Spell 'emotion' changed

killerrabbit

Unpatched game -- affected enemies remain on ground when attacked. Patched game -- enemies rise and attacked once attacked.

Expected behavior -- enemies remain prone (too dispirited to defend themselves) for duration of spell

If this spell didn't change did 'sleep' change? Could this spell be interpreted by the engine as a powerful version of sleep and not a 'standing in place' spell?

argent77

If they backported the sleep effect from IWD:EE then affected creatures will indeed wake up when attacked by default. If this is the case, then many more spells are affected, like Color Spray, Stinking Cloud and maybe even Dragon's Breath or Comet.

JuliusBorisov

This seems to be a rather serious issue. It would be great if it could be fixed in a last minute before the patch goes live.

This behavior from IWDEE shouldn't follow to BG.

Messi

I personally always thought the BG1+2 behavior was a bug, or an oversight at the very least. In practice there is no difference between how enemies behave under these kind of "sleep spells" and out right stuns in BG games, which just doesn't seem right.

That being said Beamdog shouldn't go changing things like that at this point.

Erg

This is yet another reason why I prefer the original games: they are still better in terms of customisation.

For example, in this particular case, an optional ToBEx component allows to choose how the sleep effect works (i.e. whether the enemy should wake when hit or keep sleeping).

Dee

There's a way to restore the original behavior, I believe; @Avenger_teambg‌ can you shed some light on how this works data-side?

argent77

Erg said:

For example, in this particular case, an optional ToBEx component allows to choose how the sleep effect works (i.e. whether the enemy should wake when hit or keep sleeping).

The IWD:EE version of the sleep effect works pretty much the same. Unfortunately, by default the spell effect allows the target to wake up unless you're setting a certain parameter. In technical terms, for each spell you have to set param2 of effect opcode 39 (Sleep) to 1.

Avenger_teambg

Setting param2 to 1 would make the sleep effect stick in 1.3.

Erg

Dee said:

There's a way to restore the original behavior, I believe; @Avenger_teambg‌ can you shed some light on how this works data-side?

Avenger_teambg said:

Setting param2 to 1 would make the sleep effect stick in 1.3.

@Dee, @Avenger_teambg‌, that's good to know. However, why in hell is Beamdog changing the default behaviour?

Because of changes like this, and there is plenty of them, I'll have to use a ton of mods just to restore the vanilla behaviour. No thanks, I think I'll stick with the original games.

GodKaiserHell

 

Avenger_teambg

Most people would react to news like this somewhat like this: yay, we got an extra functionality, but some spells should rather stay like the original, and then list the spells that would need to be reverted. Note: some would make sense to remain changed.

Erg

Avenger_teambg said:

we got an extra functionality

Except that this extra functionality is not new. ToBEx already does that and without changing the default behaviour.

Milo

Avenger_teambg said:

Most people would react to news like this somewhat like this: yay, we got an extra functionality, but some spells should rather stay like the original, and then list the spells that would need to be reverted. Note: some would make sense to remain changed.

Most people are not trolls who've repeated the same post literally a thousand times.

CrevsDaak

@Erg‌ but the Enhanced Edition makes it available for OSX users. The latest version (v21 works fine) of TobEx makes my Wine'd BGT crash whenever I cast a spell ;p

JuliusBorisov

@Erg‌

With the improved pathfinding and those wonderful options covered here: http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/37833/a-bunch-of-neat-baldur-ini-options-in-bg2ee-1-3-that-ive-noticed-carry-overs-from-iwdee#latest including the sneak attacks and HoF mode now available in BG, I feel that EEs are much better now.

Could somebody make a simple mod that would change the emotion spell back to BG version, as @Troodon80‌ made with the UAI ability and NPCs items? A simple mod could fix everything!

Erg

CrevsDaak said:

but the Enhanced Edition makes it available for OSX users. The latest version (v21 works fine) of TobEx makes my Wine'd BGT crash whenever I cast a spell ;p

Fair enough, but this is all the more reason for Beamdog to implement all of ToBEx and with all its flexibility and customisability, but that doesn't mean that they should go ahead and change all the defaults unbalancing the game. Modders, and users installing mods, have every right to unbalance their game as they see fit, for example by using mods like SCS, but Beamdog should IMO refrain from doing so.

bengoshi said:

With the improved pathfinding and those wonderful options covered here: http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/37833/a-bunch-of-neat-baldur-ini-options-in-bg2ee-1-3-that-ive-noticed-carry-overs-from-iwdee#latest including the sneak attacks and HoF mode now available in BG, I feel that EEs are much better now.

I'm afraid that I don't share your enthusiasm about those and IMO BG2+ToBEx+"mods not yet available for EEs" still beats all of that.

bengoshi said:

Could somebody make a simple mod that would change the emotion spell back to BG version, as @Troodon80‌ made with the UAI ability and NPCs items? A simple mod could fix everything!

Actually, more like several mods and not all of them simple (emotion spell is just one example, there is plenty of other unbalancing changes, like the spawning system or the changes to how Pick Pocket works, etc.), but that is not the point.

The point I'm trying to make is that it should be the other way round, i.e. mods should be used to change defaults not to restore them.

Erg

@Dee, @Avenger_teambg‌,

Can you please explain the rationale behind the idea of changing the default behaviour of sleep (and similar spells like emotion)?

There even was a rationale behind that decision other than lazily porting an IWD feature without thinking about the consequences in terms of game balance? Please tell me that I'm wrong and that indeed there was one.

GodKaiserHell

 

Dee

@Erg‌
The behavior is the result of Icewind Dale handling sleep differently in the engine, and when the code was brought over it wasn't accounted for with regard to spells that use the opcode for something other than sleep. It's something that we'll be looking at for the next update, but it will likely be a case of adjusting the spells that are supposed to inflict "unconsciousness" rather than "sleep". The functionality in Icewind Dale is one that we do want in Baldur's Gate; the spells that inflict sleep are weaker than the ones that inflict unconsciousness, and being able to wake up after taking damage both makes sense and doesn't disrupt the game balance (particularly since it benefits/hinders both players and enemies alike).

Erg

Dee said:

The behavior is the result of Icewind Dale handling sleep differently in the engine, and when the code was brought over it wasn't accounted for with regard to spells that use the opcode for something other than sleep.

@Dee, thanks for answering and for admitting that the consequences of this change weren't fully accounted for.

Dee said:

The functionality in Icewind Dale is one that we do want in Baldur's Gate; the spells that inflict sleep are weaker than the ones that inflict unconsciousness, and being able to wake up after taking damage both makes sense and doesn't disrupt the game balance (particularly since it benefits/hinders both players and enemies alike).

I disagree on the fact that this functionality does not affect game balance. IMO it has an huge effect on game balance because the player can use sleep much more frequently than the enemies, but at least, for once, it is a change that makes the game more difficult and not easier.

Still I think that changes like this should be entirely optional and generally they are better left to mods, instead of being forced upon everyone by official patches.

Dee

We can agree to disagree there; the important thing to remember is that mods can change it easily. I know that you personally don't like a lot of the changes we've made to Baldur's Gate, but hopefully the fact that these things are moddable helps alleviate some of that sting. (I know, I know, "I shouldn't have to mod the game to get the experience I want"...)

Aoden

Hello! Sorry for my English (Google Translate). Can I independently add additional localization files on android version, or need to reconcile this with the developers?
Thanks.

killerrabbit

bengoshi said:

This seems to be a rather serious issue. It would be great if it could be fixed in a last minute before the patch goes live.

This behavior from IWDEE shouldn't follow to BG.

I agree -- I appreciate the tip on how to mod but I would prefer to have the original behavior restored if possible.

In 1 & 2 PnP a strike on disabled humanoid monster was auto death -- in 3rd it was death with a coup de grace. The current implementation was already weaker than the desktop rules.

Erg

Dee said:

I know, I know, "I shouldn't have to mod the game to get the experience I want"...

Close, but not exactly what I mean.

Of course I have to mod the game to get the experience I want, but I shouldn't have to mod the game to get the experience as it was meant by the original developers.

By the way, IMO the original developers were much better and knew better than you lot ;p

Dee

@Erg
Thanks for the vote of confidence.