226 replies to this topic

[Dakk]

Thanks again for spell turning functionality + animation fixes.

Confirmed it works? Can we see a screenshot?

[hook71]

A little typo in setup.tra:

@4206 = ~[FEMALE3B] Ha! Now that I'm in charge, we'll be sure ot have some fun.~ [FEMALE3B]

ot -> to

[Ascension64]

Fixed, thanks.

[phordicus]

re:Weapon Specialisation-associated Number of Attacks


Isn't this mis-named? If it's providing the extra 1/2 attack at levels 7 and 13 to non-fighters, that's just a level-based adjustment. Weapon specialization-based would be giving those 1/2 attacks based on, you know, weapon proficiency points, which would let any class with 2 stars get that extra 1/2 attack regardless of level and be much more useful since this level-based adjustment could already be CLAB'd in.

Edited by phordicus, 31 January 2012 - 10:31 PM.

[Ascension64]

re:Weapon Specialisation-associated Number of Attacks

If you look at WSPATCK.2DA, you'll notice the attacks bonus is dependent on both level and number of proficiency stars. I'm afraid 'Weapon Specialisation and Level-associated Number of Attacks is even more of a mouthful...

[phordicus]

re:Weapon Specialisation-associated Number of Attacks

If you look at WSPATCK.2DA, you'll notice the attacks bonus is dependent on both level and number of proficiency stars. I'm afraid 'Weapon Specialisation and Level-associated Number of Attacks is even more of a mouthful...

True, but I'm glad I was wrong as I can now CLAB in APR penalties for non-warriors and get just the weapon spec w/o level bonuses. I love my fallibility.

[Dakk]

re:Weapon Specialisation-associated Number of Attacks

If you look at WSPATCK.2DA, you'll notice the attacks bonus is dependent on both level and number of proficiency stars. I'm afraid 'Weapon Specialisation and Level-associated Number of Attacks is even more of a mouthful...

True, but I'm glad I was wrong as I can now CLAB in APR penalties for non-warriors and get just the weapon spec w/o level bonuses. I love my fallibility.

I think the Bigg has already done that for you in the Bigg Tweaks.

[Ascension64]

re:Weapon Specialisation-associated Number of Attacks

If you look at WSPATCK.2DA, you'll notice the attacks bonus is dependent on both level and number of proficiency stars. I'm afraid 'Weapon Specialisation and Level-associated Number of Attacks is even more of a mouthful...

True, but I'm glad I was wrong as I can now CLAB in APR penalties for non-warriors and get just the weapon spec w/o level bonuses. I love my fallibility.

And APR calculations seem a bit weirded up in vanilla code. Still need to look at that.

[aVENGER]

-Enable PickpocketFailed Trigger: Re-implemented the hack, now sends PickPocketFailed() in addition to the original AttackedBy() trigger, moved to core hacks, now overrides tob_hacks

I hope there is still a way of disabling the AttackedBy() from being sent on a failed pickpocket check.

The Revised Thievery component of Rogue Rebalancing (and a similar implementation in Aurora) rely on that.

[Ascension64]

-Enable PickpocketFailed Trigger: Re-implemented the hack, now sends PickPocketFailed() in addition to the original AttackedBy() trigger, moved to core hacks, now overrides tob_hacks

I hope there is still a way of disabling the AttackedBy() from being sent on a failed pickpocket check.

The Revised Thievery component of Rogue Rebalancing (and a similar implementation in Aurora) rely on that.

This is the issue. The AttackedBy() trigger is required for the target creature to understand that a hostile reaction has taken place and become enemy accordingly. Additionally, the AttackedBy() trigger is also required to prevent the fake talk exploit. It is a bit tricky, overall. How do you intend to use the trigger? Note that both triggers are passed in the same script round, so either will return true. Previously, the PickPocketFailed() tweak wouldn't turn a creature hostile if there was no specific code, unless you found otherwise.

Edited by Ascension64, 04 February 2012 - 03:07 PM.

[aVENGER]

The desired behaviour for Rogue Rebalancing was to remove the hostile reaction after a failed pickpocket attempt and have the PickpocketFailed() trigger activate instead. That was precisely what Miloch and I had asked Taimon to do when he made the initial fix in TobHacks

To summarize, the removal of the hostile reaction on a failed pickpocket attempt is integral to the aforementioned RR component. If you alter that behavior, the component will become incompatible with TobEx.

Edited by aVENGER, 04 February 2012 - 03:27 PM.

[Ascension64]

I see, the core behaviour will be to send both triggers. I'll keep a tweak that sends PickPocketFailed() only. I will have to sort out a way so that the tweak doesn't allow the fake talk exploit to occur. Do you enable the tweak in the RR setup (in relation to changing the name of the tweak)?

Update: I decided to have a look at the RR code. Is the latest version of RR 4.47?

// This file checks for TobEx and disables the Magic Resistance Mod Fix and Damage Fix options in TobExCore.ini if it is installed.
// Currently, the abovementioned option doesn't seem to work as intended
// Hopefully, this issue will be corrected in some future version of TobEx and this file will become obsolete


ACTION_IF FILE_EXISTS_IN_GAME ~tobex_ini/tobexcore.ini~ BEGIN // if TobEx is installed
COPY ~tobex_ini/tobexcore.ini~ ~tobex_ini~
REPLACE_TEXTUALLY CASE_INSENSITIVE EXACT_MATCH ~Magic Resistance Mod Fix=1~ ~Magic Resistance Mod Fix=0~
REPLACE_TEXTUALLY CASE_INSENSITIVE EXACT_MATCH ~Damage Fix=1~ ~Damage Fix=0~
REPLACE_TEXTUALLY CASE_INSENSITIVE EXACT_MATCH ~Disintegrate Fix=1~ ~Disintegrate Fix=0~
REPLACE_TEXTUALLY CASE_INSENSITIVE EXACT_MATCH ~Strength Mod=1~ ~Strength Mod=0~
REPLACE_TEXTUALLY CASE_INSENSITIVE EXACT_MATCH ~Correct Experience Reporting=1~ ~Correct Experience Reporting=0~
BUT_ONLY_IF_IT_CHANGES
END

This (rr/lib/tobexfix.tph) is probably out of date since version 0021 fixed all these issues.

Edited by Ascension64, 04 February 2012 - 04:11 PM.

[aVENGER]

I see, the core behaviour will be to send both triggers. I'll keep a tweak that sends PickPocketFailed() only..

That would work fine, thanks.

Do you enable the tweak in the RR setup (in relation to changing the name of the tweak)?

Yes, RR currently sets Enable PickpocketFailed Trigger=1 and Remain Hidden On Pickpocket Success=1 but I can easily update that.

This (rr/lib/tobexfix.tph) is probably out of date since version 0021 fixed all these issues.

No worries, that tph is commented out as of 4.48. You can get a preview of that version on the maintenance branch of my RR fork on GitHub.

Edited by aVENGER, 05 February 2012 - 01:59 AM.

[Ascension64]

Yes, RR currently sets Enable PickpocketFailed Trigger=1 and Remain Hidden On Pickpocket Success=1 but I can easily update that.

Great, the name of the tweak is "Trigger:PickpocketFailed Trigger Only=0" found in "TobEx_ini/TobExTweak.ini". I have also updated so that it a failed pickpocket will always prevent the fake talk exploit so that actions can occur straight away.

[Lisandro]

When I downdoad TobEx_Beta0023_test_120204.rar

Winrar tells me there is an error inside and I can't use it... ????

[hook71]

An extra byte is added to the beginning of attachments since the forum upgrade. The easiest way to unpack rar-files at the moment is to use 7-zip as it can handle the extra byte.

[Lisandro]

Ok... thanks Hook!

[i30817]

wtf - a extra byte?

[Dakk]

wtf - a extra byte?

*bytes i30817*

Edited by Dakk, 05 February 2012 - 06:01 PM.

[i30817]

There is no actual base i prefix, base 10 is the default. That refers to something else altogether that people who know me well would probably recognize.

Stupid stupid bug, don't they have unit tests? This has shaken my illusions about phpboard.
Or maybe it is... *drumroll*... a "security measure"?

Edited by i30817, 05 February 2012 - 11:42 PM.