Many enemies drops gems, which they apparantly have hidden where? The same place as Boo?
Don't ask questions better left to aged sages
But for real, just pockets. The player character doesn't need a special bag to carry some gems on their person so I don't see why it's a plothole when a Xvart carries some odds and ends around.
Just to respond to one of the notions implied before the post itself - The idea that there needs to be a specific reason to include more of a thing people want more of is as arbitrary as requiring a reason to play the game in the first place. People want it, and that's more than a good enough reason. Personally I like having multiple gem bags, potion bags and scroll cases for role-play purposes. Sometimes Imoen just *has* to have that diamond and it goes into her bag, not mine. It really doesn't matter how useful it is, since the entire concept is essentially a cheat to work around inventory management anyway. At any rate trying to argue that the solution to the original poster's question is "stop wanting this" adds nothing to the discussion.
On that note, the Tweaks Anthology has a very handy component that not only adds such containers, but even separates them out into different colors and names for easy sorting. I would strongly recommend this if you want more than one of each container type.
Just to respond to one of the notions implied before the post itself - The idea that there needs to be a specific reason to include more of a thing people want more of is as arbitrary as requiring a reason to play the game in the first place. People want it, and that's more than a good enough reason. Personally I like having multiple gem bags, potion bags and scroll cases for role-play purposes. Sometimes Imoen just *has* to have that diamond and it goes into her bag, not mine. It really doesn't matter how useful it is, since the entire concept is essentially a cheat to work around inventory management anyway. At any rate trying to argue that the solution to the original poster's question is "stop wanting this" adds nothing to the discussion.
On that note, the Tweaks Anthology has a very handy component that not only adds such containers, but even separates them out into different colors and names for easy sorting. I would strongly recommend this if you want more than one of each container type.
Two or three players have weird foibles that drive them to want extra bags, beyond what you could reasonably do anything with. There are cheats for that.
I see no evidence of any widespread demand for that many bags though.
Two or three players have weird foibles that drive them to want extra bags, beyond what you could reasonably do anything with. There are cheats for that.
I see no evidence of any widespread demand for that many bags though.
The fact that a mod exists (and has existed for years) to do exactly this implies that it's probably more than a trio of players. I would argue that such a fact exactly implies widespread demand, actually. Besides, I don't understand the relevancy. What does the popularity of a desire have anything to do with its validity? Why do you even care if other people want more gem bags than you?
Two or three players have weird foibles that drive them to want extra bags, beyond what you could reasonably do anything with. There are cheats for that.
I see no evidence of any widespread demand for that many bags though.
The fact that a mod exists (and has existed for years) to do exactly this implies that it's probably more than a trio of players. I would argue that such a fact exactly implies widespread demand, actually. Besides, I don't understand the relevancy. What does the popularity of a desire have anything to do with its validity? Why do you even care if other people want more gem bags than you?
The question was "Why only one Gem Bag, Scroll Case and Potion Bag?"
There's no need for more is the answer. I'm just answering the question.
Edit: and, as you've pointed out, there are mods and cheats for those who want more anyway. It's not a problem.
Elaboration. I think Beamdog carefully considers every change they make to the originals. They do not make changes lightly.
The goal is retain the overall original experience, with some minor improvements here and there.
Increasing the ammo stacks to 80 for example is a minor improvement, that means you have to worry about ammo less often. Increasing ammo stacks to 2000 is a radical change, that would allow the player to hoard ungodly amounts of ammo for reasons only they would know. Maybe they could've pushed it a little further, say ammo stacks of 100, but they were a little more cautious than that and settled on 80.
It's the same with the bags. 1 is a minor improvement. 100 is a radical change. Maybe 2 or even 3 could've also been within an acceptable range but in the end they chose to be a bit more cautious than that. Better to stay too close to the originals than to stray too far.
Elaboration. I think Beamdog carefully considers every change they make to the originals. They do not make changes lightly.
The goal is retain the overall original experience, with some minor improvements here and there.
Increasing the ammo stacks to 80 for example is a minor improvement, that means you have to worry about ammo less often. Increasing ammo stacks to 2000 is a radical change, that would allow the player to hoard ungodly amounts of ammo for reasons only they would know. Maybe they could've pushed it a little further, say ammo stacks of 100, but they were a little more cautious than that and settled on 80.
It's the same with the bags. 1 is a minor improvement. 100 is a radical change. Maybe 2 or even 3 could've also been within an acceptable range but in the end they chose to be a bit more cautious than that. Better to stay too close to the originals than to stray too far.
I think your reasoning is faulty here. Adding one bag was the radical change. Adding one hundred would be a minor improvement.
The existence of more containers does not affect game balance in any way. People who want them could buy them from the store, people who don't want them wouldn't buy them.
Your whole argument comes down to "I don't see the need for this so other people shouldn't want it (even though it will have no effect on me whatsoever)". This is not a very good argument.
Elaboration. I think Beamdog carefully considers every change they make to the originals. They do not make changes lightly.
The goal is retain the overall original experience, with some minor improvements here and there.
Increasing the ammo stacks to 80 for example is a minor improvement, that means you have to worry about ammo less often. Increasing ammo stacks to 2000 is a radical change, that would allow the player to hoard ungodly amounts of ammo for reasons only they would know. Maybe they could've pushed it a little further, say ammo stacks of 100, but they were a little more cautious than that and settled on 80.
It's the same with the bags. 1 is a minor improvement. 100 is a radical change. Maybe 2 or even 3 could've also been within an acceptable range but in the end they chose to be a bit more cautious than that. Better to stay too close to the originals than to stray too far.
I think your reasoning is faulty here. Adding one bag was the radical change. Adding one hundred would be a minor improvement.
The existence of more containers does not affect game balance in any way. People who want them could buy them from the store, people who don't want them wouldn't buy them.
Your whole argument comes down to "I don't see the need for this so other people shouldn't want it (even though it will have no effect on me whatsoever)". This is not a very good argument.
I never said people shouldn't want it. Cannot stress enough that there are cheats and mods for that sort of thing.
I never said people shouldn't want it. Cannot stress enough that there are cheats and mods for that sort of thing.
I am aware of that, so you needn't stress yourself any further, but the question wasn't can I mod my game to get more gem bags, scroll cases and potion bags? It was why was only one of each item introduced in the first place?
And I have no idea why you mention cheats. Do you really think it would be cheating for your party to possess two scroll cases?
And I have no idea why you mention cheats. Do you really think it would be cheating for your party to possess two scroll cases?
You can enter cheat codes to add more items to your game. If that terminology offends you I could also call them Console Commands, but I think you're reading too much into it.
And I have no idea why you mention cheats. Do you really think it would be cheating for your party to possess two scroll cases?
You can enter cheat codes to add more items to your game. If that terminology offends you I could also call them Console Commands, but I think you're reading too much into it.
@Chronicler you either didn't understand @Permidion_Stark's remark or you are deliberately answering in a way that makes no sense to me as a reply to the original remark.
And I have no idea why you mention cheats. Do you really think it would be cheating for your party to possess two scroll cases?
You can enter cheat codes to add more items to your game. If that terminology offends you I could also call them Console Commands, but I think you're reading too much into it.
This is actually the rare case where this doesn't apply. Consoling in a bunch of BAG02 items will give you multiple gem bags, but they will all share the same inventory. Each bag needs to have its own individual item file and store, so you'd need to make as many copies of the sto and itm file of BAG02 as you wanted unique gem bags. This is pretty straightforward via NI or DLTCEP or (if the files are in the override already) just by duplicating them with your file manager.
Tweaks only adds a handful mainly because it's trying to straddle the line between addressing something annoying--IE inventory management--in a somewhat justifiable, role-playing manner. I don't think anyone can argue that inventory management is fun, but I do believe it was intended as a drag on the player's economical power by preventing them from bringing everything back to town and selling it. As to the OP's question about why only singular bags were introduced, I can only answer that this is probably the first time I've seen a request for multiple. The handful, optionally coupled with the Bottomless Bags component, has been enough for players.
I must admit that the word cheating did offend me somewhat. Clua consoling does sound better to me. An accusation of cheating is not to be triffled with.
Whom or what do we cheat? Is any altercation then cheating? If so is installation of any mod cheating then? I for sure dont see 6 gembags and a potioncase as cheating and I resent the notion.
And btw my request for a small DLC was driven by the fact that I am enjoying my game on a small iPhone 6 screen. Its awesome, but inventory management is tedious, a 6 man party is almost impossible when your thumb has to do the pointing instead of a mouse click (so I have 16 slots in my backpack most of the time), and modding is very far from easy.
So yes I want a gembag and potioncase peddler in FAI as a DLC (for iPhone and Android perhaps?), and I dont consider me a cheat for wanting this.
Elaboration. I think Beamdog carefully considers every change they make to the originals. They do not make changes lightly.
The goal is retain the overall original experience, with some minor improvements here and there.
Increasing the ammo stacks to 80 for example is a minor improvement, that means you have to worry about ammo less often. Increasing ammo stacks to 2000 is a radical change, that would allow the player to hoard ungodly amounts of ammo for reasons only they would know. Maybe they could've pushed it a little further, say ammo stacks of 100, but they were a little more cautious than that and settled on 80.
It's the same with the bags. 1 is a minor improvement. 100 is a radical change. Maybe 2 or even 3 could've also been within an acceptable range but in the end they chose to be a bit more cautious than that. Better to stay too close to the originals than to stray too far.
As people have pointed out, a "gem bag" is basically a purse. Gems are really, really small, diamonds could get lost in the stitching of a pocket.
It was a logical step to introduce a bag that corrected that illogicality that affected RP.
But they gave the only one to a NPC.
That's not a minor improvement. That's a straight up, in your face, "deal with this NPC whether you want to or not and if you don't, you're going to get punished by not obtaining a tweak to the playability of the game and we have just made the game even more illogical than it was before." (and I understand now with the latest patch you can't kill her?)
Same in BG2 with Hexaat. A BofH is a big deal, so let's throw one out there, but again you have to interact with our creation. No thought as to whether that increases the immersion in the game. (Which of course it doesn't, it's a clumsy plot device to introduce an NPC who from the beginning, is a clumsy plot device)
I agree thay do not make changes lightly, they are incredibly heavy handed when it comes to making changes, Rasaad in Nashkel? Dorn cut scene? ect.
And I have no idea why you mention cheats. Do you really think it would be cheating for your party to possess two scroll cases?
You can enter cheat codes to add more items to your game. If that terminology offends you I could also call them Console Commands, but I think you're reading too much into it.
This is actually the rare case where this doesn't apply. Consoling in a bunch of BAG02 items will give you multiple gem bags, but they will all share the same inventory. Each bag needs to have its own individual item file and store, so you'd need to make as many copies of the sto and itm file of BAG02 as you wanted unique gem bags. This is pretty straightforward via NI or DLTCEP or (if the files are in the override already) just by duplicating them with your file manager.
Tweaks only adds a handful mainly because it's trying to straddle the line between addressing something annoying--IE inventory management--in a somewhat justifiable, role-playing manner. I don't think anyone can argue that inventory management is fun, but I do believe it was intended as a drag on the player's economical power by preventing them from bringing everything back to town and selling it. As to the OP's question about why only singular bags were introduced, I can only answer that this is probably the first time I've seen a request for multiple. The handful, optionally coupled with the Bottomless Bags component, has been enough for players.
I must admit that the word cheating did offend me somewhat. Clua consoling does sound better to me. An accusation of cheating is not to be triffled with.
The original devs chose to enable the console with the Game Option "Cheats=1" and the original IWD required prefacing all console commands with "CHEATERSDOPROSPER:". So, referring to using the console as a "cheat" certainly seems historically accurate.
That's a straight up, in your face, "deal with this NPC whether you want to or not and if you don't, you're going to get punished by not obtaining a tweak to the playability of the game and we have just made the game even more illogical than it was before." (and I understand now with the latest patch you can't kill her?)
The minhp item isn't applied until Neera's cut scene starts. So, you can kill her before then. You can also avoid her cutscene completely by telling her you want no part in her situation.
I also don't see how it's the end of the world to tie one of the least significant items in the game behind talking to an NPC for two seconds, but at that point I think we're straying away from the original subject, which was the number of containers, not the choice in where they were placed.
I must admit that the word cheating did offend me somewhat. Clua consoling does sound better to me. An accusation of cheating is not to be triffled with.
The original devs chose to enable the console with the Game Option "Cheats=1" and the original IWD required prefacing all console commands with "CHEATERSDOPROSPER:". So, referring to using the console as a "cheat" certainly seems historically accurate.
That has been so - and now changed to debug mode. So the devs have decreed its not?
And btw the original cheats where such as: midas, summon cow, getting Drizzt. Never did them and never have. Yes the console was among them, but only one of many.
I have used the console many times, and still dont see it as cheating. Julius Borisov has in the last year handed out more than a dozen clua console codes as work around for minor bugs and such. So I dont get the impression that using the console is per se cheating - and the change of enabling code seem to back that up.
I still fail to see the big problem if people use the console? If people want to use an ingame option to tweak a game that they have paid for, how is that cheating? Its not the olympics, its just a (highly addictive) game. I wish we can have a honest discussion about a very simple topic: more bags - yea or nay.
So could we lay off the use of the word cheat? I dont like it and I never will.
BTW: Still I cant use the console, and I miss the opportunity. Actually I am missing it so much, that I am willing to pay for the added content. Hope thats not a problem either.
I must admit that the word cheating did offend me somewhat. Clua consoling does sound better to me. An accusation of cheating is not to be triffled with.
The original devs chose to enable the console with the Game Option "Cheats=1" and the original IWD required prefacing all console commands with "CHEATERSDOPROSPER:". So, referring to using the console as a "cheat" certainly seems historically accurate.
That has been so - and now changed to debug mode. So the devs have decreed its not?
And btw the original cheats where such as: midas, summon cow, getting Drizzt. Never did them and never have. Yes the console was among them, but only one of many.
I have used the console many times, and still dont see it as cheating. Julius Borisov has in the last year handed out more than a dozen clua console codes as work around for minor bugs and such. So I dont get the impression that using the console is per se cheating - and the change of enabling code seem to back that up.
I still fail to see the big problem if people use the console? If people want to use an ingame option to tweak a game that they have paid for, how is that cheating? Its not the olympics, its just a (highly addictive) game. I wish we can have a honest discussion about a very simple topic: more bags - yea or nay.
So could we lay off the use of the word cheat? I dont like it and I never will.
BTW: Still I cant use the console, and I miss the opportunity. Actually I am missing it so much, that I am willing to pay for the added content. Hope thats not a problem either.
In this case the problem with using the console is that you'll summon 2 bags, but they'll both share the same inventory space, essentially making it 1 bag that takes up 2 inventory slots.
Turns out creating more bags is a bit more involved than I realized. You need to mod in new item codes for new bags.
If Beamdog offered extra containers as purchasable DLC for a couple of dollars/pounds I would buy it. I know it is available as a mod but since I started using a Mac I can't get most mods to work (this is down to my ineptitude rather than the mods themselves but it is still frustrating).
If Beamdog offered extra containers as purchasable DLC for a couple of dollars/pounds I would buy it. I know it is available as a mod but since I started using a Mac I can't get most mods to work (this is down to my ineptitude rather than the mods themselves but it is still frustrating).
Same here on android (Chromebook). Don't use any mods at all, not because I'm principally opposed, but because it is a hassle I don't want to get in to.
I must admit that the word cheating did offend me somewhat. Clua consoling does sound better to me. An accusation of cheating is not to be triffled with.
The original devs chose to enable the console with the Game Option "Cheats=1" and the original IWD required prefacing all console commands with "CHEATERSDOPROSPER:". So, referring to using the console as a "cheat" certainly seems historically accurate.
That has been so - and now changed to debug mode. So the devs have decreed its not?
And btw the original cheats where such as: midas, summon cow, getting Drizzt. Never did them and never have. Yes the console was among them, but only one of many.
I have used the console many times, and still dont see it as cheating. Julius Borisov has in the last year handed out more than a dozen clua console codes as work around for minor bugs and such. So I dont get the impression that using the console is per se cheating - and the change of enabling code seem to back that up.
I still fail to see the big problem if people use the console? If people want to use an ingame option to tweak a game that they have paid for, how is that cheating? Its not the olympics, its just a (highly addictive) game. I wish we can have a honest discussion about a very simple topic: more bags - yea or nay.
So could we lay off the use of the word cheat? I dont like it and I never will.
BTW: Still I cant use the console, and I miss the opportunity. Actually I am missing it so much, that I am willing to pay for the added content. Hope thats not a problem either.
I don't care how you play. Play in God Mode, play in Legend of Bhaal mode. Use the console, don't use the console. Play in a suit of plate armor. Shave your head and play in Minsc Underoos. Whatever works for you. I just don't see why you need to castigate others for referring to the console as a "cheat". As I pointed out, it was originally enabled with the game option "Cheats=1". If that's how they refer to it, that's their choice.
Calling something a cheat that is called "cheat" in the files, is just using established terms. Its a cheat code (a means of doing somethign the game would not normally allow). Its not a castigation unless you want it to be. Its not like someone is going around the thread calling people cheaters and saying they are ruining the game or playing it wrong.
And I have no idea why you mention cheats. Do you really think it would be cheating for your party to possess two scroll cases?
You can enter cheat codes to add more items to your game. If that terminology offends you I could also call them Console Commands, but I think you're reading too much into it.
This is actually the rare case where this doesn't apply. Consoling in a bunch of BAG02 items will give you multiple gem bags, but they will all share the same inventory. Each bag needs to have its own individual item file and store, so you'd need to make as many copies of the sto and itm file of BAG02 as you wanted unique gem bags. This is pretty straightforward via NI or DLTCEP or (if the files are in the override already) just by duplicating them with your file manager.
I find adding a bunch of BAG02s (or other containers) via NI or EE Keeper very useful. It creates a kind of "party inventory" to ease the process of selling stuff and exchanging it. Party members keep their equipment and stuff they frequently use in inventory, but stuff that is to be sold or held in reserves (e.g., potions beyond those in the Quick Items) goes into one of the party containers.
Time to sell gems? Check the party gem bag.
Khalid run out of healing potions? Grab one from the party potion case.
Comments
On that note, the Tweaks Anthology has a very handy component that not only adds such containers, but even separates them out into different colors and names for easy sorting. I would strongly recommend this if you want more than one of each container type.
Two or three players have weird foibles that drive them to want extra bags, beyond what you could reasonably do anything with. There are cheats for that.
I see no evidence of any widespread demand for that many bags though.
There's no need for more is the answer. I'm just answering the question.
Edit: and, as you've pointed out, there are mods and cheats for those who want more anyway. It's not a problem.
The goal is retain the overall original experience, with some minor improvements here and there.
Increasing the ammo stacks to 80 for example is a minor improvement, that means you have to worry about ammo less often. Increasing ammo stacks to 2000 is a radical change, that would allow the player to hoard ungodly amounts of ammo for reasons only they would know. Maybe they could've pushed it a little further, say ammo stacks of 100, but they were a little more cautious than that and settled on 80.
It's the same with the bags. 1 is a minor improvement. 100 is a radical change. Maybe 2 or even 3 could've also been within an acceptable range but in the end they chose to be a bit more cautious than that. Better to stay too close to the originals than to stray too far.
The existence of more containers does not affect game balance in any way. People who want them could buy them from the store, people who don't want them wouldn't buy them.
Your whole argument comes down to "I don't see the need for this so other people shouldn't want it (even though it will have no effect on me whatsoever)". This is not a very good argument.
If you want 100 gem bags, you can have them.
And I have no idea why you mention cheats. Do you really think it would be cheating for your party to possess two scroll cases?
This message brought to you not from a mod, but a meddler.
Tweaks only adds a handful mainly because it's trying to straddle the line between addressing something annoying--IE inventory management--in a somewhat justifiable, role-playing manner. I don't think anyone can argue that inventory management is fun, but I do believe it was intended as a drag on the player's economical power by preventing them from bringing everything back to town and selling it. As to the OP's question about why only singular bags were introduced, I can only answer that this is probably the first time I've seen a request for multiple. The handful, optionally coupled with the Bottomless Bags component, has been enough for players.
Whom or what do we cheat? Is any altercation then cheating? If so is installation of any mod cheating then? I for sure dont see 6 gembags and a potioncase as cheating and I resent the notion.
And btw my request for a small DLC was driven by the fact that I am enjoying my game on a small iPhone 6 screen. Its awesome, but inventory management is tedious, a 6 man party is almost impossible when your thumb has to do the pointing instead of a mouse click (so I have 16 slots in my backpack most of the time), and modding is very far from easy.
So yes I want a gembag and potioncase peddler in FAI as a DLC (for iPhone and Android perhaps?), and I dont consider me a cheat for wanting this.
So I very much appreciated the refraising to clua consoling. I like that word so much better - thanks.
As people have pointed out, a "gem bag" is basically a purse. Gems are really, really small, diamonds could get lost in the stitching of a pocket.
It was a logical step to introduce a bag that corrected that illogicality that affected RP.
But they gave the only one to a NPC.
That's not a minor improvement.
That's a straight up, in your face, "deal with this NPC whether you want to or not and if you don't, you're going to get punished by not obtaining a tweak to the playability of the game and we have just made the game even more illogical than it was before."
(and I understand now with the latest patch you can't kill her?)
Same in BG2 with Hexaat. A BofH is a big deal, so let's throw one out there, but again you have to interact with our creation.
No thought as to whether that increases the immersion in the game. (Which of course it doesn't, it's a clumsy plot device to introduce an NPC who from the beginning, is a clumsy plot device)
I agree thay do not make changes lightly, they are incredibly heavy handed when it comes to making changes, Rasaad in Nashkel? Dorn cut scene? ect.
And btw the original cheats where such as: midas, summon cow, getting Drizzt. Never did them and never have. Yes the console was among them, but only one of many.
I have used the console many times, and still dont see it as cheating. Julius Borisov has in the last year handed out more than a dozen clua console codes as work around for minor bugs and such. So I dont get the impression that using the console is per se cheating - and the change of enabling code seem to back that up.
I still fail to see the big problem if people use the console? If people want to use an ingame option to tweak a game that they have paid for, how is that cheating? Its not the olympics, its just a (highly addictive) game. I wish we can have a honest discussion about a very simple topic: more bags - yea or nay.
So could we lay off the use of the word cheat? I dont like it and I never will.
BTW: Still I cant use the console, and I miss the opportunity. Actually I am missing it so much, that I am willing to pay for the added content. Hope thats not a problem either.
Turns out creating more bags is a bit more involved than I realized. You need to mod in new item codes for new bags.
Time to sell gems? Check the party gem bag.
Khalid run out of healing potions? Grab one from the party potion case.
Brilliant.