Page 1 of 2

0.7.91: Sx001 "Missing Prince" quest dungeon selection does not match classic behaviour

Posted: Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:02 am
by SlainByWoodborne
DFU_Win_x64_0.7.91

Description:
In the course of completing the "Missing Prince" quest, the dungeon is "Klarnem's Hold" instead of either "Castle Faallem" or "The Fortress of Fhojum" (according to USEP; https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Daggerfall:Missing_Prince). It's an issue of continuity since the dungeon I explored was populated mainly by were creatures instead of undead (as mentioned in the "Death Certificate").

This has been previously discussed in both of the following topics but it was unclear if the "fix" in DFU specifies undead as the predominant type found within whichever randomly selected dungeon so as to confirm the Prince's account.

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=768
viewtopic.php?f=28&t=1470

Re: 0.7.91: "Missing Prince" quest using incorrect dungeon prompting continuity issue

Posted: Sun Apr 14, 2019 5:23 am
by Jay_H
We use classic as the standard problem resolution when we can't figure out something, but the dilemma at hand is that classic doesn't really satisfy either condition. It could be either the Fortress of Fhojum (as in classic) or an undead dungeon (as in lore), but it can't be both. I'll let Interkarma give his opinion when he has a chance to come around to this.

Re: 0.7.91: "Missing Prince" quest using incorrect dungeon prompting continuity issue

Posted: Sun Apr 14, 2019 5:38 am
by Interkarma
The dungeon type is resolving as per the script. I cover this in my post here. If people feel it's important, I could limit this to a specific dungeon type. But nothing in the quest itself does so.

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=768#p8989

Re: 0.7.91: "Missing Prince" quest using incorrect dungeon prompting continuity issue [CLOSED]

Posted: Sun Apr 14, 2019 5:49 am
by SlainByWoodborne
Right. I read your post but I wasn't sure if you meant type as in style (aesthetics) of dungeon or type as in populated by certain creatures. If there's a way to control the type of creatures populated (to undead) regardless of the dungeon selected, it would at least match the history of the Prince's demise in the "Death Certificate".

Re: 0.7.91: "Missing Prince" quest using incorrect dungeon prompting continuity issue

Posted: Sun Apr 14, 2019 7:06 am
by Interkarma
As this one keeps coming up, I'll just match classic's hardcoded behaviour when I can.

I'd rather not hardcode like classic though, which means adding a new quest action and updating script accordingly. I'll leave this one in the bug list until it's processed. I can't say when I'll get to it though. :)

Re: 0.7.91: Sx001 "Missing Prince" quest dungeon selection does not match classic behaviour

Posted: Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:34 am
by SlainByWoodborne
Thank you. Considering this game's penchant for randomly-generated content, I agree that the dungeon location shouldn't be hard-coded. If there's a way to enforce the undead creature population type during that quest, it seems like the most reasonable solution. :D

Re: 0.7.91: Sx001 "Missing Prince" quest dungeon selection does not match classic behaviour

Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2019 3:53 pm
by Jay_H
Monsters spawned by dungeon type can't be altered, at least at this stage of DFU (and it's not known whether there would be plans to change that). The closest possible solution would be to alter the quest so it periodically spawns undead types inside the dungeon. However, that's varying much more from classic than before and doesn't really satisfy either question. We really just have to leave it as an oversight on Bethesda's part :?

Re: 0.7.91: Sx001 "Missing Prince" quest dungeon selection does not match classic behaviour

Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2019 7:26 pm
by SlainByWoodborne
Jay_H wrote: Mon Apr 15, 2019 3:53 pm Monsters spawned by dungeon type can't be altered, at least at this stage of DFU (and it's not known whether there would be plans to change that). The closest possible solution would be to alter the quest so it periodically spawns undead types inside the dungeon. However, that's varying much more from classic than before and doesn't really satisfy either question. We really just have to leave it as an oversight on Bethesda's part :?
I intend no malice when I ask: If you leave things as "an oversight on Bethesda's part", what is really the point to all of this; isn't everything wrong with Daggerfall "an oversight on Bethesda's part"?

Even if this is a down-the-road resolution, shouldn't it be fixed? Isn't everything, technically, a departure from classic in the sense that its bugs are being actively fixed? If there's a way (or future way) to correct (e.g., Unofficial Book Patch) one of Bethesda's oversights, it would certainly add to the game.

I'm just wondering why you'd settle for an issue being "an oversight on Bethesda's part" instead of wanting to fix it. As I understand, you're a master at writing new quests. Wouldn't the ability to populate dungeons as you see fit for a quest bolster your ability to write new quest content?

Re: 0.7.91: Sx001 "Missing Prince" quest dungeon selection does not match classic behaviour

Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:28 pm
by Jay_H
I don't mind the question, don't worry. The simplest answer is that everyone really has a different preference. One person will be satisfied by having undead in the dungeon. Another will find that too great a deviation from classic and will ask why we changed it, preferring that it deviate in some other way. As you could tell in the previous threads, the consensus in the past was that the dungeon for the quest didn't really matter, but based on further feedback it's now going to be anchored in the Fortress of Fhojum only. This thread is an example of the process in action. Lest we generate a lot of head-scratching moments or general discontent on how we're handling the project, we're resurrecting classic only.

The UI improvements Interkarma has chosen to add are ones that the community incontrovertibly decided were good. Having the game default to mouse-look, for example, is an incontrovertibly good change. No player will ever ask us, "Why didn't you keep the cursor-based actions as the default from before?" That makes it a safe design choice. Another is the removal of the instant-win conditions for several Fighters Guild and Commoner quests. They are a source of continual complaints, and changing them has universally made the game better.

Others are alterable in the config files. These are changes that the majority of people agree with but won't satisfy the purists, like the new font and the ability to generate tiny dungeons. Were we to force the one or the other in these cases, people would ask why it's not a configurable option.

Some of the choices we've made have been subjective, I agree. For example, monsters moving around when you fight them was not classic. Others, like Allofich's changes to resists and immunities, are just out of a lack of knowledge of how the original game worked, so a good functional system was put in where a big empty space once existed. These also garnered very positive community responses. If someone wants to make a fork of DFU that goes back and makes everything completely purist, they can. We're just a handful of volunteers spread around the world, doing work on DFU at the end of our laundry list of things to do. The use of classic as the ultimate fallback is sort of like why the United States uses stare decisis as an official component in case law. It prevents the need to go back to litigate the same case once and again, even if the previous settled cases weren't to everyone's liking., That way we can advance into new issues.

To answer your specific question, main quest files cannot be replaced or altered by a runtime replacement like graphics can. I can introduce new quest files as a stand-alone patch or mod, but that isn't what the game will ship with. No one has asked for it at the time so I've never considered it.

Re: 0.7.91: Sx001 "Missing Prince" quest dungeon selection does not match classic behaviour

Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 12:14 am
by SlainByWoodborne
Jay_H wrote: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:28 pm I don't mind the question, don't worry.
I'm glad.
Jay_H wrote: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:28 pm The simplest answer is that everyone really has a different preference. One person will be satisfied by having undead in the dungeon. Another will find that too great a deviation from classic and will ask why we changed it, preferring that it deviate in some other way. As you could tell in the previous threads, the consensus in the past was that the dungeon for the quest didn't really matter, but based on further feedback it's now going to be anchored in the Fortress of Fhojum only. This thread is an example of the process in action. Lest we generate a lot of head-scratching moments or general discontent on how we're handling the project, we're resurrecting classic only.
The transparency with regard to decisions made for this project is great.
Jay_H wrote: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:28 pm The UI improvements Interkarma has chosen to add are ones that the community incontrovertibly decided were good. Having the game default to mouse-look, for example, is an incontrovertibly good change. No player will ever ask us, "Why didn't you keep the cursor-based actions as the default from before?" That makes it a safe design choice. Another is the removal of the instant-win conditions for several Fighters Guild and Commoner quests. They are a source of continual complaints, and changing them has universally made the game better.

Others are alterable in the config files. These are changes that the majority of people agree with but won't satisfy the purists, like the new font and the ability to generate tiny dungeons. Were we to force the one or the other in these cases, people would ask why it's not a configurable option.
Is this where I would disable mouse-look if I wanted to go back to using "Page Up" and "Page Down" to look up and look down? ;-p I'll admit that mouse-look threw me for the first few hours of play; mostly used to it now.
Jay_H wrote: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:28 pm Some of the choices we've made have been subjective, I agree. For example, monsters moving around when you fight them was not classic.
Yes, anything flying is now the bane of my existence (thanks for that -_-); though it's a welcome change since it seemed like winged opponents were somehow floor-stapled at a set height.
Jay_H wrote: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:28 pm To answer your specific question, main quest files cannot be replaced or altered by a runtime replacement like graphics can. I can introduce new quest files as a stand-alone patch or mod, but that isn't what the game will ship with. No one has asked for it at the time so I've never considered it.
I don't mean to put words in your mouth but as I understand it now, in light of your explanation, you're saying the only feasible way to alter the main quest line would be to completely recreate all of them from scratch with new quest files with an option to use the classic main quest line or a new (rebuilt) main quest line?