fired a dialogue - sounds like something from a script. Might make more sense to fire something from one of the creature's sound slots, whatever is assigned there (which will vary by creature automatically).

[Hoppy]

While I was fighting a vampire wolf, he suddently insulted Skeezer who had hit him with a bow.

Eh, what exactly did it say?

I don't think it fired a dialogue - sounds like something from a script. Might make more sense to fire something from one of the creature's sound slots, whatever is assigned there (which will vary by creature automatically).

I think he refers to AI scripting "strings" (DisplayHead) that appear over enemies. Usually added by any tactical improving mod of choice and they are generic and will appear over animals sometimes but not all.

[horred the plague]

Actually, seeing as it's a "Vampiric Wolf", it may have slipped through the cracks of a check that was added a long time back. Is their race ANIMAL, or UNDEAD? I did go the grunt/growl approach instead of just the sound, if I recall.

I don't have anything installed ATM, so I can't just go and check--but I know something was done to prevent this. Whether the measures proved insufficient, or whether this one just slipped the cracks, I'm not sure. If somebody has this installed and handy, perhaps they would so kind as to enlighten us more.

[Turambar]

Eh, what exactly did it say?

It was a DisplayHead string; something like "coward, come and fight as a man" or something like that.

Actually, seeing as it's a "Vampiric Wolf", it may have slipped through the cracks of a check that was added a long time back. Is their race ANIMAL, or UNDEAD? I did go the grunt/growl approach instead of just the sound, if I recall.

Yes, it does check the race: in the script, one of the conditions for the DisplayHead is

OR(2)
		General(Myself,HUMANOID)
		General(Myself,GIANTHUMANOID)

The problem is that the BG1 (and therefore BGT) vampire wolf is Humanoid-Human-Mage (whereas wolfva01 , which is the BG2 one, is undead).
I will write that in the BGT forum, but I think Ascension won't include that in BGT because she doesn't fix those bg1 errors.
I'll include that in my fixpack anyway.

edit: I've noticed that they both originally have the same script (wtasight), but BP gives BPWTSIGT to the BG1 wolf (the humanoid one) and BPWDASGT to the BG2 one.

What's the difference? should I also check if he's got the former and give him the latter?

do you think this would be right? It reads what BP script the correct vampire wolf uses (otherwise, it uses the one that BP used for my wolf) and changes any BP script the BG1 wolf has with that. If there are no BP scripts on the BG1 wolf, only the race is changed.

COPY_EXISTING - ~wolfva01.cre~ ~override/wolfva01.cre~
	FOR (i=%SCRIPT_OVERRIDE% ; i<=%SCRIPT_DEFAULT% ; i += <img src='http://www.shsforums.net/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='8)' /> BEGIN		//humanoid script
		READ_ASCII %i% test
		PATCH_IF NOT ("%test%" STRING_MATCHES_REGEXP "BP.*") BEGIN	//BP script: NOT means it DOES
			SPRINT script "%test%"
			i= %SCRIPT_DEFAULT%+1					//finish loop
		END
	END
BUT_ONLY	//never

ACTION_IF NOT VARIABLE_IS_SET script BEGIN
	OUTER_SPRINT script "%BPWDASGT%"
END

COPY_EXISTING ~wolfva.cre~ ~override/wolfva.cre~
	WRITE_BYTE 0x271 4			//general undead
	WRITE_BYTE 0x272 117		//race wolf
	WRITE_BYTE 0x273 147		//class wolfva
	FOR (i=%SCRIPT_OVERRIDE% ; i<=%SCRIPT_DEFAULT% ; i += <img src='http://www.shsforums.net/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='8)' /> BEGIN		//check BP scripts
		READ_ASCII %i% test
		PATCH_IF (FILE_EXISTS_IN_GAME "%script%.bcs" AND NOT ("%test%" STRING_MATCHES_REGEXP "BP.*")) BEGIN		//BP script: NOT means it DOES
			WRITE_EVALUATED_ASCII %i% "%script%" #8
		END
	END
BUT_ONLY

Edited by Turambar, 17 September 2010 - 01:45 AM.

[Miloch]

The problem is that the BG1 (and therefore BGT) vampire wolf is Humanoid-Human-Mage (whereas wolfva01 , which is the BG2 one, is undead).
I will write that in the BGT forum, but I think Ascension won't include that in BGT because she doesn't fix those bg1 errors.

Eh... he was last I checked, or maybe he isn't since he "resigned" . Anyway, it's a simple fix to correct the general/race/class as it should be - once that happens it should get the right script anyhow, no?

[Turambar]

Eh... he was last I checked, or maybe he isn't since he "resigned" . Anyway, it's a simple fix to correct the general/race/class as it should be - once that happens it should get the right script anyhow, no?

He said that quite recently for the problems with Gerde and her ankhegs.

I was thinking of the installation order... BP should come quite early, and my fixpack should come afterwards, so the wolf will already have had the wrong script

[Miloch]

BP should come quite early, and my fixpack should come afterwards, so the wolf will already have had the wrong script

Oh I see... well we can fix it in the BP code before the script-assigning anyway.

[Miloch]

The question is why the Object settings for the vampiric wolf in BG1 were set the way they were? (protect from Turn Undead, etc.?)

Bug. There's a lot of that sort of thing in BG1 (and TotSC is appalling what with invalid .cre settings).

[Era]

I once saw a horse that said, "FOOLISH MORTAL! YOU HAVE UNLEASHED POWERS FAR BEYOND YOUR COMPREHENSION BY SUMMONING ME HERE."

[Hoppy]

I once saw a horse that said, "FOOLISH MORTAL! YOU HAVE UNLEASHED POWERS FAR BEYOND YOUR COMPREHENSION BY SUMMONING ME HERE."

I saw that once in a dream