Base Mod Content Thread: Scripts

indio · Post by **indio** » Sun Feb 05, 2006 9:50 am

The thing to solve in that case is the DM misclick. Unless Obsidian have totally ignored their playerbase, and-or are complete idiots, there will be a confirmation box presented before killing PCs if that option is selected. Not for mobs, of course. But for PCs, how can they make the same mistake twice?

Fionn · Post by **Fionn** » Sun Feb 05, 2006 5:41 pm

Well, handling the CoELBCaK failure would prevent *that* issue, but not a DM spawning CR8 Orcs when he meant to spawn CR3.

If we can exploit-proof our Black Rock (preferably with a variable dropped on the PC Hide), it won't be an issue to overwrite all the Raise spells with correct XP loss. Might even want to open a convo window with the deceased indicating the name and diety of the caster (obviously DM version would bypass)

We should also link the corpse to a pDeathChest (again by variable) so it is lootable (incrementally) in stealth. Carry Body could be placed upon the emote ball - perhaps applicable to *any* placeable you can target that is set to 'weight>1'.

dergon darkhelm · Post by **dergon darkhelm** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 2:37 pm

Don't know if this is the place to bring it up nor how much effort it entails ........ but maybe some further divisions in the scripted factions of NPCs / animals etc.

It drives me nuts to catch one town guard with the edge of an area spell and as a result have every NPC from Yartar to Rassalantar chasing you down.

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:14 pm

This is a faction issue that I've had on my radar for a long while, probably since I was a player on other PWs which exhibited this problem. Some of it is a result of poor building practices but some of it relates to scripting and a less than ideal use of faction reputations.

I think the reputation scripts Baalster has written will serve as a really good foundation for addressing this above and beyond the dynamic/immersion element.

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 4:26 am

Just for having it on the record:

NickD wrote:Can you please add a global variable to the Basemod for ALFA2 that says whether the module is BETA or LIVE, with the default being BETA. And then use that variable to disable the passport/visa and level validation checks for BETA servers.

Murky Majare · Post by **Murky Majare** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 6:43 am

That setting... or rather, those two settings since we split it into two different settings, is in the alfa_options file.

We just haven't had use for that particular setting in quite a while, but yes, it is something we need to have implemented in the AHBM

Fionn · Post by **Fionn** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:46 am

Earthspur and a couple others had neat footprint scripts in the snow. If possible, it would be nice to see this tied into Tracking. The graphics used faded rapidly, and showed direction of travel - we could add a Ranger/Druid ability to determine age, number and race (and hopefully time them into a Search check).

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 4:51 am

Nice. Do we have access to that content?

Overfilled Cup · Post by **Overfilled Cup** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 9:55 pm

Heres a blurb about carrying over scripts from NwN1 to NwN2...By Vulcano a moderator on the NwN2 Forum boards. This is his response to the question about a BETA toolset, or more precisely the lack of one. There was one piece of info Ive bolded which sounds nice if it really is there.

It's slighty more complicated. Scripts will import. Not every function is going to carry over in its current form. In some cases, old functions required too much upgrading, so the import process will point to the new function you should be using, so you'll have to make a few changes there. Also, script parameters in NWN2 will cut down on the number of dialogue scripts required. While you don't have to redo existing systems to take advantage of them, you probably want to. So yeah, there are new features, and your module will need a once over for a few things. But this is a far superior situation than was permitted by the NWN1 pre-release toolset. Nothing worked in the final release there.

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:54 am

Thanks OC. Good to know. Can you provide more context, specifically what question this answered?

As long as they state what's changed and reduced it to a simple function exchange (no loss of functionality), it'll be manageable. But this begs the question, if there's no loss in functionality, why not simply gut and replace the current function without changing the API?

I'm not sure if I'm buying the simplicity pitch. It appears as though they are renigging on a lot of expectations they set forth some 6 months back so it may be increasingly more likely that our timelines for release will stretch beyond what we had hoped.