[(BG1) BUG] Ranger "Racial Enemy" effect not effective
OBSERVED:
When testing whether or not racial enemy bonuses are being implemented, I got these stats from a ranger with Ogre as Racial Enemy:
vs Cat: +15 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Mouse: +15 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Gibberling: +11 (+8 on half-attack)
vs Xvart: +11 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Ogre: +11 (+7 on half-attack)
From a ranger with Gibberling as Racial Enemy:
vs Cat: +15 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Mouse: +15 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Gibberling: +11 (+8 on half-attack)
vs Xvart: +11 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Ogre: +11 (+7 on half-attack)
Mind you, I used rangers which both had STR 16 and Drizzt's +5 scimitar, so it should have been the equivalent, though other attribute scores varied somewhat.
EXPECTED:
The ranger +4 attack roll vs Racial enemy.
Plus, why no xvart Racial Enemy? What if my ranger hates them? We hates the xvartses... Hates them... forever!!!
NOTES:
This also doesn't entirely accounts for intermittent seemingly incongruous scores which appear to occur at the high end of all attack rolls in order to display a consistent max roll. The values above are from attack bonuses shown when rolling a 14 or lower. Further testing would confirm the accuracy of the 1/2 attack roll. The important thing to note is only that there is no discernible Racial Enemy attack bonus for rangers.
When testing whether or not racial enemy bonuses are being implemented, I got these stats from a ranger with Ogre as Racial Enemy:
vs Cat: +15 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Mouse: +15 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Gibberling: +11 (+8 on half-attack)
vs Xvart: +11 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Ogre: +11 (+7 on half-attack)
From a ranger with Gibberling as Racial Enemy:
vs Cat: +15 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Mouse: +15 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Gibberling: +11 (+8 on half-attack)
vs Xvart: +11 (+9 on half-attack)
vs Ogre: +11 (+7 on half-attack)
Mind you, I used rangers which both had STR 16 and Drizzt's +5 scimitar, so it should have been the equivalent, though other attribute scores varied somewhat.
EXPECTED:
The ranger +4 attack roll vs Racial enemy.
Plus, why no xvart Racial Enemy? What if my ranger hates them? We hates the xvartses... Hates them... forever!!!
NOTES:
This also doesn't entirely accounts for intermittent seemingly incongruous scores which appear to occur at the high end of all attack rolls in order to display a consistent max roll. The values above are from attack bonuses shown when rolling a 14 or lower. Further testing would confirm the accuracy of the 1/2 attack roll. The important thing to note is only that there is no discernible Racial Enemy attack bonus for rangers.
Post edited by Bhryaen on
2
Comments
In BGEE using two Rangers with the same stats (13 Strength, no proficiency in Club) against a CLUAConsole Gibberling in Candlekeep:
- Ranger 1 had Gibberlings as a racial enemy and consistently received a +4 on attack rolls (with the exception of when reaching the attack roll cap).
- Ranger 2 had Kobolds as a racial enemy and consistently received a +4 on attack rolls (with the exception of when reaching the attack roll cap).
I can confirm that the Racial Enemy definitely worked in BG2.
Two Rangers with the same stats (13 Strength, no proficiency in Short Sword) against the first Mephit in BG2:
- Ranger 1 had Mephits as a racial enemy and consistently received a +8 on attack rolls (with the exception of when reaching the attack roll cap).
- Ranger 2 had Beholders as a racial enemy and consistently received a +4 on attack rolls (with the exception of when reaching the attack roll cap).
Everyone seems to have their race set to 1 rather than the proper IDS.
This could be fun to fix....
[EDIT] Potentially fixed - A number of creature files have been modified so that their race is no longer set to human
@Bhryaen - Also, Xvarts are all set to be Kobolds (if it's wrong I didn't do it!), so next time you make a ranger they won't know what hit em!
Odd that. When I once did a Detect Evil with summoned skeletons they turned up evil... but then again that was a BGT game.
Yes, and I always found it odd anyway that a LG Cleric of Lathander could so regularly win the approval of a Good diety to summon Chaotic Evil Skeletons... That they're now True Neutral is a relief...
Did the races fix make it to Build 0709? I'm still not getting the Racial Enemy bonuses
Ah ok, confirmed not fixed but hopefully the stuff you did makes it for the next build. >.<
Does anyone have an easy way of testing if this works for every enemy type? >.<
Even if there were, I'll be doing a thorough testing if you don't. ;-)
Oh, test ahead then. >_>;
What @SethDavis said on July 10 about gibberlings is wrong now thankfully: there's an @Igneous thread I confirmed fixed last night regarding them having been fixed to gibberling status now. I'll check the rest in a bit...
Did you check this one already or still on the backburner?
If I had a list of creature codes to spawn them I could test them all.
Definitely test them. I started to and got sidetracked... several times...
I meant that I'd test them if I had a list of codes to spawn the creatures.
Oh... and given @Balquo's Creature Corrections (since numerous creatures had the incorrect race assigned to them) this should hold even though there are obviously many different versions of creatures like Ogres, Kobolds, Gibberlings, etc.
Ignore the ".cre" and just add the name itself to CreateCreature("XVART").
CARRIO.CRE (Carrion Crawler)
ETTERC.CRE (Ettercap)
GHOUL.CRE
GIBBER.CRE (Gibberling)
GNOLL.CRE
GERG.CRE (just kidding) HOBGOB.CRE
KOBOLD.CRE
OGRE.CRE
SKELET.CRE
SPIDGI.CRE
I'll test a different group. Actually Xvarts should get the same attack bonus as Kobolds at the moment...
I thought there was going to be a big list with every possible type of Gnoll and stuff like that.
Though now that I think about it, as long as their race is set correctly, it shouldn't matter. I'll test that list.
- Checked if all racial enemies gave a bonus of +4 to hit.
- Checked that the +4 only applied when fighting your racial enemy.
Don't worry- I've been checking every CRE type as I go to make sure they've got the right Race designation. The issue there would be in the CREs not being assigned correct races rather than a failure of the Ranger Enemy bonus to work, but they've already been addressed elsewhere thankfully. (A much longer list...)
Confirmed (Not?) Fixed:
I'm guessing that Gergs have struck again... but maybe it's nothing...
OK, I tested with STR 15, DEX 15 (i.e., no melee or missile THAC0 adj) 1st lvl Elf Rangers using SW1H04, BOW05 (modified only to give extra attacks per round), 1 proficiency pt in both Long Sword and Short Bow: The only CREs that gave an unpredicted behavior were the spiders and gergs. The specific spiders I tested may have some extra defense built into them that affects the attacker's roll... maybe... But the hobgobs were all over the place as well as turned up mixed results for the same gerg-hating ranger on melee rolls. As you can see I also couldn't use Hobgobs as a test case because they give odd results, though I was using named Hobgobs mostly, and they may be given their own special defenses. Still, not sure why a ranger with no gerg-hate was still getting +4 AB v HOBGOBSU.CRE.
NOTE:
Any time I encountered unpredicted behavior I retested to make sure it wasn't just me...
Why do you get +5 against every hated enemy (for the most part)?
I think it's because I was using an elf- which is why I mentioned that at the start. (+1 longsword/ shortsword, +1 longbow/ shortbow?) I made a half-elf at one point and suddenly it was +4 for the hated enemy, +0 otherwise... I'd already done enough elf tests though that I just stayed with that the rest of the way.
What does the number between (number) means?
Those were the mixed results I mentioned- at times it would be a +9, other times a +5. I really don't know whether that's a bug or not though. It's possible that those Hobgobs just give the attacker a +4 AB already... but it looks bad, so I mentioned it. I didn't actually try the baseline hobgob.CRE like I'd mentioned to you- was trying to see if it applied ok to others sharing the same race designation.