31 replies to this topic

[Vlad]

Only for Jaheira lovers - there is a logical hole in the plot. If Khalid dies in BG1, everything else in BG2 including Jaheira's dialogues in Irenicus dungeon, dead Khalid body etc. doesn't make sense. That's why I suggest to make them true pair in BG1. It means if one leaves or dies, the second simply leaves for good and won't appear in BG2 anymore.

 

I'll made this fix in the next version of NeJ3, although I don't join Jaheira anymore.

 

[EDIT] Also I made the fix for Minsc, Viconia and Edwin, as I mentioned in my other post. They are completely continuous from BG1 as well.

Edited by Vlad, 30 July 2015 - 12:39 AM.

[Bill Bisco]

I would prefer that you did not do this Vlad. BG2 does not make sense already. The game assumes that you saved Viconia, that Edwin did not kill Dynaheir and so forth.

I have a proposal om this thread #5:

It's the mod I work on after Erevain is done:http://www.shsforums...e-to-see-exist/

Also, linked pairs are generally not fun for many people. I'd ask that you make that code optional.

Edited by Bill Bisco, 30 July 2015 - 07:21 AM.

[K4thos]

wait, BGT doesn't take into account character dead when creating new NPCs? That's just silly if true. Let's say you let Viconia die in BG1 and she is still there in BG2 talking that you've saved her before? If this is correct than BGT indeed deserves better. (this is just my opinion of course)

 

I like your idea about making Jaheira and Khaalid a true pair in BG1. If Siege of Dragonspear won't come up with explanation that could contradict this I will write something similar in EET (similar concept to BGT but for EE games). Although it’s unlikely as it was already hinted that canon party will be explained.

 

Either way it’s a good idea and wroth implementing it in BGT.

Edited by K4thos, 30 July 2015 - 11:50 AM.

[Bill Bisco]

Yes, as far as I remember, I'd have to check the code. Coran, Safana, Garrick, Quayle, Xzar, Montaron, Edwin, Viconia all appear in BG2 even if they died in BG1. Any collaboration if and when we get to that would be great. I stress the same point to you K4thos, please mKe any forced pairs an optional component. That is not fun for a lot of people. No pair leaves the party if one of them dies, Jaheira included. She is made of strong stuff and has a strong sense of duty.

[The Imp]

wait, BGT doesn't take into account character dead when creating new NPCs?

Well, if they are not in the party during the party transition then no. And having died, they take a party slot, so you can only carry 5 dead people. And then no other party members.
The consistency there is, there's no way anyone could say what exactly actually happened between the transition, yeah, it seems to take a few days... but anyone could go and restore the non party members that are not present during the transition.

And that's the canon Viconia dialog in BG2, BGT shouldn't go and change it even if it's not exactly consistent. Unless you wish to go through a huge deal of rewriting that part of the plot.

How exactly is the Jaheira - Khalid pairing coded ? By the by.
Does it take into consideration Petrification ? And other effects that insta kill the party members....and what about the fact that Jaheira could be the only person in the party that could revive Khalid, if he dies...

[Vlad]

I've done that already. It's exactly the same coding as for Kachiko-Yoshimo, at least for me. One dies or leaves, another leaves forever together with the body. It doesn't re-write anything, it just makes sense in the game, and it will be installed only for BGT. If NeJ3 is installed without BGT, everything is per usual.

 

As to transition and continuity for other NPCs, it's in NeJ3 for ~half a year, when I have uploaded the transition files here. You'll get exactly the same NPC from your BG1 party in BG2. But if they are dead, they won't obviously be transited, so no worries. Everything is smooth and works fine.

 

[EDIT] I'm talking only about joinable NPCs in BG2. I don't care about quest NPCs such as Quale, Xzar, Safana, Coran etc. By the way, Coran was in the earlier versions of TS with a nice quest, but later Domi decided to split it and release the separate romances. So I think to bring him back one day.

Edited by Vlad, 31 July 2015 - 05:53 AM.

[cmorgan]

It is FR. Someone comes along and raises the dead. Tazok, anyone? Keeping Yoshimo mod? Smiling Imp's Joinable BG1 NPC's in BG2? Lots of the mod-added NPCs are built around the unchangeable plot points by necessity as well as by choice. But players are very used to the inconsitencies.

 

The reason to not deal with this is because you have to entirely rewrite BG2 if you try to keep internal consistency between the games reflecting each possible ending that a player could generate. The most obvious one is Imoen. Some players execute her almost immediately in BG1. So... rewrite BG2... without Imoen. And break internal consistency with all of the NPC and romance mods out there, because if there are two absolutes in BG2, it is that Player1 will survive until the end (game over on Player1 death causes reload to complete the story) and Imoen is a permanent part of the BG2 plot.

 

I'm not saying that Vlad's idea isn't a good one, a logical one - I am saying there is a reason why most folks accept the plot holes, because this is a fantasy that requires a structural plotline.

 

And from a functional standpoint, the two most commonly reported player activities are 1. multi-romancing and 2. walking Khalid (or any member of a pair) into a building while the rest of the party waits outside, dropping him, and going outside, so that the regular "pairs are inseparable" triggers fail, so that they get the party slot opened and still keep the one member of the pair they want.

 

Consider this - the real answer to the bhaalspawn saga is simple. Mellisan searches out each bhaalspawn, hires the Shadow Masks or another assassin's guild, sits back, and wins. Of course, the entore game would have ended in the first cutscene of BG... with the added image of a knife being stuck in the Armored Figure's back and him falling off the tower, too. We probably are better off creating more opportunities to allow players to justify the plot holes than try to fix them.

Edited by cmorgan, 31 July 2015 - 06:48 AM.

[Vlad]

because if there are two absolutes in BG2, it is that Player1 will survive until the end (game over on Player1 death causes reload to complete the story) and Imoen is a permanent part of the BG2 plot.

 

You're incorrect. Back in days I've written a script removing Player1 and making Player2 be Player1. I have this script still working, so no issues.

 

Imoen - it's possible to remove this sub-plot as well. Everything is possible in Baldur's Gate. For example, in NeJ3, Imoen is completely continuous. From the beginning till the end. She just gets 1 mln XP upon rejoining.

 

[EDIT] And I have a script which allows any NPC in the game to replace Player1 in the party. 

Edited by Vlad, 31 July 2015 - 08:30 AM.

[The Imp]

And I have a script which allows any NPC in the game to replace Player1 in the party. 0

You mean the "Game ends only on party death" or-whatever the mod was that Salk released ? Yeah, well that's optional. Some install it, some do not. But basically that doesn't usually make the Bhallspawn to be the first one to get slayn.
As for the Imoen, BGT already handles the BG2 Imoen so that even if you try to get her killed, it won't happen because her 1HP minimum belt. Now yes, you could skip the Imoen in the game, but you are redacting a considerable amount of the base plot from the game with that.

We probably are better off creating more opportunities to allow players to justify the plot holes than try to fix them.

Edited by The Imp, 31 July 2015 - 10:37 AM.

[K4thos]

You mean the "Game ends only on party death" or-whatever the mod was that Salk released ?

no, he means that you can get rid of CHARNAME completely from the party and then the engine automatically assigns Player1 to first character in the party. This is indeed possible and tested - I've written the same thing too. You can even re-add CHARNAME later if you wish. I was planning to include IWD in EET and make it playable with different party - triggered via reading a book about these events during game. That was before IWD:EE was announced, so in the end I've scrapped this idea because we can already play IWD in EE engine.

Edited by K4thos, 31 July 2015 - 10:54 AM.

[Bill Bisco]

Modding to remove Imoen and have alternate cutscenes and story would be great. I would want to be a part of that. Vlad, I agree that Jaheira's lines in BG2 won't make sense if Khalid dies in BG1. But, I think it would be better to modify her lines in BG2 to accommodate. She is a strong woman and has a sense of duty to CHARNAME and the cause of good overall. She didn't leave the party in BG2 neither does she in BG1.

[K4thos]

But, I think it would be better to modify her lines in BG2 to accommodate. She is a strong woman and has a sense of duty to CHARNAME and the cause of good overall. She didn't leave the party in BG2 neither does she in BG1.

your idea requires re-writing several NPC dialogues, including Jaheira romance and adds tons of compatibility issues with other mods. Making Khaalid and Jaheira a true pair in BG1 is a matter of 5 minutes to code and test it. No conflicts whatsoever. Guess which solution is viable

Edited by K4thos, 31 July 2015 - 11:17 AM.

[Bill Bisco]

K4thos that's the lazy way. We can do better than that can't we? We're modders afterall.

And please if you're going to add such lines of code. Please make them optional. NPC pairs should not be forced upon people.

[cmorgan]

Well, to each their own choice Perhaps I should restate -

 

"for the past 10+ years, modders have worked with and added to BG, SoA, and ToB assuming that 1. parties are 6 (5+PC), Imoen is mandatory for BG2 plotline, The Game Ends When PC Dies, Many Players Divide NPC Pairs, Sarevok Is A Bad Guy, and Khalid and Dynaheir are toast at the beginning of BG2 - so they have written their plots, banters, side commentaries, extensions, quests, and all content related materials with that in mind. If you are creating these new things, you are expecting other mods to look silly while yours makes sense". For most things, modders can adjust pretty easily - 10 NPCs in a party, or stuff like that - extensions of existing content. Other stuff, like things that expect Jaheira to be a widow in BG2, mean comprehensive rewrites of both canonical and mod-added content, and ... heh.

 

Again, I am not saying "don't do this" - I am saying that if you want to erase all the crazy plot holes, it is like chasing your tail. An endless loop.

 

Your tail to chase, of course - and it can be a lot of fun doing things like creating "Continuous Jaheria" or fixing and making a better "Continuous Imoen", making the game keep going after Player1 has dies (that *really* screws with mod-added NPC's, as there is no DV check for the Player1D stuff - unles the trick is to basically min-hp Player1 and keep him/her technically "alive" while showing him as dead. I wonder what happens when a PID is triggered by a shell-scripted NPC as Player1? Hmmm.... that sounds like a fun thing to test out...)

Edited by cmorgan, 31 July 2015 - 06:02 PM.

[Bill Bisco]

@cmorgan  I do understand what you're saying.  Yes, it's work to rework the original game content so that it does not assume that certain NPCs are alive or traveled with you.  However, if we're trying to be consistent, BGT (and EET) are entirely different works than the original.  People have been asking for years to take their BG1 party with them to BG2.  People have been noting for years the weirdness and disconnect about having certain NPCs alive or claiming to know CHARNAME when they didn't or were long dead.

 

I really wish something comprehensive like this was done years ago.  But I guess people wanted to do other stuff, and that's ok.  If other mods make assumptions, that's fine.  But, at least for the base mostly unmodded game, this would be a lot of fun and highly satisfying to implement.  (and long-asked for and overdue in my opinion).

[Vlad]

It's not Salk, of course, and it's not what you mean K4thos. It's really a simple thing that many don't know it works. I'll give the script here, but please acknowledge me if you use it.

 

Do the following trap with the script, and you'll see what happens.

 

 

IF
IsOverMe(Player2)
THEN
RESPONSE #100
StartCutScene("RemProt")
END


RemProt.bcs:


IF
Global("VP_Kill_Protagonist","GLOBAL",0)
THEN
RESPONSE #100
CutSceneId(Player2)
SetGlobal("VP_Kill_Protagonist","GLOBAL",1)
ActionOverride(Player1,PlayDead(0))
FadeToColor([20.0],0)
ForceSpell(Player1,SKIN_DANCER_RESTORE)
ActionOverride("TR...01",DestroySelf())
FadeFromColor([20.0],0)
EndCutSceneMode()
END

 

 

Edited by Vlad, 01 August 2015 - 05:59 AM.

[The Imp]

How would you go to the thieves secondary guild house(the one you get to keep if you are a thief) in BG2, if Edwin is dead ? Since he is the one activelly participaring in the complition of the mission(he has the documents or ... what ever it was ).
OK, after you have that down. In BG1, Edwin is supposed to hunt for the Rasheman witch, and that is Dynaheir, which most good parties take as a party member, but Edwin is no where to be heard again(he just stands there in Naskeln as if nothing had happens...), now how about when we travel from Candlekeep to BG(in chapter 6 in the original BG1, with Dynaheir and Minsc in tow) and there's a random encounter where ... surprice Edwin has a few henchmen and leveled up and he really wants to kill the witch.
Same could go with Minsc and Dynaheir if Edwin is there(yeah it's a little time constrained in this and all, but it can still be gone through that way).

I don't really care if this woiuld be in BGT, but it could very well be put into a EET mod(but not the EET itself, as it needs to be optional).

Edited by The Imp, 01 August 2015 - 06:48 AM.

[Bill Bisco]

Imp, as I stated in the other thread, all you do is edit the area scripts such that If Edwin is dead in BG1, in BG2, a new NPC appears in Edwin's place and gives you Mae'var's quests instead. The dialogues would similarly be edited to reflect "talk to X" instead of "talk to Edwin". Originally I thought of making a new blue robed NPC give the quest, but it could easily be another thief. I like your idea and would love to see the mod. It is inconsistent with Edwins' s track record of tolerating her presence despite jabs at CHARNAME and Minsc's and Edwin's tolerance of each other during BG2 (even if for awhile). It would still be fun.

[Vlad]

Bill, there is even a simpler solution. Just copy Edwin creature file in BG2, call it different name, for example "Medwin", choose different colours (if you want) and remove the option in dialogue to join the party. That's all. 

 

[EDIT] Just to edit area script, of course to destroy original Edwin and to place Medwin. No need need to change his dialogue or script. Leave his DV the same and dialogue the same (minus join party).

Edited by Vlad, 02 August 2015 - 01:37 PM.

[Almateria]

Ahh, the Mass Effect 3 school of character creation