Neverwinter Nights Forum Update

Remove all ads!

(Originally posted by Z-Layrex)

David Gaider, Designer

Conversation Bug:

Quote: Aaah, the one that can be worked around simply by removing the default "end conversation" script, or commenting out the ClearAllActions() call in that default script, eh?

Correct. Technically this is not a bug... it's something that has been brought to everyone's attention since the WalkWayPoints() command was automatically added into every dialogue file in v1.22. WalkWayPoints() has a ClearAllActions command which would clear out the action queue of any action scripts in the dialogue. Not good, but it's doing what it is supposed to... prior to 1.22, the script with WalkWayPoints just generally wasn't added to dialogues of this kind. So it's not a hard fix (there are several ways to go about it)... we've just got to decide which would be the best way to go without demolishing already existing stuff.

DM Fixes:

Quote: What about the other issues being looked at by Bio? Any response from a Bio-passer-by...?

Well, we haven't before actively asked for feedback on issues that involve new functionality, simply because the focus was on bugs. We have kept an eye on what people have been commenting on, however, and will be looking at perhaps changing some of these things in the near future. Insofar as the chat system, itself, is concerned, this is a list of some possible changes... most of which have been taken from feedback here:

~~change DM to be able to hear all forms of chat (including Party)

~~The ability to disable individual chat channels on a per-player basis using a scripting command. This would allow DM's the ability to prevent dead players from chatting (which they can't currently do), prevent players from Shouting, if desired, and also have plots in which players are seperated from the rest of the group and can't contact each other.

~~Change so that pressing 'Enter' to type another message doesn't immediately clear what is already on-screen.

~~A DM-possessed creature using Talk will have text displayed on the bottom of the screen (more of a minor bug, this, really, I suppose).

~~Change Shout so that it is area-wide only and not module-wide.

~~Add a small sound to any DM chat useage.

These are only things that are under consideration, however, and not guaranteed alterations. If you have any suggestions on reasonable changes or feedback on the above, I'd be glad to hear it.

Those New Script Functions: Derek has to sift through the patch notes that are written by the various programmers and 'translate' them into a version readable by the public. It's possible that a programmer related something regarding putting in the coding for these commands and Derek may have assumed that this meant they were in the release (when in fact there was still one step left to go), I don't know. Regardless, it qualifies as an 'oops!'. As for 'damaging our reputation'... uhhh, okay, sure. Someone made a mistake. I'm sure it won't be our last one, either. I doubt it's worthy of painting a big red letter on our forehead. There are more added commands planned for the 1.24 patch, I believe (that patch is actually pretty big on new content), but new content of any kind that is done by the Live Team and not left for an expansion will always depend on the time & difficulty of implementation. We're well aware of the kinds of commands that have been asked for here since release... no link necessary, thanks.

Item Creation Thread: (Ed. Note: Stop by and let them know what you want to see
Ok. The system of creating items in the toolset needs some changes. We're aware of that. It worked pretty well for the official campaign, perhaps, but it didn't leave a lot of options for module creators... and we always knew that a really useful system was only going to be creatable once everyone got their meathooks into things and discovered what they did and didn't like. So, anyway, now's the time to discuss what we can do about it... and your opportunity to provide some feedback. Before we begin, however, a few things you need to be aware of:

Ideally, the system of controlling what items can be brought into someone's module should be the responsibility of the DM, the module maker and the server... not ours. At best, we can only bandaid stops versus cheaters, as they will always be one step ahead of us, and many of these stops affect creators more than is reasonable. DM's, however, need a method of directly looking at what a PC has... opening up their inventory and inspecting away. A module maker needs proper scripting hooks to be able to create scripts that sift through and evaluate an entering player's inventory. Servers need the option of determining exactly what items and values get filtered and which do not. Really there should be no reason why we couldn't provide all three methods for cheating control. That level is, however, going to take time to reach. Until that point, we do absolutely need to keep the multiplayer aspect of the game in mind when we're dealing with how items are created and transferred. Hopefully, however, we can minimize the impact prior to that.

Secondly, this is only in reference to creating items using the toolset. We are not talking about editing .2da files here or creating custom item types and so forth. Just to make that clear. Ok, then... here's my list of some changes we could consider. These are not guaranteed changes, of course... just a list that I've gathered based on the feedback I've read and what I believe to be reasonable outside of an expansion (an expansion is where much bigger changes such as new item properties, wholesale changes to current item lists and so forth can be made).

?value? and ?cost? of an item need to have separate values. Currently, the item?s properties have a ?cost?? this is also the amount they are bought & sold for within a module. The creator can only raise this value (not lower it), and this also happens to raise the minimum required level for an item (which is cost-dependant). The value of an item should indeed be determined by its properties... and it should supply the default cost, which can then be changed by the creator for their own module. Only possible issue: players creating items with inflated prices in order to sell them for mega gold within a module.

the Lore value for an item needs to be editable. Changing the Lore value really has no bearing on the multiplayer aspect or cheating, so there seems to be little reason that the module creator can?t directly change it. If there is any way we can have a ?ignore minimum level? selection on an item, we should have it. Previously, the ?plot? selection performed this function? but that was removed because people were taking plot items into other modules that were enforcing minimum levels and still being able to use them. Perhaps we could do the same thing with items as we did with characters... if the plot selection of an item is on when you enter a module, it gets turned off automatically. The reason that creators want this? So that they can still have ILR on their module but do stuff like create subraces (which require items to be used in the creature inventory? items with properties that often push the min level of the item into the 10?s or 20?s) or special module-only items (like the big artifact sword that the characters must get and use) without sacrificing the restrictions on items being brought into the module.

There seems to be little method as to the properties that can or can?t be assigned to items. Understandably, combat-type properties should only be applicable to weapons. But why is it required that you have a property on a wand? Can?t you have a non-magical wand? Why can no magical properties be assigned to gems? Weight should also be editable? although that might involve adding an additional property, I suppose. Currently you can reduce the weight of an item with a special property? but only by percentage amounts. You cannot increase an item?s weight. There needs to be a module event for OnItemEquipped and OnItemUnEquipped. Without these, any type of scripting for cursed items or special bonuses/negative for using weapons & armor is completely impossible. The current event only fires when an item is picked up or dropped? and that isn?t enough. This may be something that can only be added in an expansion, however. Another quick thing to keep in mind: changes insofar as damage or additional properties do need to remain seperate item properties, for the most part, instead of being directly editable. Why? Well, all item properties are listed on the item... so if a DM or player pulls up an item they can quickly identify what changes have been made to the base properties. Some changes (such as Lore) probably don't need to be singled out this way, I think.

---------

Okay, whew. At any rate, this is what I have so far. Feedback on stuff I may have missed (please be specific) or on what's already on the list would be welcome.

More:

Quote: But the set Armor AC and type just sucks. If you want something that works at mithril, or other things here and there, you just can't do it.

As I understand it, properties do exist to increase/decrease the AC of armor. The only problem with doing it currently is that the subsequent value of the item skyrockets. If you could apply the AC +/- as an item property (so it shows up in the list of properties and is easy for a DM checking it out to see) and still adjust the cost as a completely seperate value... wouldn't that be enough?

Quote: EDIT: And.. also.... very important. Negative ability/possibly skill attributes. I don't mean cursed, as you can't equip unidentified items. But rather, sometimes even a good magic item may have a penalty.

Hmmm... I think these exist as item properties as well. If they don't, however, you won't be seeing them outside of an expansion. I think our ability to add new item properties is very limited.

And More:

Quote: - It would be nice to be able to control the special effects that appear on an item as properties in their own right.

This would require either a large change to the current item properties or new ones. You could only see that in an expansion.

Quote: - Weight. Getting a finer grain on weight would be a pleasing thing. It would be fun to create an artifact sword that needed Titanic strength to wield without falling over.

Adjusting the weight is one thing... that only affects encumbrance, however. Setting up something like 'Minimum Stat Required' would require a new item property... though it is a fine idea. Having a proper OnItemEquipped would also allow you to script this. If someone equips the item, you check if their Strength (or whatever) is above a certain amount... and, if not, force them to immediately unequip it.

And Even More:

Quote: Perhaps the value calculation could take negative properties into account. For example, a sword that does loads of damage but is nearly impossible to hit with - the extra damage increases the value, but the fact that you can barely use it doesn't reduce it again.

Well, here's the problem with that... and the reason that we took out the calculation of negative properties in the first place: you can very easily add on completely useless negative onto an item and bring its value/level down very low while at the same time applying very powerful properties. We were able to do this in many types of variations, getting super-powerful items that were min level 1 and worth 1 gp. Until the controls I mentioned in my post (for the DM, the creator and the server) are put into place, I'm not sure that we can even look at revamping item value calculation.

Must. Kill. Gaider:

Quote: Why can scripts not be directly attached to objects, such as rings, wands, and more? All of these require the use of Unique, which is a really roundabout way of doing it. If you have many unique powers in your game, you have to put a separate check for each. Wouldn't it be easier to be able to set it up so that a wand has X power, attached to X script, named Y? That way, we could get some really unique effects going on.

I think this is just the way the game was built. Inventory items aren't the same type of 'object' as many other things in the game are... and they aren't required to exist as an instance in the module, just like the player character. Hence neither can have scripts. You've also got to consider that these things have to be transferrable to other modules. You certainly wouldn't want someone's item scripts coming with them into your module, would you? What you need are module-level scripts for both. As I mentioned above, adding an OnItemEquipped event would open up the number and type of effects you could create... as well as having more than one Unique power (and being able to name it... I find that more annoying that anything else, personally).

Quote: Onhit abilities for weapons. Why can new ones not be added? I'd like to be able to make venomed weapons, as many others would, but the poison on hit is a 1d2 poison based on a stat. Is there any way you can add the poison information to that, cause saves, etc?

Expanding item properties and adding new ones is something that has to be done in an expansion. They require a lot of work, even seemingly small things. The big deal with them is the layering of multiple effects... it has the potential for so many bugs it's not even funny.

DIE!

Quote: I am curious as to how the maximum item properties were assigned? IE- 1 power on a potion? The 'updated' system should allow a DM or a mod-builder (MB from now on) the flexibility to allow virtually any item to have virtually any power.

A lot of the limitations regarding the # of effects on an item have to do with the layering of effects, as I mention above. I understand that people want more item properties and more control over them... revamping how item properties work requires an expansion, however, as I've mentioned. All I put on my list (and I'm not even sure this could be done) is have the same properties being applicable to all weapons and non-weapons, as an option. This does cover some of the things in your message (like the scroll), but I'm not even sure if this could be done without some major re-tooling.

Model Support: Now this is why I didn't want to give any ETA at all for the release of this stuff when you asked the first time. Reluctantly I said 'probably sometime in August', but I also said that was a total guess on my part because the timetable depended on so many other things. So now you're going to rant and make demands based on that? Well... I guess I know what to do the next time someone asks me for an ETA, don't I? The artists are, in fact, putting together the files we used for 3dsMax (and GMax, as well, if I heard correctly). That may include the .plt plug-in as well, I really don't know. Regardless, they have to go through everything and make sure nothing proprietary remains in there and that everything is legal and kosher and has been approved through the appropriate channels (like Ray and Greg, at the very least)... and that it comes with instructions on use, as well. Sorry, but we are not going to run over to our computer and 'drag over' our utilities to the send box just because you've decided to become impatient once again, rtrifts. We are busy and are working on it.

1.24:

Quote: Easy fixes I would like to see in next patch.

1. Add secret door .hak to Aurora base, so don't have to depend on others to download the .hak.

Done. Coming in 1.24

Quote: 2. Custom Items - allow the money value to be adjusted down... right now you can add value, I want to be able to lower value.

What we are actually considering is seperating the value (the inherent worth of the item from its properties) from the cost (the price of the item in the given module) and making the cost completely editable. It's just considering at this point, as we're still working out the details, so I don't know if that would be in in time for 1.24 or not.

Quote: 3. Custom Scrolls/Potions - adjust spell level. The sub-property cannot be adjusted; should be easy to make this adjustable so I can have custom scrolls based on lvl of caster, instead of picking from one or two static lvls.

Will consider this, but probably not for 1.24

Quote: 4. AdjustReputation and AdjustAlignment - option to adjust only the PC, not PC and his party. Right now it adjusts PC and party.

Noted.

Quote: 5. Merchants 'Max buy flag' - have a value that merchants will only buy items from PC that are cost 'x' or lower.

I think merchants are likely going to be revamped in the future (possibly in an expansion), but I would definitely like to see this myself. Also such additions, I think, as a 'no Identify' flag and an optional flag for the merchant to put money from purchases into a specific object and use the money in that object to fund purchases (so if he has no money, he can't buy... and if he only has 100 gp, he can only offer that much maximum). Just thoughts on my part, here, however, but I know we want to increase the facility of the merchants.

Quote: 6. Tavern Bar placeable - Should be easy to draw a large wooden bar so we dont have to use park tables for the bar.

That's a damn fine idea. I'll pass that on.

More:

Quote: Toggle Minimap on/off per area. Forgot this big problem. The minimap shows too much info, especially indoors. So, as DM I want the ability to not allow players the option to use it in an area.

This is under consideration, yes. Not sure if it's something that would be done in time for 1.24, however, but a scripting ability (or area property, maybe) to shut off the minimap would be a great boon for mazes and such.

Custom Content:

Quote: How long before we have an official guide to adding custom content? ie New creature models etc? Does something have to be done to the code for end users to handle .2da & .tlk files safely?

I think that the tools we used for 3dsMax to add creature models and tilesets will probably be released by 1.24... but custom content can never really be officially supported. There may be some tutorials to help people who wish to do that stuff, however. Not sure about your second question. With the last patch, most .2da's work in a hakpak normally. As far as 'handling' .2da's or the dialog.tlk, again that falls under the heading of custom content.