Johanobesus

Personally, I have always found a few of the restrictions sort of bizarre. A mace is basically an artificial club, so why can't a druid use one? Supposedly it's because of their "ethic," they can use a rough branch with a nail stuck in it, but not a polished wooden shaft with a metal ball on the end. But then in BGII they can use scimitars, and no other swords. That makes no sense to me at all. Why can they only use a sword if it has a certain shape? If they can use scimitars and daggers, it seems to me they should be able to use all swords. If they can use clubs, it seems to me they should be able to use maces and flails.

I think you shouldn't penalize weapon use too much. I don't see why a long sword should get in the way of picking a lock. Carrying around a big scabbard might reduce stealth and skills that rely at least in part upon stealth, like pick-pocketing and hide-in-shadows, but then where does the thief keep a katana, or are thieves like immortals in "Highlander," and have a magical disappearing scabbard in their coats? If a katana doesn't get in the way, neither should a long sword. A great big two-handed sword, though, would probably get in the way of everything. Also, consider that most thieves aren't that strong. With the exception of Yoshimo, most NPC thieves are a bit weak. Considering that they are often the first ones to look inside a chest or tomb and carry out loot, I try to keep their loads as light as possible, and there is no way I would burden Imoen or Jan with a big heavy weapon.

As for mages, maybe instead of restricting the spells they can cast, you could increase the spell casting time. If a mage is wielding a bastard sword, he can still cast any spell he wants, but it will take him a moment to put the sword in its scabbard before he can start casting, doubling his casting time. The bigger the weapon, the longer it takes for him to put it away. In fact, the same could be true for all spell casters. I've always thought fighter/mages were a bit over powered.

Now, there are three portraits for each NPC, a large one for the records page, and a small one for the main game window. There is also a medium sized portrait, but I can't at the moment remember what it is used for (maybe the epilogue?). For practical purposes, you only need to replace the large and small portraits. PC's only use the two portraits. The actual files are named xxxxl, xxxxm, and xxxxs, where xxxx is the identifier for the portrait set and is the same for all three files. The identifier might not be identical to the NPC's name. If the name is too long, it will be abbreviated for the identifier, or there might be some other alteration. I don't know exactly why, but sometimes it might have random letters thrown in. If you want to replace an NPC's portraits, you must determine what the files are called. If AerieL and AerieS don't work, you can use DLTCEP or Shadowkeeper to load the creature file and see what the files are called.

Of course, if you load the .cre file into one of these programs, you will have the option of assigning a different portrait and then saving the character. Then you won't have to worry about renaming anything. However, there are several versions of each NPC, and to do it this way you would have to edit and save each one, so it would probably be easier to just find the portraits' identifier and rename your pics.

Also, the portraits have to be bitmaps of particular size and format. You can't just use any old picture. They should be 24 bit .bmp files with a resolution of at least 72 dpi. Xxxxl should be 110x170 pixels, and xxxs should be 38x60.

A quickie serach indicates the author hasn't posted in these forums since April 22. Is this still being worked on? It sounds really neat. It'd be a shame if it's abandoned.