Author Topic: Baseitems oddness questions  (Read 392 times)

Legacy_meaglyn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1451
  • Karma: +0/-0
Baseitems oddness questions
« on: January 31, 2014, 02:53:20 pm »


               Hi Folks,

I'm trying to make helmets and bracers into pieces of armor. To that end I've copied the original lines in baseitems and made a few changes. But I've hit a few issues that I'm hoping you guys can help out with.

First, the new helmet line I made does not have any appearances, just the default and nothing in the drop down.
I noticed this is the case for the CEP helmet_armor*  line as well. Both have the same "helm" for ItemClass as the
original helmet line, and that one does show all the helmet models. Shouldn't this just work? What Am I missing?

Second, I added a BaseAC value to helmets and bracers but in game the AC is not applied. Whereas with shields it is.  I found some references in the Omnibus to people doing this and no reports of complete failure.  Is this something that should work or is there something hardcoded about shields that allow the BaseAC entry to work?
(i.e. should I just give up on that part and use AC Bonuses? I was planning to use both. Medium and heavy bracers would have Base AC as well as potential bonus at higher qualities. )

Third, I added armor proficiency as a required feat for them which seems to work, but the items are red in game all the time. If you have the proficiency you can equip them anyway, but they are still red.  Has anyone seen this?
I think I noticed this also with the bracers_shield* CEP item, which has no required feat,  but I'm not completely sure about that.


Thanks for any thoughts or suggestions!

Meaglyn
               
               

               
            

Legacy_meaglyn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1451
  • Karma: +0/-0
Baseitems oddness questions
« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2014, 10:06:03 pm »


               Okay so helmets are a bit different than simple base items. Anyone know how the list of appearances gets populated? I tried copying and renaming a few helm_00X mdl, plt and icon files. The first one works, but I don't get a list for the later ones. Anyone?
               
               

               
            

Legacy_meaglyn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1451
  • Karma: +0/-0
Baseitems oddness questions
« Reply #2 on: February 02, 2014, 01:52:06 am »


               Found references, and my own experiments confirm, that the BaseAC column is not useful. Only the shields get inherent AC (and armor of course).

I guess I'll need to play with AC bonuses for that.

I'm still interested in knowing if it's possible to add a new helmet baseitem

And if there is a way around the red, unusable, highlighting on items the PC can actually equip.
I tested this on a clean 1.69 module with an unmodified copy of the bracers baseitem line.
Still reports red, but allows equipping. Can anyone enlighten me on this? Is it just a bug, is there a work around?

Thanks,

Meaglyn
               
               

               
            

Legacy_Shadooow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7698
  • Karma: +0/-0
Baseitems oddness questions
« Reply #3 on: February 02, 2014, 02:10:14 am »


               

meaglyn wrote...

Found references, and my own experiments confirm, that the BaseAC column is not useful. Only the shields get inherent AC (and armor of course).

I also think this is hardcoded on a baseitem lines.

I'm still interested in knowing if it's possible to add a new helmet baseitem

tried to same in an attempt to workaround the limit on heads with same results as you, then abadoned it. I dont think this is possible without NWNX adjustment.
               
               

               
            

Legacy_Proleric

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1750
  • Karma: +0/-0
Baseitems oddness questions
« Reply #4 on: February 02, 2014, 11:00:53 am »


               

ShaDoOoW wrote...

meaglyn wrote...

I'm still interested in knowing if it's possible to add a new helmet baseitem

tried to same in an attempt to workaround the limit on heads with same results as you, then abadoned it. I dont think this is possible without NWNX adjustment.

IIRC, the old CEP team abandoned this, too. Not sure who was working on it, though.
               
               

               
            

Legacy_meaglyn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1451
  • Karma: +0/-0
Baseitems oddness questions
« Reply #5 on: February 02, 2014, 03:44:23 pm »


               Thanks guys! I think I'll abandon it too then.

How about the red, "unequippable", but still equippable items? If this is something I did wrong or can work around I'd like to fix it, but if it's just the way it is I'll stop worrying about it and move on...
Maybe I have just not noticed this before for other non standard baseitems.
               
               

               
            

Legacy_Shadooow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7698
  • Karma: +0/-0
Baseitems oddness questions
« Reply #6 on: February 02, 2014, 03:49:33 pm »


               

meaglyn wrote...

Thanks guys! I think I'll abandon it too then.

How about the red, "unequippable", but still equippable items? If this is something I did wrong or can work around I'd like to fix it, but if it's just the way it is I'll stop worrying about it and move on...
Maybe I have just not noticed this before for other non standard baseitems.

thats something i havent encountered, can you tell me exact instruction how to reproduce this issue? Or perhaps paste the baseitem line you have problem with Ill try it.
               
               

               
            

Legacy_meaglyn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1451
  • Karma: +0/-0
Baseitems oddness questions
« Reply #7 on: February 02, 2014, 04:11:20 pm »


               

ShaDoOoW wrote...
thats something i havent encountered, can you tell me exact instruction how to reproduce this issue? Or perhaps paste the baseitem line you have problem with Ill try it.


Just copy the bracers or gloves line and make an item with the wizard. Then look at it in game.

I  just tested with most of the other equippable item types (only did one weapon,  shortsword). None of the other do this. Only bracers and gloves. Seems to be a bug...  I'll just live with it if I keep the new bracers I made I guess.

I didn't realize the CEP added armor things were half baked when I started down this road. I was using those new items with different armor bonus types as a proof of concept, oops:blush:
               
               

               
            

Legacy_Shadooow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7698
  • Karma: +0/-0
Baseitems oddness questions
« Reply #8 on: February 02, 2014, 05:02:25 pm »


               oh gloves/bracers only, that explains why I and probably noone else haven encountered it

Well you are correct they does glow red, I assume you already tried to change all various values right? Confirming your discovery then. If you found some workaround let us know.
               
               

               
            

Legacy_meaglyn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1451
  • Karma: +0/-0
Baseitems oddness questions
« Reply #9 on: February 02, 2014, 05:31:55 pm »


               

ShaDoOoW wrote...

oh gloves/bracers only, that explains why I and probably noone else haven encountered it

Well you are correct they does glow red, I assume you already tried to change all various values right? Confirming your discovery then. If you found some workaround let us know.


I tried a few things, one of which is ReqFeat of armor proficiency. Which works as expected,  (PC with heavy armor can equip, one without cannot) but still always glows red for both. But I have not tried changing every possible column '<img'>    In my real module I have the tlk lines all changed. I added and removed BaseAC, changed AC enhancement type, etc. None of which of course changed this problem  I might try adding a required feat to the regular bracers line just to see if it will glow red  when appropriate, but that would be more just to get a better idea of what the bug actually is.

My work around may be just to put a note in the documentation somewhere '<img'>

Thanks for the sanity check!