The SCS component is supposed to prevent chunking in all circumstances--the fact that it doesn't always work is itself the bug.
I don't think so... From SCS readme: Make party members less likely to die irreversibly
This component tries to prevent "chunking", the annoying permanent death of your character when you're reduced below -10 hp. Characters who get reduced to 0 hp or below just die in the usual fashion and can be resurrected. It isn't possible to prevent quite all forms of chunking (massive damage from fire, in particular, still seems to cause chunking fairly reliably), but this component should make it a rarer occurrence. This may be useful in the later stages of the game, when melee opponents often do 30-40 hp damage per blow - that 10 hp safety margin starts to feel slender.
That's the thing, though. It doesn't make chunking "less likely." It has no effect on chunking whatsoever.
The naming of those two spells is pretty clear. We could ask the mod creator, but I'm pretty sure the reason why it says "less likely" is because testing found that chunking was still possible. The creator thought that the fix was imperfect, but the reality is that the fix did nothing. The intent was to prevent it; not to decrease the chance of it. And there is one very clear, very specific reason why it did not do anything: because it accidentally enabled chunking after disabling it, negating the only effect it might have had.
SCS applies two opcodes from two spells, one which disables chunking, appropriately named "Apply Non Permanent Death," and another one which enables chunking, appropriately named "Remove Non Permanent Death." The intent is clear from the name, and they work exactly as the name says they do.
But SCS applies both spells, and the second one, which takes precedence, enables chunking. When I give one character, the Duergar Cleric, the typical SCS fix, he will always get chunked when reduced to -10 HP. But when I give Maneira the SCS fix, but remove the second opcode, which disables the first and enables chunking (as the spell names state), she never gets chunked. Even fire damage can't chunk her. Only cold damage causes chunking when the fix is applied properly.
I just tested it using a set of custom weapons that applied massive slashing damage, massive fire damage, massive cold damage, and the disintegration effect. Confirmed. The typical SCS version never prevents chunking. Without that bug, it always prevents chunking, with the sole exception of cold damage and petrification. The Bioware rule was made with the assumption that the SCS fix sometimes, but did not always, prevent chunking. That assumption was incorrect on both counts--in fact, it is not even possible to sometimes, but not always, prevent chunking. The SCS fix never did anything, due to an error in its implementation. Remove that error, and the chance of chunking goes from 100% to 0%.
With the sole exceptions of cold damage and petrification, every single chunking in SCS in the entire Bioware thread was due strictly to a bug. We have a 100% confirmation of this. Per the normal Bioware forum's rules, every single one of them warranted a reload.
I understand if people decide to make an exception for behavior that seems normal. But this behavior is due strictly to a coding error in SCS--there are no other factors involved.
With the sole exceptions of cold damage and petrification, every single chunking in SCS in the entire Bioware thread was due strictly to a bug. Per the normal Bioware forum's rules, every single one of them warranted a reload.
1) In our view, subversion of intent is a necessary but not sufficient condition for invoking the bug rule, do read my post
2) I'd need to see more data before concluding that the SCS component never, ever provides protection- specifically in the case of physical damage beyond the original -10HP and below a certain threshold, with Gore enabled. Even if it always fails to protect, that would not change my view: I would still be unwilling to negotiate around the dynamic by invoking the bug reload rule. If the anticipated behavior concerned me, I'd fix it or mod it before starting a run and declare my fix or mod.
We have some disagreement on reloading for the purposes of reversing a potentially unintentional chunking.
For cases like these, I think we can agree that if people are using rules that differ from the typical no-reloader's, they should state in advance what they are, rather than come up with a justification after the fact.
My policy is:
1. If a character is erroneously chunked due to a bug involving SCS' no-chunking component, a reload is possible provided that 1a. The chunking was solely due to a bug 1b. The player wins both the initial fight and the subsequent fight 1c. The chunking was not due to petrification or cold damage, which cannot be prevented due to engine limitations
1. I didn't know the component didn't work at all until @Tresset kindly sent me a fix for it. I didn't see how his fix worked 100% of the time, as he said it did, when SCS' did not. Only when I looked closely at the relevant files from SCS did I realize that SCS' fix did not work at all. I assumed that it was supposed to work all the time, so I've historically used reloads to replicate that effect.
2. It can be fixed very easily. After installing the fix, go into EEKeeper, go to the "Effects" tab, and find the effects with type "0x027." There should be two of them, one with "Apply Non Permanent Death" under Resource 3, and another with "Remove Non Permanent Death," in that order. Remove the second one. Repeat that for each character and all of them will be immune to chunking, except by petrification and cold damage.
3. I've gotten so used to my normal solution, reloading and re-fighting the previous battle, that I actually didn't even consider implementing the actual fix until I decided to test it. And I am too lazy to go back in EEKeeper whenever I get a new character, since a "solo" Seducer run involves a fair amount of cycling through new characters as they become available.
I suppose you could fix it more permanently simply by going to SPIN668 and changing the "Stat value" parameter from 0 to 1. That way, the erroneous extra spell would merely repeat the original effect, instead of reversing it.
4. If the EEKeeper fix works, then I don't think playing on Normal would be necessary for the purposes of avoiding chunking, since the only forms of chunking the fix can't prevent are cold damage and petrification, both of which are still possible in Normal mode.
I suppose the chunking issue is a bit of a moot point at this point. Why fuss over reloading as a response to chunking when we can use @Tresset's fix to prevent it entirely?
I've actually already done the reload option once in my current run, and @Tresset's fix would have been a lot more convenient.
I don't believe so. Tests suggest that it just changes the animation that displays when a permanent death does occur. We could collect more evidence on that point, if we wished to.
We have demonstrated that with the SCS component installed turning Gore off makes permanent death MORE likely, not less.
This is a repost:
With the SCS Make Party Members Less Likely to Die Irreversibly Component installed, then, surprisingly, disabling gore makes permanent deaths more likely.
From a recent test. In both cases, Edwin was at 4HP when Aestica attacked, and then took exactly 28HP of damage. This is with the SCS Make Party Members Less Likely to Die Irreversibly Component installed.
With gore disabled. Edwin dies permanently, though without a chunky death animation.
I didn't know the component didn't work at all until @Tresset kindly sent me a fix for it.
(As an aside, I'm still not convinced that it never works. I believe we've seen evidence that it provides some protection with physical damage specifically and Gore on. Data could be convince otherwise)
Don't look at me. I just made a thing that prevents chunking. @semiticgod was the one who figured out that the component wasn't working properly. I don't even use SCS on a regular basis.
The SCS fix should be all or nothing--the opcodes offer no chance of probabilities getting involved--but it's possible the game itself gives critters a chance of avoiding chunking, depending on the damage taken. Since I was using a weapon that deal over 200 damage, that could explain why my tests turned up with automatic chunkings. It's possible that a 30-damage hit would chunk the target only occasionally.
I didn't know the component didn't work at all until @Tresset kindly sent me a fix for it.
(As an aside, I'm still not convinced that it never works. I believe we've seen evidence that it provides some protection with physical damage specifically and Gore on. Data could be convince otherwise)
Agree. If character takes physical damage going down to, say, -20 hp and is not chunked, then, in my view, the component is working.
Evidence suggest that it does work at least some of the time and disabling Gore hinders its performance.
I'll note that while I rarely use the SCS component, I've always been pleased with its behavior. It makes party members less likely to die irreversibly, as the title states, but leaves permanent death as part of the game, as intended on Core rules
Is it the SCS, component, though, or is it normal game behavior? Because to my knowledge, the only thing SCS does to the game as far as chunking goes is apply those opcodes, which are all or nothing.
Here's the WeiDu code for that component. Can any WeiDu experts see if we're overlooking something?
DEFINE_ACTION_FUNCTION ~no_chunk~ BEGIN
// main patch
OUTER_SPRINT pc_list ~~ COPY_EXISTING_REGEXP GLOB ~.*\.cre~ ~override~ SPRINT filename ~%SOURCE_RES%~ LPF CRE_is_PC RET value=value END PATCH_IF value=1 BEGIN PUSH pc_list ~%filename%~ END BUT_ONLY
MAKE_PATCH add_effect_inline=>~match=>is_PC opcode=>295 parameter2=>1 timing=>9 target=>1~ END LAF edit_creature STR_VAR creature= ~%pc_list%~ editstring=~add_effect_inline=>"match=>is_PC opcode=>295 parameter2=>1 timing=>9 target=>1"~ END
ACTION_IF is_bg2 BEGIN LAF no_chunk_selfishness END END
END
//////////////////////////////////////////////////// // make the Selfishness test still chunk the victim ///////////////////////////////////////////////////
DEFINE_ACTION_FUNCTION no_chunk_selfishness BEGIN
// modify HELL_EXPLODE to have a delay time of 1
LAF edit_spell STR_VAR spell=HELL_EXPLODE editstring=~patch_effect_inline=>"timing=>4"~ END
// amend area script
LAF get_area_script STR_VAR area=ar2904 RET script END LAF swap_text STR_VAR files= ~%script%.bcs~ swaps=~ReallyForceSpell(Player2,HELL_EXPLODE) =>ReallyForceSpell(Player2,HELL_EXPLODE)ActionOverride(Player2,LeaveParty())Wait(1) ReallyForceSpell("hellvict",HELL_EXPLODE) =>ReallyForceSpell("hellvict",HELL_EXPLODE)ActionOverride("hellvict",LeaveParty())Wait(1)~ END
May I ask why you don't just play with chunking, semiticgod?
Best,
A.
I did. In my first no-reload run, with the Party of Spiders, Cernd notably suffered a chunking that dramatically changed the course of the run, forcing us to recruit Haer'dalis. That was petrification, and my normal rules don't allow reloads for that even now, of course, so I'd still stick with that if it happened again. I didn't like it, but it was an emotional moment that made the run more interesting. Not for me, exactly, but for people who were reading about the run. I actually stuck with chunking for a long while.
Then I suffered 6 chunkings in a single run. After that, it began to seem less like a challenging game mechanic I wanted to work within, and more like a horrible headache that made the game less fun.
The thing is, my runs are virtually always experimental. The primary reason I start many runs is because I want to try a particular strategy or party setup. In a normal run, a chunking can make the game more interesting. But in an experimental run, the effect can be very different.
Let's say I started a run because I wanted to explore the uses of Called Shot. What happens if my Archer gets chunked?
In this context, the chunking doesn't make the gameplay more challenging or more interesting. All it does is defeat the entire purpose of the Called Shot run. That was when I stopped rolling with party members getting chunked--it was interfering with the purpose of my runs.
No idea why I stuck with petrification-related chunkings, though, since I didn't know they worked any differently from normal ones.
If we posit that none provides a comparative advantage, non-mage kits and wild mages behave like none, and player created unkitted characters are granted the generalist kit, not none, we could, I believe, explain all the results we've observed so far, including the previously perplexing findings from monsters.
I think the issue is that certain kits, including NONE, are considered to be specialists in school-less spells and effects, including on-hit weapon effects.
The specialist bonus was implemented by looking for matches between the spell effect applied and the specialty school of the relevant character without excluding what we'll call the null case, a match between none and no school. Later, when the non-mage kits were added, and later still when the wild mage kit was added, they were coded in such a way that they behave like none for specialty school checks: they all gain a bonus when using unschooled weapons or spells. In contrast, when a specialist mage or character coded generalist uses unschooled weapons or spells, they do not gain a bonus: there is no advantageous match between their school and the schoolless effect. This leads to the following behavior with unschooled spells and weapons:
1) None v Generalist, advantage None 2) None v Mage Kit other than Wild Mage, advantage None 3) None v Non-Mage kit or Wild Mage, even 4) Mage Kit other than Wild Mage kit v Generalist, even 5) Mage Kit other than Wild Mage kit v Non-Mage kit or Wild Mage, advantage Non-Mage kit or Wild Mage 6) Non-Mage kit or Wild Mage v Generalist, advantage Non-Mage kit or Wild Mage
Letting "Schoolless"= None + Wild Mage + Non-Mage Kit, and "Schooled"=Generalist + Mage Kit other than Wild Mage, then we can reduce to:
Schoolless v Schoolled, advantage Schoolless
Put another way, if it's not one of the original mage kits or a generalist, the engine treats it as a schoolless specialist, and confers bonuses with unschooled weapons and spells
Note that your observation concerning the distinction between "generalist" and "none" was absolutely essential in teasing this out. It was the behavior of my unkitted fighter paired with her berserker twin that had led us to abandon the null case theory of the anomaly. We now understand that the behavior of my fighter and her twin is consistent with the null case theory: my fighter was flagged generalist, not none, and berserkers behave like none, not a specialist mage.
Best,
A.
Ok, now that I am fully awake, I realize you are right about this. The one thing that was throwing me off was that I was testing with the clerical version of Know Alignment to see how people would save against it. With Generalist casting it on Illusionist I noted a -2 penalty to the saves was being added. I thought this was because of the kit bonus, but checking on the spell in NI it actually has an undocumented save penalty of -2 to resisting its effects. Quite annoying now that I realize that THIS is what was throwing me off. I am glad we were able to figure this out finally.
And for the record, the SCS Make Party Members Less Likely to Die Irreversibly component does work with physical damage and Gore on, at least in my install.
Settings:
Tests were conducted in EE v1.3 with the SCS v30 component. I summoned Jan and Edwin via the Fate Spirit. In each trial I let Jan backstab Edwin with Edwin's ToB quarterstaff. Edwin 's HP had already been reduced to 14HP
There were 5 trials in each condition. In the SCS condition, Edwin was never permanently killed- even when hit with a 90+ HP critical. In the non-SCS condition, Edwin was chunked 4/5 times. The only time he was not chunked was when Jan landed a dud backstab, 28 damage.
With the SCS component:
Without the SCS component:
If you seek to replicate, be sure that you do not create a save with NPCs already generated in your SCS install and then export it, or vice versa. Be sure your characters are generated under the test conditions that you wish to evaluate.
I would encourage @semiticgod to attempt replication in his install, following the same protocol. I suspect that the distinctions between his prior results and mine are attributable to one of the following:
1) Use of non-physical damage (which, as the read me states, is treated differently) 2) Testing with Gore OFF instead of on (turning Gore OFF disables the SCS component) 3) Dealing damage outside of normal game range with a player created weapons (less likely explanation, but possible)
Now I'm confused. Testing found that chunking was guaranteed at -10 HP, but then I check EEKeeper and none of my newly-created characters had the opcodes the previous ones did. My WeiDu file shows no indication of the SCS component being installed.
Yet my other characters had those opcodes active, the same opcodes mentioned in the WeiDu code I posted above. It might be a BWS thing that messed with my WeiDu file, but I don't see how I could have gotten those opcodes applied if that SCS component wasn't installed.
@Alesia_BH: My other tests remained the same when I removed the non-physical damage and when I used a vanilla weapon (+2 short sword with backstab) to kill the target. Gore was on. Maybe it's EET; maybe it's BWS; maybe it's v2.3.
I'm a little hobbled as far as testing goes, because I haven't been able to install SCS without BWS for I don't know how long; uninstalling or reinstalling SCS after installing it with BWS is supposed to be extremely unwise; and installing SCS again on a new game with BWS would take two days. All I can do is stick with my existing installs.
Alesia, could you check your characters in EEKeeper? I wanted to see if they have one or both of these effects. I ask because the WeiDu code above, copied from the stratagems installer for SCS v30, suggests that these two opcodes, applied to party members, are the ONLY thing that SCS' chunking fix actually does to the game.
Further testing found that chunking was not guaranteed if HP did not go below -20 or so. It also proved impossible to chunk Imoen outside Candlekeep, even though it was entirely possible to chunk player-generated characters.
So under normal circumstances, chunking is partly luck-dependent, and SCS modifies the probabilities somehow. But in my install due to some sort of error, chunking is either guaranteed or impossible.
1) We've demonstrated that is works in some cases- the only point Serg and I wanted to make 2) Serg and I are content with it as is 3) For those, such as yourelf, who dislike it and/or can't install it, a tweak/fix is available
My curiosity is sated. I'll exit the conversation here. Others should feel free to keep exploring, if they like.
I've had inconsistent results with reviewing chunking behavior having tested it several times during the day under different conditions. I'm a bit tired now and will consider further tomorrow, but provisionally I think the following factors may explain the inconsistency: 1) I've sometimes used old saves and the protection is only applied at the point that the character is added to the party. A character added in an SCS installation will have protection even if the save is then loaded in a non-SCS installation (and will not have protection if added in a non-SCS installation and loaded up in SCS). 2) Protection is only ever given to standard NPCs and not to player-generated characters.
Comments
The naming of those two spells is pretty clear. We could ask the mod creator, but I'm pretty sure the reason why it says "less likely" is because testing found that chunking was still possible. The creator thought that the fix was imperfect, but the reality is that the fix did nothing. The intent was to prevent it; not to decrease the chance of it. And there is one very clear, very specific reason why it did not do anything: because it accidentally enabled chunking after disabling it, negating the only effect it might have had.
SCS applies two opcodes from two spells, one which disables chunking, appropriately named "Apply Non Permanent Death," and another one which enables chunking, appropriately named "Remove Non Permanent Death." The intent is clear from the name, and they work exactly as the name says they do.
But SCS applies both spells, and the second one, which takes precedence, enables chunking. When I give one character, the Duergar Cleric, the typical SCS fix, he will always get chunked when reduced to -10 HP. But when I give Maneira the SCS fix, but remove the second opcode, which disables the first and enables chunking (as the spell names state), she never gets chunked. Even fire damage can't chunk her. Only cold damage causes chunking when the fix is applied properly.
I just tested it using a set of custom weapons that applied massive slashing damage, massive fire damage, massive cold damage, and the disintegration effect. Confirmed. The typical SCS version never prevents chunking. Without that bug, it always prevents chunking, with the sole exception of cold damage and petrification.
The Bioware rule was made with the assumption that the SCS fix sometimes, but did not always, prevent chunking. That assumption was incorrect on both counts--in fact, it is not even possible to sometimes, but not always, prevent chunking. The SCS fix never did anything, due to an error in its implementation. Remove that error, and the chance of chunking goes from 100% to 0%.
With the sole exceptions of cold damage and petrification, every single chunking in SCS in the entire Bioware thread was due strictly to a bug. We have a 100% confirmation of this. Per the normal Bioware forum's rules, every single one of them warranted a reload.
I understand if people decide to make an exception for behavior that seems normal. But this behavior is due strictly to a coding error in SCS--there are no other factors involved.
2) I'd need to see more data before concluding that the SCS component never, ever provides protection- specifically in the case of physical damage beyond the original -10HP and below a certain threshold, with Gore enabled. Even if it always fails to protect, that would not change my view: I would still be unwilling to negotiate around the dynamic by invoking the bug reload rule. If the anticipated behavior concerned me, I'd fix it or mod it before starting a run and declare my fix or mod.
3) We should move this to the lounge
Best,
A.
For cases like these, I think we can agree that if people are using rules that differ from the typical no-reloader's, they should state in advance what they are, rather than come up with a justification after the fact.
My policy is:
1. If a character is erroneously chunked due to a bug involving SCS' no-chunking component, a reload is possible provided that
1a. The chunking was solely due to a bug
1b. The player wins both the initial fight and the subsequent fight
1c. The chunking was not due to petrification or cold damage, which cannot be prevented due to engine limitations
1) Why do you use the component if you believe it never works?
2) Do you know how to fix it? If so, why not fix it?
3) If you can't fix it -or are unwilling to fix it- why not just accept that and play without invoking the bug reload rule?
4) What are your current thoughts on a Normal with Core damage based solutions?
Best,
A.
1. I didn't know the component didn't work at all until @Tresset kindly sent me a fix for it. I didn't see how his fix worked 100% of the time, as he said it did, when SCS' did not. Only when I looked closely at the relevant files from SCS did I realize that SCS' fix did not work at all. I assumed that it was supposed to work all the time, so I've historically used reloads to replicate that effect.
2. It can be fixed very easily. After installing the fix, go into EEKeeper, go to the "Effects" tab, and find the effects with type "0x027." There should be two of them, one with "Apply Non Permanent Death" under Resource 3, and another with "Remove Non Permanent Death," in that order. Remove the second one. Repeat that for each character and all of them will be immune to chunking, except by petrification and cold damage.
3. I've gotten so used to my normal solution, reloading and re-fighting the previous battle, that I actually didn't even consider implementing the actual fix until I decided to test it. And I am too lazy to go back in EEKeeper whenever I get a new character, since a "solo" Seducer run involves a fair amount of cycling through new characters as they become available.
I suppose you could fix it more permanently simply by going to SPIN668 and changing the "Stat value" parameter from 0 to 1. That way, the erroneous extra spell would merely repeat the original effect, instead of reversing it.
Or just use @Tresset's fix.
4. If the EEKeeper fix works, then I don't think playing on Normal would be necessary for the purposes of avoiding chunking, since the only forms of chunking the fix can't prevent are cold damage and petrification, both of which are still possible in Normal mode.
I suppose the chunking issue is a bit of a moot point at this point. Why fuss over reloading as a response to chunking when we can use @Tresset's fix to prevent it entirely?
I've actually already done the reload option once in my current run, and @Tresset's fix would have been a lot more convenient.
If you don't like the behavior mod it/fix it and announce the mod/fix. There's no need to invoke the bug reload rule.
(I, personally, will continue to play with chunking enabled, if and when I party.)
Best,
A.
We have demonstrated that with the SCS component installed turning Gore off makes permanent death MORE likely, not less.
This is a repost:
With the SCS Make Party Members Less Likely to Die Irreversibly Component installed, then, surprisingly, disabling gore makes permanent deaths more likely.
From a recent test. In both cases, Edwin was at 4HP when Aestica attacked, and then took exactly 28HP of damage. This is with the SCS Make Party Members Less Likely to Die Irreversibly Component installed.
With gore disabled. Edwin dies permanently, though without a chunky death animation.
With gore active. Edwin does not die permanently
Best,
A.
Edwin had 4 hp. He took 28 HP of physical damage. He was thus below -20. Without the SCS tweak, he would have -or should have- been chunked.
Best,
A.
I'll note that while I rarely use the SCS component, I've always been pleased with its behavior. It makes party members less likely to die irreversibly, as the title states, but leaves permanent death as part of the game, as intended on Core rules
Best,
A.
Best,
A.
Here's the WeiDu code for that component. Can any WeiDu experts see if we're overlooking something?
DEFINE_ACTION_FUNCTION ~no_chunk~ BEGIN
// main patch
OUTER_SPRINT pc_list ~~
COPY_EXISTING_REGEXP GLOB ~.*\.cre~ ~override~
SPRINT filename ~%SOURCE_RES%~
LPF CRE_is_PC RET value=value END
PATCH_IF value=1 BEGIN
PUSH pc_list ~%filename%~
END
BUT_ONLY
MAKE_PATCH
add_effect_inline=>~match=>is_PC opcode=>295 parameter2=>1 timing=>9 target=>1~
END
LAF edit_creature STR_VAR creature= ~%pc_list%~ editstring=~add_effect_inline=>"match=>is_PC opcode=>295 parameter2=>1 timing=>9 target=>1"~ END
ACTION_IF is_bg2 BEGIN
LAF no_chunk_selfishness END
END
END
////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// make the Selfishness test still chunk the victim
///////////////////////////////////////////////////
DEFINE_ACTION_FUNCTION no_chunk_selfishness BEGIN
// modify HELL_EXPLODE to have a delay time of 1
LAF edit_spell STR_VAR spell=HELL_EXPLODE editstring=~patch_effect_inline=>"timing=>4"~ END
// amend area script
LAF get_area_script STR_VAR area=ar2904 RET script END
LAF swap_text STR_VAR files= ~%script%.bcs~
swaps=~ReallyForceSpell(Player2,HELL_EXPLODE) =>ReallyForceSpell(Player2,HELL_EXPLODE)ActionOverride(Player2,LeaveParty())Wait(1)
ReallyForceSpell("hellvict",HELL_EXPLODE) =>ReallyForceSpell("hellvict",HELL_EXPLODE)ActionOverride("hellvict",LeaveParty())Wait(1)~ END
END
We should test with Gore enabled, and focus on physical damage in parallel installs only differentiated by their SCS Tweak setting.
I'm 90% confident that it provides protection in some circumstances.
Best,
A.
Then I suffered 6 chunkings in a single run. After that, it began to seem less like a challenging game mechanic I wanted to work within, and more like a horrible headache that made the game less fun.
The thing is, my runs are virtually always experimental. The primary reason I start many runs is because I want to try a particular strategy or party setup. In a normal run, a chunking can make the game more interesting. But in an experimental run, the effect can be very different.
Let's say I started a run because I wanted to explore the uses of Called Shot. What happens if my Archer gets chunked?
In this context, the chunking doesn't make the gameplay more challenging or more interesting. All it does is defeat the entire purpose of the Called Shot run. That was when I stopped rolling with party members getting chunked--it was interfering with the purpose of my runs.
No idea why I stuck with petrification-related chunkings, though, since I didn't know they worked any differently from normal ones.
Best,
A.
Settings:
Tests were conducted in EE v1.3 with the SCS v30 component. I summoned Jan and Edwin via the Fate Spirit. In each trial I let Jan backstab Edwin with Edwin's ToB quarterstaff. Edwin 's HP had already been reduced to 14HP
There were 5 trials in each condition. In the SCS condition, Edwin was never permanently killed- even when hit with a 90+ HP critical. In the non-SCS condition, Edwin was chunked 4/5 times. The only time he was not chunked was when Jan landed a dud backstab, 28 damage.
With the SCS component:
Without the SCS component:
If you seek to replicate, be sure that you do not create a save with NPCs already generated in your SCS install and then export it, or vice versa. Be sure your characters are generated under the test conditions that you wish to evaluate.
I would encourage @semiticgod to attempt replication in his install, following the same protocol. I suspect that the distinctions between his prior results and mine are attributable to one of the following:
1) Use of non-physical damage (which, as the read me states, is treated differently)
2) Testing with Gore OFF instead of on (turning Gore OFF disables the SCS component)
3) Dealing damage outside of normal game range with a player created weapons (less likely explanation, but possible)
Best,
A.
Yet my other characters had those opcodes active, the same opcodes mentioned in the WeiDu code I posted above. It might be a BWS thing that messed with my WeiDu file, but I don't see how I could have gotten those opcodes applied if that SCS component wasn't installed.
@Alesia_BH: My other tests remained the same when I removed the non-physical damage and when I used a vanilla weapon (+2 short sword with backstab) to kill the target. Gore was on. Maybe it's EET; maybe it's BWS; maybe it's v2.3.
I'm a little hobbled as far as testing goes, because I haven't been able to install SCS without BWS for I don't know how long; uninstalling or reinstalling SCS after installing it with BWS is supposed to be extremely unwise; and installing SCS again on a new game with BWS would take two days. All I can do is stick with my existing installs.
Alesia, could you check your characters in EEKeeper? I wanted to see if they have one or both of these effects.
I ask because the WeiDu code above, copied from the stratagems installer for SCS v30, suggests that these two opcodes, applied to party members, are the ONLY thing that SCS' chunking fix actually does to the game.
It doesn't patch anything else.
No one had those opcodes according to EEKeeper.
Install failure, possibly associated with version, sounds like a candidate explanation for the behavior you've observed.
Best,
A.
NW: I don't have EE Keeper or the like installed. I can set up Near Infinity semi-soon.
Anybody know what SCS' anti-chunking component does specifically? @subtledoctor? @kjeron? @argent77? @OlvynChuru?
1) We've demonstrated that is works in some cases- the only point Serg and I wanted to make
2) Serg and I are content with it as is
3) For those, such as yourelf, who dislike it and/or can't install it, a tweak/fix is available
My curiosity is sated. I'll exit the conversation here. Others should feel free to keep exploring, if they like.
I hope you'll find your answers!
Best,
A.
1) I've sometimes used old saves and the protection is only applied at the point that the character is added to the party. A character added in an SCS installation will have protection even if the save is then loaded in a non-SCS installation (and will not have protection if added in a non-SCS installation and loaded up in SCS).
2) Protection is only ever given to standard NPCs and not to player-generated characters.