Page 23 of 24

Re: Re Twitter

Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2019 5:09 am
by BansheeXYZ
Regarding the discussion on twitter and github about Charm:

There is a premade targeting spell named "Charm Mortal" with the effect "Charm". Charm and Pacify are separate effects per the spell creator. The description given for charm is "Raises caster's charm with target, improving caster's reputation." This appears to describe something that would affect a friendly NPC's attitude towards you so that they will talk to you instead of stonewall you.

Allofich thinking that charm should operate like pacify makes no sense to me. That would make it redundant, and the descriptions specifically references reputation which pacify doesn't alter AFAIK. Pacify is all about getting things to stop attacking you, not stop ignoring you.

What's making this confusing is that UESP says "Charm Mortal" has a "Pacify - Humanoid" effect type, but that is not what the spell says in classic. So it sounds like a broken or unfinished effect that was intended to get ignorers to be talkers.

Another oddity is that it's a targeting spell and static NPCs can't be targeted. The devs didn't think this one through and that could be another reason why it's disabled.

After testing spells in classic's spell maker, there are all kinds of weird bugs and inconsistencies, some of which have carried over to DFU:

-Pacify's duration setter is blank, but still works when you click the increment/decrementers. You can see the mp cost change.
-Offensive targeting spells that aren't damage have elemental selection when they shouldn't.
-Duration/Chance/Magnitude in the spellbook often doesn't match the correct values given in the spellmaker description of the effect. Things that are N/A or instantaneous will show up as "1+1" etc.

Re: Re Twitter

Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:56 pm
by Interkarma
Yeah, the effect seems non-functional in classic and definitely doesn't operate as described in the text database. There appears to be some confusion from the original devs around how this effect was supposed to work, or even what should be considered a humanoid. It's a bit of a mess for sure. :)

But that doesn't mean Allofich is wrong about how these effect are intended to function. He's working through the original's source and can usually derive intended functionality even when something is broken in classic through coding errors. I'll do some testing of my own to confirm the monster/class humanoid split, but I know from experience that Allofich is almost always correct about this stuff. If he isn't sure, he always says so.

In any case, the effect system has been designed to be modable. It's possible to replace these effects top to bottom with all new settings, text, and behaviours. It would be great to see a mod that reworks some of these effects to be more rational gameplay-wise and improves their text descriptions.

BansheeXYZ wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 5:09 am
Pacify's duration setter is blank, but still works when you click the increment/decrementers. You can see the mp cost change.
I haven't been able to reproduce this in DFU. These UI controls are disabled when a particular component such as Duration is not used by the effect, and the cost formulas also ignore these values when not enabled. I'm not sure how this could be happening in DFU at this time.

BansheeXYZ wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 5:09 am
Offensive targeting spells that aren't damage have elemental selection when they shouldn't.
This has been matched to classic. I agree it doesn't make sense, and is possibly an oversight in classic. But without better information available, my position is to match classic for minor stuff like this. The worst it does is let the player decide which colour magic they want to use. This could be changed as part of an effect mod also.

BansheeXYZ wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 5:09 am
Duration/Chance/Magnitude in the spellbook often doesn't match the correct values given in the spellmaker description of the effect. Things that are N/A or instantaneous will show up as "1+1" etc.
The text entries for these in effects in TEXT.RSC incorrectly defines macros for these components when they should be "N/A". As DFU uses the same TEXT.RSC from your local DF install, we inherit the same layout. This could be fixed either through an effect mod with custom text defined, or a TEXT.RSC mod to fix these bad entries.

Re: Re Twitter

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2019 3:13 am
by BansheeXYZ
Interkarma wrote:I haven't been able to reproduce this in DFU. These UI controls are disabled when a particular component such as Duration is not used by the effect, and the cost formulas also ignore these values when not enabled. I'm not sure how this could be happening in DFU at this time.
Pacify has a duration, the spellmaker text says it does. The bug is that the duration changer is blank in both classic and DFU. Classic simply has the extra oddity of being able to work the duration meter despite it looking disabled.

Something else with pacify while I'm at it: are you missing the feedback text outputted for this spell? I've noticed that classic immediately tells you when the spell had no effect or a save versus is made. Otherwise, it's hard to tell if it worked or not.
This has been matched to classic. I agree it doesn't make sense, and is possibly an oversight in classic. But without better information available, my position is to match classic for minor stuff like this. The worst it does is let the player decide which colour magic they want to use. This could be changed as part of an effect mod also.
Do any enemy types have intended immunities or resistances to the "magic" element? If so, then this oversight can be exploited to silence or paralyze enemies that shouldn't be susceptible. It also might give the player the impression that enemies can do the same thing to them, which would affect their decisions in the custom class editor process.
The text entries for these in effects in TEXT.RSC incorrectly defines macros for these components when they should be "N/A". As DFU uses the same TEXT.RSC from your local DF install, we inherit the same layout. This could be fixed either through an effect mod with custom text defined, or a TEXT.RSC mod to fix these bad entries.
Is this the same process you are using to fix quest files and spelling/formatting errors?

Re: Re Twitter

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:27 am
by Interkarma
Thank you. I'll confirm if classic really observes Duration for Pacify or if just the text is incongruous with the effect. If it does, I can easily enable the Duration component for effect. I'll also check text output while I'm at it.

Edit: Further testing has confirmed that pacified enemies remain that way permanently, provided player does not attack them again. The Duration component is not used for Pacify, so the way DFU handles this is correct. There is also no text output that I can see after a successful pacify attempt - the enemy simply stops attacking player. Further, I have confirmed that Pacify Humanoid does not function on enemy classes, only humanoid monsters. The Charm effect is able to pacify enemy classes (also confirmed). Allofich is 100% correct in how these effects actually function in game. Rather, the text description in TEXT.RSC is simply incorrect/misleading.

For your other questions:

I've had a look through enemy careers and none are immune to Magic. A few carry the milder "resistant" to magic flag, but that's a strategic choice for player to make (e.g. Gargoyles are more susceptible to Fire damage than Magic damage). Note that Paralysis/Disease/Poison have their own tolerance flags alongside Fire/Cold/Poison/Shock/Magic. If an enemy is straight-up immune to Paralysis (e.g. Vampire Ancient) they will remain so no matter which "element" spell is crafted to carry that Paralysis effect to them.

The TEXT.RSC database is consumed exactly as the user provides it with their game data. Same with book files. Text from quests is part of the quest scripts in StreamingAssets/Quests, and text hardcoded into FALL.EXE is mostly split into related text files in StreamingAssets/Text. Some of it remains hard-coded in DFU in the HardStrings.cs file and a couple of template files. One of my goals after pre-alpha is to move remaining gameplay text to external text files to help with translation efforts. But majority of game text is in TEXT.RSC, and we inherit any errors present in that text database on the user end.

Re: Re Twitter

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2019 2:25 pm
by BansheeXYZ
Interkarma wrote:
Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:27 am
There is also no text output that I can see after a successful pacify attempt - the enemy simply stops attacking player.
I didn't say any appeared on success. The spell has a chance of failing and when it does, it's supposed to output "Spell effect failed." I think I've also seen "Save versus spell made." depending on enemy resistance.
Interkarma wrote:Further, I have confirmed that Pacify Humanoid does not function on enemy classes, only humanoid monsters. The Charm effect is able to pacify enemy classes (also confirmed). Allofich is 100% correct in how these effects actually function in game. Rather, the text description in TEXT.RSC is simply incorrect/misleading.
Oh I don't doubt that's how it behaves. The question is, why doesn't "Pacify - Human" exist and why is "Charm" taking on that role despite a description for the spell equivalent of "Raises Rep With"? It looks like bethesda screwed up and we're missing the reputation spell because of it.

Re: Re Twitter

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2019 9:13 pm
by Interkarma
Agreed. On a personal level, I'd prefer this one to operate the way it says on the tin. But right now this opens up a big can of worms around back-end support required and how it could affect other systems related to reputation. My priority for now is to re-implement classic, often warts and all, with that scaffold for future improvements.

I'm so close to completing all the spell effects now, I don't want anything to bog me down much. Provided I can make the time around current RL work projects, I should have all the spell effects completed by end of Feb. Then it's just the item-maker and some related effects to go and magic is wrapped.

Re: Re Twitter

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:18 am
by Jay_H
Darn. So down the drain goes the "enemy charmer" build, controlling an imp or skeletal warrior and bulldozing parts of the dungeon :lol: At least that's what "charm" means to me. Well, perhaps it's for a mod.

Re: Re Twitter

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 4:06 am
by Feralwarlord
Jay_H wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:18 am
Darn. So down the drain goes the "enemy charmer" build, controlling an imp or skeletal warrior and bulldozing parts of the dungeon :lol: At least that's what "charm" means to me. Well, perhaps it's for a mod.
Well that gives me an idea, add a conjuration skill with spells only taught by necromancers and witches. Necromancers for the undead and witches for everything else (and some witches may also offer spell to summon the undead).

Re: Re Twitter

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:20 am
by Jay_H
Witches sound more like spriggan/harpy/gargoyle territory, don't they? But yes, I agree with the idea.

Re: Re Twitter

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:08 am
by Feralwarlord
Jay_H wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:20 am
Witches sound more like spriggan/harpy/gargoyle territory, don't they? But yes, I agree with the idea.
they do deal with daedra as well like from memory I believe you have to go to the glenmoril witches to summon hercine