.dll fixes post your request here...

Discussion in 'General Modification' started by bradrinwi, Jan 23, 2006.

Remove all ads!
  1. Shiningted

    Shiningted I changed this damn title, finally! Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2004
    Messages:
    12,743
    Likes Received:
    374
    also @ the moose: what if you got those responses but dialogue still began (as opposed to the current situation of having to dump party members etc)? That should be a reasonably straightforward .dll hack?
     
  2. Moosehead

    Moosehead Rubber nipple

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2005
    Messages:
    182
    Likes Received:
    0
    @ the ted: that solution works too :p
     
  3. Allyx

    Allyx Master Crafter Global Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2004
    Messages:
    5,009
    Likes Received:
    255
    I've been testing this today (my test group for Verbobonc is now level 3 and I gave my halfling rogue and half-elf bard weapon finesse with the fixed rapier size for both medium and small versions.) It seems the medium rapier IS finessable by medium sized characters, but the small rapier IS NOT finessable by small characters.
     
  4. Kalshane

    Kalshane Local Rules Geek

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    1,653
    Likes Received:
    4
    Interesting.

    Going back to the Holy Smite and Flamestrike discussion, I noticed Searing Light actually registers as positive energy, so that's an option. Though I wonder if that will make the other spells do more damage against undead, which they shouldn't. Regardless, some fix has to be made because the spells are severely weakened by any resistance being able to completely absorb them right now (I can't remember what I hit with holy smite, but the game repeatedly applied the creatures DR to the spell until it had absorbed all the damage. As in it literally said "-10 DR 10/Magic -10 DR 10/Magic -10 DR 10/Magic 0 Damage")

    I was thinking about Improved Invisibility and the infinite AOO bug, and I'm wondering if it has something to do with how Invisibilty is handled by the game. I imagine invisibility is coded to say the equivalent of "1. Check for Invisibility. 2. Make attack with Invisibility Modifiers. 3. Cancel Spell." If they used the same code for Improved Invisibility, at least in the AOO section (again, I know nothing about actual programing, I'm just guessing at logic patterns here) you'd get a loop, as the spell wouldn't actually cancel once the spell was completed, so it goes back to "Check for Invisibility" again and repeats.
     
  5. Lord_Spike

    Lord_Spike Senior Member Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    1
    Adding a thought; maybe irrelevant. This seems right to me, as I've had it happen when things were obscured from view by the ice storm spell...infinite loop; the game never progresses & the timer is greyed out.
     
  6. bradrinwi

    bradrinwi Established Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2005
    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    0
    ill check the things menioned allyx your buttn is about done cujo .. drow should also be llinked re 15-16 and 2

    krunch great thought and ill check the eel and weap finese and AoO things this weekend
     
  7. Allyx

    Allyx Master Crafter Global Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2004
    Messages:
    5,009
    Likes Received:
    255
    The wizards copy scroll ability ia also (partially) broken. if you fail the spellcraft check to learn a new spell, but the game only remembers the last spell you failed to learn, it should remember all failed copy scroll checks until you add more ranks in spellcraft.

    Currently it is possible to fail to learn one spell (eg melf's acid arrow), then fail to learn another spell (eg teleport), then successfully learn the first spell (eg melf's acid arrow) without adding the spellcraft rank.
     
  8. Feanor

    Feanor Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    The non D&D multiclassed spellcaster penalty implemented by Troika needs to be removed. See the thread I started in this section for details.
     
  9. Blair

    Blair Unwanted Construct

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good point--that and the nonsensical "polearms can attack adjacent targets" decisions were two of the silliest choices the designers made. I don't think they bothered considering why the PnP rules had spells per day and reach weapons working as they do.

    On the other hand, it's probably impossible to fix the "reach feature", but the multiclass spells really does need to be fixed. Non-min-maxed parties often include such characters and it's a shame to deprive them of their rightful abilities.

    --Blair
    "Excuse me... pardon me... exc--Hey, wait a second, aren't you *schluk* *gurgle*"
     
  10. Kalshane

    Kalshane Local Rules Geek

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    1,653
    Likes Received:
    4
    I'm not sure the reach weapons being able to effect adjacent targets was a "rules" decision as much as a "crap, how do we implement this?" thing.
     
  11. Feanor

    Feanor Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Also, this may be impossible, but just to put it out there:

    When the party is in melee, and you click on an enemy who appears to be adjacent, sometimes the game makes your character take a very small step in order to attack. When it does this, it doesn't count the step as a 5-foot step, but as a full movement, and your character doesn't get his full attack. Of course, if you knew that he needed to take a 5-foot step in order to attack, you could do it in the radial menu, but the problem is that you can't tell by looking that he is too far away; sometimes it's more like a 1-foot step.
     
  12. Ugignadl

    Ugignadl Established Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    0
    The .dats as well eh. So he wasn't reverse engineering it, he's hacking it up a la moebius...

    I would really love to know any more detail on how this turned out :(.
     
  13. Shiningted

    Shiningted I changed this damn title, finally! Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2004
    Messages:
    12,743
    Likes Received:
    374
    Well, decompiling the .dats is the first thing u do to mod this game (well, the second. No wait, possibly the third, depending on if u already have your coffee). I don't think its a comment on how he is doing it - u may be right, I'm not sure. Personally I am assuming he is decompiling / recompiling the .dll, but its a guess.
     
  14. Ugignadl

    Ugignadl Established Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, I originally figured decompiling/recompiling as well.

    Anyway. I guess we won't know, unless he returns. I can't find any more detail on it by using the forum search, at least.
     
Our Host!