Jump to content


Photo

TobEx Wish list


  • Please log in to reply
821 replies to this topic

#661 Ascension64

Ascension64
  • Modder
  • 5983 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:57 PM

There's one that fixpack attempts to fix, and really bugs me the way it does:
- Invisibility granting save bonuses, II granting AC bonuses against creatures that do not detect invisible things (io invisible detection by script).

-Galactygon

Can you clarify exactly what the bonuses and how they are applied, for implementation purposes?

Can you do the reverse of dualclass for all and also add the opposite, no dualclass for anyone aka humans can multiclass?

You can do this yourself by modding the 2DAs.

Edited by Ascension64, 07 April 2012 - 04:58 PM.

--------------
Retired Modder
Note: I do not respond to profile comments/personal messages in regards to troubleshooting my modifications. Please post on the public forums instead.

Baldur's Gate Trilogy-WeiDU and Mods
Throne of Bhaal Extender (TobEx)

Contributions: (NWN2) A Deathstalker (voice acting) - (IWD2) IWD2 NPC Project (soundset editing) - (Misc) SHS PC Soundsets (voice acting)
Legacy: (BG/Tutu/BGT) Beregost Crash Fixer 1.9 (18 Jul 10) - (BG2) Enable conversations with charmed/dominated creatures (18 Jul 10) - (BG2) Experience Corrections (18 Jul 10) - (Misc) Platform Conversion Utility RC2 (13 Feb 10)


#662 phordicus

phordicus
  • Member
  • 212 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:51 PM

You can do this yourself by modding the 2DAs.


What the... Have humans always been able to multiclass just by zeroing out stuff in DUALCLAS.2DA? Having to mess with that flag in the CRE file about "original class" made me assume it was something hard-coded. Thanks :)

Edited by phordicus, 07 April 2012 - 09:52 PM.

Druid Kit Enhancements 1.0 (requires Dispel Magic fix, whether ToBEx's or Taimon's)

#663 aVENGER

aVENGER
  • Modder
  • 1680 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 01:01 AM

When time permits, please look into the issue with probability-staggered effects and see if anything can be done about it.

#664 Galactygon

Galactygon

    Modding since 2002

  • Member
  • 938 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:54 AM

Yes, I think it would be wise to present changes of ToBEx/GemRB and ideas to the bgee team. They might even listen.

While Overhaul Games are working on BGEE, it would at least be worthwhile to propose some limit-removing changes to the source code to support modders. The limited number of globals was one issue, for example.

Do they know the existence of the likes of GemRB and ToBEx or are they silent about it? It doesn't sound as though they have contacted you or the likes of Avenger.

About opcode #177 (and other opcodes using the same parameter style). I already modified #0 and #1 subtypes to handle faction/team and #9 to handle classmask (these to support various stuff in the blackisle branch of the engines).

GemRB doesn't externalise this is to a bcs file, does it?

I don't think so. It should be pretty easy to make it GemRB compatible if external .bcs files are used though.

There's one that fixpack attempts to fix, and really bugs me the way it does:
- Invisibility granting save bonuses, II granting AC bonuses against creatures that do not detect invisible things (io invisible detection by script).

Can you clarify exactly what the bonuses and how they are applied, for implementation purposes?

See this topic in what I mean. Here's the code from fixpack v 9.01:
Spoiler


In summary, fixpack has an implementation by externalizing the saving throw bonuses as separate shell spells. These shell spells are applied in addition to normal (improved) invisibility effects, and the .cre is protected against the shell spells so that the saving throw bonuses do not stack while allowing (improved) invisibility to be renewed before it expires.

This implementation has several shortcomings:
a.) improved invisibility can be renewed, but the saving throw bonuses are not renewed and expire prematurely: a major inconsistency
b.) if improved invisibility is dispelled by opcodes 47 and 136, the bonuses are not removed by default
c.) the saving throw bonuses are also effective against creatures who detect invisible characters via opcode 193, when in reality they should not be

In PnP it's supposed to give a -4 bonus to saves and AC, which is different from fixpack's implementation of granting bonuses only to saves.

I think the best way to sort this out is to allow a string of effects to be attached the invisibility opcode (#20) via a .2da list. These effects are automatically applied/removed when the invisibility opcode is applied/removed which means they are removable with the invisibility opcode and non-cumulative.

Now for something completely specific: an effect can be applied when the character is completely invisible (type 0, as in param2 of opcode 20) or when the character is partially visible (type 1). An effect can be applied in both cases by listing it twice with types 1 and 2.

2DA V1.0
***
	 TYPE
EFF1 0
EFF2 0	  
EFF3 1			  
EFF4 0
EDIT: And if possible, could you hardcode saves/AC bonuses/protection effects carried via invisibility to be ignored by creatures with stat SEEINVISIBLE=1?

-Galactygon

Edited by Galactygon, 08 April 2012 - 04:59 AM.

Posted Image

#665 aVENGER

aVENGER
  • Modder
  • 1680 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:21 AM

In PnP it's supposed to give a -4 bonus to saves and AC, which is different from fixpack's implementation of granting bonuses only to saves.


The AC bonus is implemented as a to hit penalty for anyone who attacks an improved invisible creature and it works correctly.

And if possible, could you hardcode saves/AC bonuses/protection effects carried via invisibility to be ignored by creatures with stat SEEINVISIBLE=1?


This already works fine for the AC bonus/to hit penalty.

#666 Galactygon

Galactygon

    Modding since 2002

  • Member
  • 938 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:42 AM

I haven't known about this, and it's not even mentioned in the IESDP:
Spoiler


EDIT: My stance on externalizing effects carried via invisibility hasn't changed. The +4 initial attack bonus (melee?/ranged?) as well as the AC/Saving Throw bonuses can still be externalized to an effects list.

-Galactygon

Edited by Galactygon, 08 April 2012 - 05:44 AM.

Posted Image

#667 Ascension64

Ascension64
  • Modder
  • 5983 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:26 AM

Do they know the existence of the likes of GemRB and ToBEx or are they silent about it? It doesn't sound as though they have contacted you or the likes of Avenger.

I certainly haven't heard anything from them.

I think the best way to sort this out is to allow a string of effects to be attached the invisibility opcode (#20) via a .2da list. These effects are automatically applied/removed when the invisibility opcode is applied/removed which means they are removable with the invisibility opcode and non-cumulative.

It is not as simple as that, particularly if the plan is to provide +4 saving throw bonus only when an aggressor who cannot see invisible tries to do something to the invisible target. If the effects are applied across the board, I would still have to hard-code contingencies to prevent/reverse the effect in the case that the bonuses are negated through the aggressor seeing invisible. Conditionally applied effects are not very well suited to externalisation as a result. For a global change across the board, it is easier to tag all the spells with invisible opcode (#20) with all the saving throw bonuses, just like Fixpack has done.

--------------
Retired Modder
Note: I do not respond to profile comments/personal messages in regards to troubleshooting my modifications. Please post on the public forums instead.

Baldur's Gate Trilogy-WeiDU and Mods
Throne of Bhaal Extender (TobEx)

Contributions: (NWN2) A Deathstalker (voice acting) - (IWD2) IWD2 NPC Project (soundset editing) - (Misc) SHS PC Soundsets (voice acting)
Legacy: (BG/Tutu/BGT) Beregost Crash Fixer 1.9 (18 Jul 10) - (BG2) Enable conversations with charmed/dominated creatures (18 Jul 10) - (BG2) Experience Corrections (18 Jul 10) - (Misc) Platform Conversion Utility RC2 (13 Feb 10)


#668 Galactygon

Galactygon

    Modding since 2002

  • Member
  • 938 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 07:54 AM

It is not as simple as that, particularly if the plan is to provide +4 saving throw bonus only when an aggressor who cannot see invisible tries to do something to the invisible target. If the effects are applied across the board, I would still have to hard-code contingencies to prevent/reverse the effect in the case that the bonuses are negated through the aggressor seeing invisible. Conditionally applied effects are not very well suited to externalisation as a result. For a global change across the board, it is easier to tag all the spells with invisible opcode (#20) with all the saving throw bonuses, just like Fixpack has done.


I can't see the relation between contingencies/opcode 232 and this. The checks when those effects would be removed would correspond to the checks when the invisibility state is removed. The engine already turns on/off opcodes 153-158 according to STATE_INVISIBLE.

What I imagine right now is that each time a saving throw is rolled, a check is made between the state (STATE_INVISIBLE, etc) of the creature attempting the save and the stat of the attacker (SEEINVISIBLE=1). Instead of automatically applying a +4 bonus, there could be a run through the effects listed in the .2da file for opcodes 33-37. If what aVENGER_RR said is true, then the engine already does this with to hit rolls except it's not externalized.

I'm just as fine with externalizing those SEEINVISIBLE-sensitive roll values into a .2da file, and then allowing non-SEEINVISIBLE sensitive effects to be externalized. Or hardcoding some sort of .spl that is applied when the invisibility is ended so that .spl could then be customized to remove sectypes for example. Maybe that's the easiest to implement.

-Galactygon
Posted Image

#669 Ascension64

Ascension64
  • Modder
  • 5983 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:22 PM

It's blasphemy to use the contingency system, to say the least. The contingency pairs the effect details to a trigger and pops them on a list that is checked every script round. If the trigger is met, then the contingency effect is applied (essentially, a spell is cast) and the pair is purged from the list. What is more, the contingency needs an effect to hold it in the list, since the list sits within the derived stats.

For a specific conditional stat change, it is far better to apply it directly than to use the cumbersome effect system (i.e. rather than modify the stat, modify a local copy of the AC/saving throw in the specific function instead). It is possible to externalise the number, but if you want to make other changes, they will have to be hard-coded in.

For the to hit rolls, this is exactly what happens. After the to hit roll is made, a huge number of modifiers are applied by hard code. This is the same function that displays the extra combat info text (the to hit one only; the damage one has a completely different one). The implementation of a bonus to saving throws when target invisible and aggressor cannot see invisible should sit immediately before the net saving throw is checked.

--------------
Retired Modder
Note: I do not respond to profile comments/personal messages in regards to troubleshooting my modifications. Please post on the public forums instead.

Baldur's Gate Trilogy-WeiDU and Mods
Throne of Bhaal Extender (TobEx)

Contributions: (NWN2) A Deathstalker (voice acting) - (IWD2) IWD2 NPC Project (soundset editing) - (Misc) SHS PC Soundsets (voice acting)
Legacy: (BG/Tutu/BGT) Beregost Crash Fixer 1.9 (18 Jul 10) - (BG2) Enable conversations with charmed/dominated creatures (18 Jul 10) - (BG2) Experience Corrections (18 Jul 10) - (Misc) Platform Conversion Utility RC2 (13 Feb 10)


#670 Ascension64

Ascension64
  • Modder
  • 5983 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 08:52 PM

Allow items with more than 3 headers (see here). Probably not really feasible due to there being space only for 3 charge fields per item, but it might be useful to see how exactly the extra data structure(s) for such items get allocated in .sto, .cre and saved game files.

In answer to some request for some ages ago, any charges for ability index > 2 uses the same usage index as ability index 0. There is no overflow. Adding more charge fields does require extra data structures, which the pre-existing item structure does not have. To say the least, it would be cumbersome to add these unless there was a really strong reason to do so.

--------------
Retired Modder
Note: I do not respond to profile comments/personal messages in regards to troubleshooting my modifications. Please post on the public forums instead.

Baldur's Gate Trilogy-WeiDU and Mods
Throne of Bhaal Extender (TobEx)

Contributions: (NWN2) A Deathstalker (voice acting) - (IWD2) IWD2 NPC Project (soundset editing) - (Misc) SHS PC Soundsets (voice acting)
Legacy: (BG/Tutu/BGT) Beregost Crash Fixer 1.9 (18 Jul 10) - (BG2) Enable conversations with charmed/dominated creatures (18 Jul 10) - (BG2) Experience Corrections (18 Jul 10) - (Misc) Platform Conversion Utility RC2 (13 Feb 10)


#671 phordicus

phordicus
  • Member
  • 212 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 10:05 PM

Externalizing hardcoded effects. This is near and dear to my heart. It must be a pain in the ass if possible at all, because things like stoneskin and deprecating spell protections could use it, too. Do you work better with a fine single-malt, or domestic 6-pack? I'm willing to help in any way I can.
Druid Kit Enhancements 1.0 (requires Dispel Magic fix, whether ToBEx's or Taimon's)

#672 Galactygon

Galactygon

    Modding since 2002

  • Member
  • 938 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 03:23 AM

It's blasphemy to use the contingency system, to say the least. The contingency pairs the effect details to a trigger and pops them on a list that is checked every script round. If the trigger is met, then the contingency effect is applied (essentially, a spell is cast) and the pair is purged from the list. What is more, the contingency needs an effect to hold it in the list, since the list sits within the derived stats.

For a specific conditional stat change, it is far better to apply it directly than to use the cumbersome effect system (i.e. rather than modify the stat, modify a local copy of the AC/saving throw in the specific function instead). It is possible to externalise the number, but if you want to make other changes, they will have to be hard-coded in.

For the to hit rolls, this is exactly what happens. After the to hit roll is made, a huge number of modifiers are applied by hard code. This is the same function that displays the extra combat info text (the to hit one only; the damage one has a completely different one).


While I do not have or understand the source, I highly doubt contingencies and opcode 232 are relevant here. As you have said, we are talking about opcode-specific conditions which are not kept track in a list but rather are triggered when something specific happens. What I am thinking of is a set of external effects being applied (via externalized list), and then removed when something happens that prematurely purges the opcode.

In essence we wouldn't be externalizing the trigger conditions (as in contingency) but rather what happens when certain hardcoded trigger conditions occur.

Note: This applies to many earlier requests of other opcodes which can be purged premature their expiration (stoneskin, decrementing spell immunity, etc).

The implementation of a bonus to saving throws when target invisible and aggressor cannot see invisible should sit immediately before the net saving throw is checked.

Exactly. The SEEINVISIBLE sensitive bonuses would not be externalized, but the number to adjust them (saving throws, to hit rolls) would be. Note that invisible characters shouldn't receive bonuses to saving throws against area effect spells.


Allow items with more than 3 headers (see here). Probably not really feasible due to there being space only for 3 charge fields per item, but it might be useful to see how exactly the extra data structure(s) for such items get allocated in .sto, .cre and saved game files.

In answer to some request for some ages ago, any charges for ability index > 2 uses the same usage index as ability index 0. There is no overflow. Adding more charge fields does require extra data structures, which the pre-existing item structure does not have. To say the least, it would be cumbersome to add these unless there was a really strong reason to do so.

On the other hand, it should be feasable to externalize which headers use which charges, so that additional headers can use indexes other than 0, and items with multiple abilities can be tied to a single charge count (index 0). A problem with more than 3 abilities that wasn't mentioned is the GuI problem when you choose the item's abilities in the quickslot via the inventory. That would need a scroll bar. tooltip.2da is not limited to 3 entries, but I'm not 100% sure and needs some testing.

With this we can fix an oversight where wands should not be using seperate charge counts for the different abilities. (Note to Fixpackers: inserting additional blank headers at 1 and 2 should do this, but there still might be problems with the GuI).

-Galactygon
Posted Image

#673 Avenger_teambg

Avenger_teambg
  • Member
  • 604 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 05:24 AM


What would be an alternative, they dance in a little circle before they switch back/get a penalty time before switching back?

I'd vote for both. They don't remain standing there, but instead walk/run some distance before stopping. Could the both the distance run and the penalty time be enforced via the expanded stats?

This would be extremely tough I believe because they don't get saved in areas or in saved games.


I can't even start to comment on this because my lack of understanding in how flying projectiles are handled in the game. This is not an issue for spells that do not use projectiles; the effects are transported correctly through areas.

edit: For the projectile-in-next-door-area, there are plenty of empty fields in the .pro area explosion header that can be used as kind of a "true projectile radius". Some of the empty fields are used by GemRB.

-Galactygon


Uh, yeah, and it is documented somewhere.
Please either leave the unused fields unused or what's better: implement them!
These fields are mostly there to squeeze hardcoded projectiles into the regular structure. In GemRB all projectiles are coming from a .pro file!
Not only bg style projectiles, but all of PST and HoW!
If you implement these, and some modder 'steals' the .pro files from GemRB, they could fully implement iwd/pst spells.
Well, if you also implement the missing effects.
If you have a question about some field, just ask.

About projectiles through areas: that's not always sane. It is fine for some indoor/outdoor. If you implement this, also make an exit flag for it :)
Avenger

#674 Ascension64

Ascension64
  • Modder
  • 5983 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 03:50 AM

...we are talking about opcode-specific conditions which are not kept track in a list but rather are triggered when something specific happens. What I am thinking of is a set of external effects being applied (via externalized list), and then removed when something happens that prematurely purges the opcode.

Only effects in the game work via opcode. Most hard-coded changes bypass effects directly and simply directly change the internal structure in question. The problem with trying to conceptualise the entire engine with effect opcodes and stats is simplistic in view and limited in scope, because effects must follow certain rules of application/removal. What you are suggesting for an example of:
if (target.bIsInvisible && !source.bSeeInvisible) target.savingThrows += 4
is flawed and highly dangerous because the modification is available to every function. It is much more optimal and to use a copy of the savingThrows variable and directly adjust that within a single function.
int savingThrowsLocal = target.savingThrows;
if (target.bIsInvisible && !source.bSeeInvisible) savingThrowsLocal +=4;
There is not a chance externalising this effect will provide much return, because all I would let you do is to change the number 4 to something else. If you want to change the AC instead, you'd end up putting that on the wish list and I'd have to code that up, etc., etc.
Note that script actions also follow well-defined rules, so a ChangeStat(SAVING_THROW_X, 4) would also be flawed due to it becing accessible by every function.

Exactly. The SEEINVISIBLE sensitive bonuses would not be externalized, but the number to adjust them (saving throws, to hit rolls) would be. Note that invisible characters shouldn't receive bonuses to saving throws against area effect spells.

As above. I would have to provide the entire background code so you can adjust every bonus to your whim. One block of code for saving throws, one for to hit rolls, one for AC, one for goodness-knows-what, one for make-Galactygon-happy. :)

On the other hand, it should be feasable to externalize which headers use which charges, so that additional headers can use indexes other than 0, and items with multiple abilities can be tied to a single charge count (index 0). A problem with more than 3 abilities that wasn't mentioned is the GuI problem when you choose the item's abilities in the quickslot via the inventory. That would need a scroll bar. tooltip.2da is not limited to 3 entries, but I'm not 100% sure and needs some testing.

With this we can fix an oversight where wands should not be using seperate charge counts for the different abilities. (Note to Fixpackers: inserting additional blank headers at 1 and 2 should do this, but there still might be problems with the GuI).

I need to question the usefulness of such a 'fix' in relation its usefulness relatively to requests of broader scope. For example, the expansion of stats has a much larger potential than to make items with more than 3 abilities.

Edited by Ascension64, 10 April 2012 - 03:52 AM.

--------------
Retired Modder
Note: I do not respond to profile comments/personal messages in regards to troubleshooting my modifications. Please post on the public forums instead.

Baldur's Gate Trilogy-WeiDU and Mods
Throne of Bhaal Extender (TobEx)

Contributions: (NWN2) A Deathstalker (voice acting) - (IWD2) IWD2 NPC Project (soundset editing) - (Misc) SHS PC Soundsets (voice acting)
Legacy: (BG/Tutu/BGT) Beregost Crash Fixer 1.9 (18 Jul 10) - (BG2) Enable conversations with charmed/dominated creatures (18 Jul 10) - (BG2) Experience Corrections (18 Jul 10) - (Misc) Platform Conversion Utility RC2 (13 Feb 10)


#675 Sasha Al'Therin

Sasha Al'Therin
  • Modder
  • 615 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 06:17 AM

See this thread at G3 http://forums.gibber...=0

Is there anyway to find out and determine what exactly triggers the weapon style proficiencies?

More specifically if they only affect melee fighting or if ranged weapons fall into various categories too, if so which categories.

Is it pointless to put points into a weapon style if you are an archer and a bow is supposed to be your main weapon? I would think that a bow is two handed and would be affected by two handed weapon style. However it's been suggested that it isn't.

If ranged weapons aren't part of the weapon style proficiencies could they be added?

My working mods:
an AI Party Script for BG2 game engine DOWNLOAD LINK ONLY!
Interactive Tweaks for BG series with some IWD support. DOWNLOAD LINK ONLY!
Rest For 8 Hours an IWD mod
-------------------------------------------
My contributions: BG1Fixpack, BG1Tweaks
On Hold: Solestia an NPC for SOA
-------------------------------------------
My website: http://sasha-altheri...s.com/index.htm


#676 phordicus

phordicus
  • Member
  • 212 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 05:08 PM

See this thread at G3 http://forums.gibber...=0

Is there anyway to find out and determine what exactly triggers the weapon style proficiencies?

More specifically if they only affect melee fighting or if ranged weapons fall into various categories too, if so which categories.

Is it pointless to put points into a weapon style if you are an archer and a bow is supposed to be your main weapon? I would think that a bow is two handed and would be affected by two handed weapon style. However it's been suggested that it isn't.

If ranged weapons aren't part of the weapon style proficiencies could they be added?

So you're saying that the style that teaches you how to use halberds, spears, and 2-handed swords more effectively should also affect how well you use a bow or crossbow?
Druid Kit Enhancements 1.0 (requires Dispel Magic fix, whether ToBEx's or Taimon's)

#677 Sasha Al'Therin

Sasha Al'Therin
  • Modder
  • 615 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 06:52 PM

So you're saying that the style that teaches you how to use halberds, spears, and 2-handed swords more effectively should also affect how well you use a bow or crossbow?

If someone wants to do that, why not? If ranged weapons are not part of the weapon styles, then it is unfair that melee weapons get TWO sets of proficiencies which dictate how well the weapon can or can not be used. Also, a good sturdy bow can be used much the same as a quarterstaff in melee. A crossbow while a bit cumbersome can bonk heads just as effectively as a club. If someone chose to give such weapons a melee component, would they be covered?

Its more my curiosity about how it actually works that needs to be satisfied than making any actual changes. Documented proof would be preferable over idle speculation. Since ToBex handles the game engine, surely such information will be discovered. It has to be controlled by the engine as there is nothing on any item to set weapon style proficiency that affects it.

My working mods:
an AI Party Script for BG2 game engine DOWNLOAD LINK ONLY!
Interactive Tweaks for BG series with some IWD support. DOWNLOAD LINK ONLY!
Rest For 8 Hours an IWD mod
-------------------------------------------
My contributions: BG1Fixpack, BG1Tweaks
On Hold: Solestia an NPC for SOA
-------------------------------------------
My website: http://sasha-altheri...s.com/index.htm


#678 phordicus

phordicus
  • Member
  • 212 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 09:27 PM

If someone wants to do that, why not?

Because it can't be derived from the existing rules in any way, and making stuff up "just because" is terrible game design. It's in the same category as asking why the Stinking Cloud spell doesn't reduce Charisma until the stink is washed out, or why you can't re-ignite an NPC romance by getting them drunk. There's only the barest of connection between them as far as the game is concerned.

If ranged weapons are not part of the weapon styles, then it is unfair that melee weapons get TWO sets of proficiencies which dictate how well the weapon can or can not be used.

Privelege is bad, right? Fairness has nothing to do with a game's rules unless the game in question is targeted at pre-schoolers. Rules are blind dictators, not kumbayah camp counselors.

The melee styles grant bonuses that tend to be exclusive outside of the weapon profs themselves, like extending critical range or granting an AC bonus. Those styles also cover a far greater number of weapons to be applied to; there's only two categories of missile weapons, thrown and leveraged. I'm curious what your missile weapon styles would look like.

Also, a good sturdy bow can be used much the same as a quarterstaff in melee. A crossbow while a bit cumbersome can bonk heads just as effectively as a club. If someone chose to give such weapons a melee component, would they be covered?

This is ludicrous. "Hey, it's wood so all wood things must be usable in the same ways, right?" Imagination needs to have at least its starting point in reality. You couldn't find a wood product less suited for use as a quarterstaff than a bowstaff. Just... no.

Its more my curiosity about how it actually works that needs to be satisfied than making any actual changes. Documented proof would be preferable over idle speculation. Since ToBex handles the game engine, surely such information will be discovered. It has to be controlled by the engine as there is nothing on any item to set weapon style proficiency that affects it.

The styles are dependent on two things: the ITM's item ability has to be Melee, and whether the item flag 18h indicates 2-handed or not.

I bashed you pretty hard, but only for the dual-purposed weapons which just would never work; impossible in reality, silly in a game.

I'm not sure where it is on Asc64's to-do list, but I questioned where the styles' benefits were granted from a while ago in the hopes they could be externalized to a 2DA. If they could, you'd be able to make up some Ranged Weapon Styles, which would actually be pretty cool.

Edited by phordicus, 10 April 2012 - 09:27 PM.

Druid Kit Enhancements 1.0 (requires Dispel Magic fix, whether ToBEx's or Taimon's)

#679 Sasha Al'Therin

Sasha Al'Therin
  • Modder
  • 615 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 09:55 PM

I don't want to argue. I want to know exactly how it works because frankly I want to extend the abilities of igi's Learn Through Use mod to weapon styles as well. I've already got the ground work to expand his mod after it's been installed. I just need to know specifically how the engine deals with ranged weapons. Not whether or not you believe something can or can't be done in game or real life. If you can't answer that, then don't say anything. Thank you.

My working mods:
an AI Party Script for BG2 game engine DOWNLOAD LINK ONLY!
Interactive Tweaks for BG series with some IWD support. DOWNLOAD LINK ONLY!
Rest For 8 Hours an IWD mod
-------------------------------------------
My contributions: BG1Fixpack, BG1Tweaks
On Hold: Solestia an NPC for SOA
-------------------------------------------
My website: http://sasha-altheri...s.com/index.htm


#680 phordicus

phordicus
  • Member
  • 212 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 11:16 PM

"How the engine deals with ranged weapons" is brand new. If anyone was supposed to filter that from the stream of disparate conjecture prior to your last post, I'm impressed.

"It has to be controlled by the engine as there is nothing on any item to set weapon style proficiency that affects it." I told you exactly why that was wrong and how the item dictates weapon style interaction. If you ignore that, don't get angry. You're welcome.
Druid Kit Enhancements 1.0 (requires Dispel Magic fix, whether ToBEx's or Taimon's)