Community Patch discussion and development thread

[Legacy_Bogdanov89]

               

Thank you for reading and replying to my big post '>

I will keep it much shorter in the future.

 

Two small questions about AI:

 

1. I am playing on the very hard difficulties, and my henchmen tend to cast AoE spells that also hit me (due to full pvp settings enabled).

 

Do you think it would be a good idea for the AI to check are there any friendly targets near his targeted enemy BEFORE he unleashes a potentially deadly spell, or some very powerful paralyze/daze/death magic that can stun/kill his own master?

Lately i am more afraid of my henchman's spells than i am afraid of any enemy moster i fight xD

 

2. I notice that the caster henchmen like the bard girl have the "Combat Casting" feat - but they never use the Defensive Casting Mode that is needed for the Combat Casting feat to be used at all!

 

Also, whenever my henchmen try to cast spells in melee with enemies, they get heavily wounded from enemy Attacks of Opportunity - and their spell usually fails.

Could you please make the companions/henchmen properly use the Defensive Casting mode (which would also make use of their Combat Casting feat) whenever they are in melee with an enemy?

 

I do not know how the recent "combat mode lasts until canceled" change interacts with the AI using combat modes (like defensive casting mode), but it would be a GREAT improvement if the caster henchmen used Defensive Casting Mode to actually be able to cast in melee (and use their Combat Casting feat) instead of them losing 80% of their total health from AoO and failing their spell.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Gruftlord]

               I have no idea about the polymorph engine. It way over my head. But i see no reason why the feature shiuld be doubled in nwnx and the polymorph engine. Simpler scripts sound like a good option.


Re switches: i personally see no reason for the disabling feature to begin with. But i'm pretty certain i could work around it anyway, if i ever encountered a mod where i disliked a setting. So i do not care either way. The main question is: is there even a sp module builder around who is interested in this? I might be interested in his oppinion. Maybe i'm missing something here.


Point 1 sounds intriguing. But does it solve anything a cpp dm widget couldn't?


Re 2: no preference really but to me it sounds like something people would want a switch for.


3: i do not understand the bug. Is it supposed to simulate passage of time before resurrection? Or arw we talking about payer cast spells? In the latter case im pro, former case no prefference.


4: it's my idea, what's not to like? :-D


5: i like that idea, definatelly support it.


Main reason for post: i'll upload the ground models tomorrow. The way it looks atm, i'll package project q models where available. They are really way above the doa ones. This includes a spot on model for healers kits, a model for boots that do not have the problem you mentioned (i hope), and improved models for amulets and rings.

On top of it i'll send the updated zextures for thieves kit, cloak  (both vanilla resources that fix other problems, too) and belt.

I will also send a basitem.2da. The q models have different file names and i also thought it would be nice to add shieldmodel 011 as base model for shields instead of bags.

Everything is optional of course, so will also send tje improved texture for the old healerkit
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

Thank you for reading and replying to my big post '>

I will keep it much shorter in the future.

 

Two small questions about AI:

 

1. I am playing on the very hard difficulties, and my henchmen tend to cast AoE spells that also hit me (due to full pvp settings enabled).

 

Do you think it would be a good idea for the AI to check are there any friendly targets near his targeted enemy BEFORE he unleashes a potentially deadly spell, or some very powerful paralyze/daze/death magic that can stun/kill his own master?

Lately i am more afraid of my henchman's spells than i am afraid of any enemy moster i fight xD

Hmm, this is tricky again because this behavior is not needed on lower difficulty settings and also not in case of monsters who has immunity to the spells of others. But I can understand that this gets riddiculous with for example a high level sorcerer henchman. Will see what I can think up.

 

 

2. I notice that the caster henchmen like the bard girl have the "Combat Casting" feat - but they never use the Defensive Casting Mode that is needed for the Combat Casting feat to be used at all!

 

Also, whenever my henchmen try to cast spells in melee with enemies, they get heavily wounded from enemy Attacks of Opportunity - and their spell usually fails.

Could you please make the companions/henchmen properly use the Defensive Casting mode (which would also make use of their Combat Casting feat) whenever they are in melee with an enemy?

 

I do not know how the recent "combat mode lasts until canceled" change interacts with the AI using combat modes (like defensive casting mode), but it would be a GREAT improvement if the caster henchmen used Defensive Casting Mode to actually be able to cast in melee (and use their Combat Casting feat) instead of them losing 80% of their total health from AoO and failing their spell.

This is something I added there already, however it is available only for a creatures with high AI, which normally aren't any (the HIGH_AI level is not used in official campaigns and rarely anywhere else, mainly because in vanilla there are no extra functionalitiies over normal AI - but CPP changed this).

 

Maybe I could give every henchman this high AI level. Or probably better, I could extend this feature to henchmans automatically. Still, the current code uses defensive casting only if the skill rank is over 22 (aka autowin situation) as it uses if before the AI decide whether she casts any and which spell. And also because you can actually fail the check and cast nothing. I need a suggestion how to deal with this because this feature won't work in your case anyway - OC henchmans can hardly possess such high concentration rank.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

I have no idea about the polymorph engine. It way over my head. But i see no reason why the feature shiuld be doubled in nwnx and the polymorph engine. Simpler scripts sound like a good option.

that confirms my own opinion so I will rework this and exclude this workaround

 

Re switches: i personally see no reason for the disabling feature to begin with. But i'm pretty certain i could work around it anyway, if i ever encountered a mod where i disliked a setting. So i do not care either way. The main question is: is there even a sp module builder around who is interested in this? I might be interested in his oppinion. Maybe i'm missing something here.

I would also like to hear someone who wants this, why he wants this etc. But the inclusion of this feature is non problematic itself so I can add it nevertheless - whether someone use it or not its not my business - and as you said, player will always be able to get around this, its just matter of the work he will need to employ.

 

 

Point 1 sounds intriguing. But does it solve anything a cpp dm widget couldn't?


Re 2: no preference really but to me it sounds like something people would want a switch for.


3: i do not understand the bug. Is it supposed to simulate passage of time before resurrection? Or arw we talking about payer cast spells? In the latter case im pro, former case no prefference.


4: it's my idea, what's not to like? :-D


5: i like that idea, definatelly support it.


Main reason for post: i'll upload the ground models tomorrow. The way it looks atm, i'll package project q models where available. They are really way above the doa ones. This includes a spot on model for healers kits, a model for boots that do not have the problem you mentioned (i hope), and improved models for amulets and rings.

On top of it i'll send the updated zextures for thieves kit, cloak (both vanilla resources that fix other problems, too) and belt.

I will also send a basitem.2da. The q models have different file names and i also thought it would be nice to add shieldmodel 011 as base model for shields instead of bags.

Everything is optional of course, so will also send tje improved texture for the old healerkit

 

1: CPP wise only, there is a little advantage. At this moment CPP uses two invisible placeable objects (three with new polymorph engine) that if not pre-set will be created in starting area. This shouldn't be visible in any way so there is no problem. However the inclusion of the area could allow to add other features which would need a visible and useable placeable. Some ideas:

- placeable with PC Widget Tool conversation meant for Dungeon Masters.

- "engine" chest for new itemproperties. Aka I could add a scripting support to create an itemproperty from CPP in NWScript. This is done with an item blueprint that has this itemproperty so this item needs to be spawned somewhere and later destroyed - wouldnt be a good to do in astarting area. Also, other builders could reuse this chest for their own purposes as they could count with its presence (or couldnt since CPP is optional ok scratch it)

- etc.

In short, not needed at this moment, could be good for something in future.

 

2: yea, its quite a lot hardcore I guess


3: talking about player cast AOEs - imo when player is dead this still has a reson why they should work as its not something that player needs to focus, however after respawn this is quite weird imo

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Bogdanov89]

               

It would be awesome if the Defensive Casting Mode could be made to properly work with henchmen!

Perhaps they should be given a big boost in Concentration, just to make sure that these caster companions can "keep up" in usefulness when compared with the melee fighter/rogue/monk companions.

 

Currently my cleric/bard companion just get hit for 80% of their health when they try to cast spells in melee AND their spell also fails (concentration fail)... so using the Defensive Casting mode (and risking it's chance to fail the spell) seems to be a good idea - especially if you can buff up the Concentration skill for the caster companions.

 

 

I noticed two small issues with Tomi the rogue in chapter two of the original campaign (maybe in all other chapters as well):

 

1. he seems to be wearing armor that greatly penalizes his Dexterity bonus to AC, as well as other feats/skills that rely on Dexterity and the use of lightest armor.

I think Tomi is in studded leather or hide armor (max dexterity 4), which to me seems very penalizing when Tomi probably has much more dexterity.

If possible, he should be permanently changed to use only Padded Armor or Leather Armor, so that his Dexterity based AC/feats/skills do not suffer from the armor penalties.

 

2. Tomi mostly relies on sneak attack to do damage, and he has those "two weapon fighting" feats that help characters dual wield.

However, even after all the "conversations" for him to level up/update gear (currently at lvl10), he is still NOT using two weapons!

He has a single dagger (or whatever) in his main hand, and nothing in his off hand... meaning he is losing out on a lot of off-hand sneak attacks, and all those two-weapon-fighting feats are just wasted '>

 

I do know that changing the original campaign is not the primary goal of the CPP, but i just thought it would be a good idea to mention potential issues whenever i manage to spot them '>

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Gruftlord]

               As far as i can tell, you can spawn the cpp player widget to allow you to access his inventory. This will solve both of your Problems. There is nothing more the cpp could want or would want regarding this atm, imho
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

For bigbies spells, incorporeal mechanics are not part of the base game in 1.69 or earlier, are they?  That's another change/tweak/fix I could see a player possibly not wanting.

Just a minor addendum.

 

I think this is actually for the player's benefit. It improves a shifter.

 

Shifter in specre form gets 50% concealment, incorporeality status (thus no longer affected by web, grease, entangle, bigbies, implosion) and ghost effect - passability thought creatures. And in a case the shifter is currently affected by bigbi/entangle effect, if he shapechange into spectre he is released from it.

 

That gives plenty of new ways and opportunities to play the shifter. Also the air elemental pulse now works as wind of gust. These features makes playing druid/shifter so much fun and interesting.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Gruftlord]

               

here we go:

http://www.file-uplo...ns-Juli.7z.html

 

thanks to the cep team for these nice models.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

here we go:

http://www.file-uplo...ns-Juli.7z.html

 

thanks to the cep team for these nice models.

thanks

 

EDIT: would you mind renaming the models to the doa prefix? This way, I would have to include both old doa models and these models in order to provide backwards compatibility with a modules using baseitems.2DA "old 1.71 final" or even 1.70 where doa_ models are used.

 

I guess I should rename the models to the it_ prefix back then, but its too late to do that now I guess...

               
               

               

                     Modifié par Shadooow, 07 juillet 2014 - 08:03 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Gruftlord]

               

you can rename the models for a CPP 1.72 later on, i suppose. but you are right, as long as we can not replace them all it's best to leave the names as is. new upload is here:

http://www.file-uplo...ns-Juli.7z.html

 

i deleted the baseitems.2da, but you should consider adding the shield changes to it anyway.

 

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Bogdanov89]

               

I did the 1.71 v3 Addons reinstall as you suggested, and pretty much everything is working fine - except in one situation.

 

My henchmen was just following me through the NWN Forest zone (chapter 2) and did not fight when both i and she were attacked.

 

Her last order from me was either "attack nearest" or "guard me", so she was definitely not ordered to be passive.

 

Could you please take a look at these 2 saves and see is it an AI issue?

 

http://www.filedropper.com/passiveai

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

I did the 1.71 v3 Addons reinstall as you suggested, and pretty much everything is working fine - except in one situation.

 

My henchmen was just following me through the NWN Forest zone (chapter 2) and did not fight when both i and she were attacked.

 

Her last order from me was either "attack nearest" or "guard me", so she was definitely not ordered to be passive.

 

Could you please take a look at these 2 saves and see is it an AI issue?

 

http://www.filedropper.com/passiveai

Indeed, Sharwyn is broken. Unfortunately this happened before first save and I have no clue how this can happen - it shouldn't be possible anymore.

 

Just tell her attack nearest - this now acts as a ultimate passive fixer.

 

This will probably happen again, when it happen again, try to remember what were circumstances when this happened. I dont think that save will help anymore - this needs possibly some special order of commands/actions/situation, and to fix this we must figure this order out.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

MannyJabrielle, and everyone who is building single player/LAN module with CPP.

 

I realized, that there is an easy way for a builder to determine whether player playing his module has CPP installed or not.

int GetCommunityPatchVersion()
{
object oTest = CreateObject(OBJECT_TYPE_ITEM,"70_it_scrwarcry",GetStartingLocation());
 if(oTest == OBJECT_INVALID) return -1;
DestroyObject(oTest);
oTest = CreateObject(OBJECT_TYPE_PLACEABLE,"70_ec_poison",GetStartingLocation());
 if(oTest == OBJECT_INVALID) return 170;
DestroyObject(oTest);
return 171;
}

Might be useful?

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MannyJabrielle]

               

Could very well be, yes.... right off the bat I think of using that as a way to msg the player that doesn't have CPP to install it or miss out on the content/possibly break some features should I not attach the hakpaks.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MannyJabrielle]

               

Question/comment on one of the spell tweaks/fixes.  The current documentation says that the 'continual flame' spell has been changed to mark the targeted item as stolen, although there is a module switch to disable that change, and to check x2_inc_switches for the switch.

 

I looked through x2_inc_switches, and there's no switch, or is the feature bundled up with the functions of another switch and it's just not labeled in the description of the various switches?


Comment in general.... Couldn't there be a better way to handle the continual flame/selling change?  As far as I know, marking an item as stolen only limits which merchants you can sell the item too, as there are merchants who do buy stolen items, so for fixing this as far as the OC's.... doesn't really stop it, just hassles the player doing it by making them have to sell to the black-market merchants.  While they might not get as much as I do believe the OC stolen goods merchants buy stuff at a lower price, the player is still making a profit by lighting up the copper rings he finds.

 

Offhand I would say just lower the GP value of the "light" permanent properties to virtually nothing (similar to the disarm-whip feat, which costs nothing compared to the regular disarm feat on the same item).  That would solve the exploit (if we could really qualify it as an exploit), although it would 'cheapen' light items in general (at low levels, that 125 gp light ring can be a major investment).  But then again, that could be changed by the module builder as well.... manually raise the price on such light-enabled items to whatever he or she deems appropriate.  For the OC's... I wouldn't say light items/torches are *that* much of an issue since the OC's don't really have any super dark areas.

 

And  last, a suggestion.  Could the switch (as it is now) be added to the widget's switches for the player to control?  I personally don't view this issue as a strict exploit.  Cheap gameplay, yes, but not an exploit as in the non-patched behavior the spell is doing exactly what it is supposed to.  Builders who want to address this issue in their own modules would still be able to do so (just as non-patch builders... change the spell's behavior directly as I've seen done by making the spell create a very long lasting temp property, or modifying their item property costs 2das, or whatever other method they choose).