334 réponses à ce sujet

[Shallina]

it's better than no kaedrin at all or compatibility problems.

[Kaldor Silverwand]

That is one opinion. Not mine. Not everyone uses Kaedrin's stuff or wants to. The ones who do are very vocal about it, but that is all.



My preference is to not include Kaedrin's stuff and let the player decide. If they choose to use it then any fancy resting system in the campaign isn't going to work. That is a choice they can make.



What I want to know is, is there a better option? Freezing a version of Kaedrin's is only a better option if Kaedrin was done doing updates. Since he isn't it isn't a better option. The modder will be pressured to relase a new hak everytime Kaedrin releases a new version. That won't be good for the modder or the players and can lead to bugs in updates.

[The Fred]

[quote]Shallina wrote...
No you don't have to specify place to have to be visited.[/quote]

You just have to set the final task of each stept so it fit in the story. (acquiring a book, an item, an ability from something like a statue of purification, or what ever).[/quote]
If the book, item, etc is in a place, then that place must be visited. Regardless, we need a chain of "plot" things which will allow a confrontation with the big T.

[quote]Kaldor Silverwand wrote...
I'm hearing Kaedrin's PrC Pack stuff is essential and a customized rest system is desired by several. I'm not sure you can have it both ways. Kaedrin's PrC pack modifies the standard rest script. So while you could release all of the scripts in a hak to keep Kaedrin's from overriding that means that the effort would be using a frozen version of Kaedrin's which probably isn't preferable. Unless you use a hak Kaedrin's rest system is going to win. If you do use a hak then you'll probably need to release updates everytime Kaedrin releases a new version that modifies the module scripts.[/quote]
You would only need to include the rest script in a hak. Plus, Kaedrin's script actually calls another script, which does all the work. It looks as though he will only update the latter, allowing us to change the first one as long as we still preserve that call to the former.

Personally, though, I wouldn't want to mandate people to use Kaedrin's. I know it's very popular, but the more people are forced to install, the worse, as far as I am concerned. After all, not everyone uses it, so it's best to keep it as an option if at all possible.

[Arkalezth]

Re: non-resting reward: It could be similar to Harp & Chrysantemum. You can rest anytime using the "R" key, but if you don't, you gain some extra XP at the end of the mission.

The resting prior the boss makes sense gameplay wise, but it would be a bit weird and repetitive to find a safe room in every dungeon, just before the boss. I know, lots of games have used this system for years...

Another option: Potions/items of Resting. Technically, you could fill your inventory with them and rest at any time, but they could come in limited amounts or something.

Edit: Agreed with Kaldor and Fred. The less things required, the best. Of course, as much compatibility as possible is desirable, but not if it's obligatory IMO.

That said, since this is a community module, I guess several people would be able to update it., so maybe it'd be easier to keep it up to date with Kaedrin's than most other modules.

Modifié par Arkalezth, 22 février 2011 - 11:44 .

[The Fred]

It could be made so that resting doesn't damage your bonus XP reward, but leaving does. Then, you can only rest in certain places. So, you can leave to rest (losing that XP) or, in large dungeons, rest half-way through. Possibly large dungeons would have to be split into chunks, however.

[nicethugbert]

I like the idea of various factions in favor or against the return of the tarrasque and the tarrasque not being a part of any of them. Some neutral factions might work too. It can get quite tangled and fun. Faction chaos for the win!

What you guys don't get about Kaedrin's is that it's not a matter of including it so much as being compatible with it.  Then the player decides if he wants to use it by putting it in his override if he wants.  The first step is to use his event scripts.  As Fred mentioned, they are just wrappers for his event functions.  So, you can put your code before his function calls.  I suspect his event code just basically maintains properties.

Modifié par nicethugbert, 23 février 2011 - 12:07 .

[manageri]

The Fred wrote...

Also, as regards resting, wandering monsters could be cool, but we'd all have to agree on and use a specific system. It might be easier just to disallow resting except in designated areas (such as right before the boss). Manageri's idea of giving a bonus reward for completing dungeons without leaving actually makes a lot of sense, since then you can restrict resting in a way which isn't just an annoyance - however, it might make players reluctant to explore new places since they can't leave and come back without forfeiting that extra XP or whatever it is.

I assume you mean like for example your group comes into a dungeon that's a bit too tough for you so you leave because you don't think you can clear it in one go yet? I think the best way to do it would be an autosave at the start of the dungeon and not initiating the dungeon "lockdown" before you kill something in it. Also I really liked the LoWPM system where the dungeon tells you the level range before you even enter.

Arkalezth wrote...

The resting prior the boss makes sense
gameplay wise, but it would be a bit weird and repetitive to find a safe
room in every dungeon, just before the boss. I know, lots of games have
used this system for years...

Totally true but the alternative doesn't make sense either in many cases which is all the more reason to side with gameplay. For example your group blazes through the ebul necromancer's tomb, stops before the boss's room, goes out to rest, and comes back without the necromancer ever having realized all his zombies just got powned and there's a bunch of lathanderites camped outside his lair...right.

The Fred wrote...

It could be made so that resting doesn't
damage your bonus XP reward, but leaving does. Then, you can only rest
in certain places. So, you can leave to rest (losing that XP) or, in
large dungeons, rest half-way through. Possibly large dungeons would
have to be split into chunks, however.

That'd work only if you can rest just once per safe area. Otherwise you can just run back a few rooms after every pack which is no different from totally unlimited resting. You're right that with very large dungeons those one time rest areas would propably be necessary.

[kamal_]

Re resting etc. CW as the exec should just make an exec decision, or people will just argue.

[Kaldor Silverwand]

nicethugbert wrote...
What you guys don't get about Kaedrin's is that it's not a matter of including it so much as being compatible with it.  Then the player decides if he wants to use it by putting it in his override if he wants.  The first step is to use his event scripts.  As Fred mentioned, they are just wrappers for his event functions.  So, you can put your code before his function calls.  I suspect his event code just basically maintains properties.

Sorry pres, but I don't think that is quite right. In order for Kaedrin's stuff to work you have to have calls to his cmi (sometimes ccs) scripts in the standard module scripts.  In his PrC pack he replaces the standard module scripts (as of version 1.4.1 he replaces k_mod_hb, k_mod_heartbeat, k_mod_pc_loaded, k_mod_player_equip, k_mod_player_levelup, k_mod_player_rest, k_mod_player_unequip, and k_mod_start, as well as x2_mod_def_act, and also replaces several of the kinc include files) with versions that do that, as well as checking for compatibility with SoZ (which he identifies by checking for module tags).

So if Kaedrin's stuff is in the override and your module scripts have the same names, then unless your scripts are in a hak, his will override and any special logic you have will not work.

You would either have to include all of your module scripts in a hak, which makes updating them problematic, or use non-standard module script names and modify them to call his cmi scripts.  But because he also has additional code in the module scripts themselves, it isn't as if the only thing going on is an executescript to a cmi script at the end. So if you do not use his scripts you may not be compatible with future releases.

I think that if you truly want to be compatible with Kaedrin's stuff now and going forward you have to use his scripts and only his scripts.  That means you cannot customize the rest system or the equip system or unequip system or the module heartbeat script. Neither at the campaign level or the module level.

I appreciate the work he has done, but by modifying those scripts as he has I believe he has tied the hands of other modders.  I'll gladly look through his scripts again, but I don't think I am mistaken.

Regards

Modifié par Kaldor Silverwand, 23 février 2011 - 12:34 .

[Hellfire_RWS]

kamal_ wrote...

Re resting etc. CW as the exec should just make an exec decision, or people will just argue.

+1

But for the record, Im for the standard SOZ resting

[Shaughn78]

If I'm wrong correct me but we should be able to make this compatible with kaedrin and still be able to do some custom stuff without the HAK.
Each builder will be making their own module and will be applying the k_mod scripts. If someone wishes to modify their on rest script they should be able to create their rest script my_mod_rest. Do their area specific stuff then at the end of the script if the rest is successful execute the k_mod_rest script.
This should allow for the custom changes while still not interferring with kaedrin's content.

We do not want to go with a hak version to modify kaedrin's content. From experience it makes keeping a game current very difficult and there are a number of games out there that are compatible with older unavaliable versions of kaedrin's content.

Regardless of the creature packs we use I would strongly suggest including pain's appearance.2da in the master hak so other packs can be added if needed.

Modifié par Shaughn78, 23 février 2011 - 02:16 .

[Shaun the Crazy One]

Holly Hell this thread has taken off.  It's been a good hour of reading for me, and I wanted to expand on some of the ideas mentioned and bring up a few points of my own (I'll try not to make this too long).


For the record we really need a better place/way to organize this.


Level adjustment:
First off, one of m prime concerns is level adjustment.  We don't want our level 4 PC party walking into a cave filled with Umber hulks.  SOZ used a few cleaver plot mechanics to insure this didn't happen (keep you in a certain section of the map in the early game, have a second OM you can't get to till a ways in ect.).  We're gonna need a game mechanic of our own to handle it.

Here's two basic methods:

• Have the PCs start on one side of the OM, put the easy areas on that side and make them progressively harder as you go along.
• Set up script to auto-level enemies, or use encounters to adjust an area's difficult to the PCs current level.
• Seal off more difficult areas by making requirements for entry (have to pick a tough lock, cast a high level spell on the door, ect)

I personally prefer method 2, but that's also alot of work.


Starting Plot:

_Knightmare_ wrote...
- Have the player start off as like a Henchman for the more powerful/well-known group of adventurers (those who eventually die fighting the T as others have mentioned). And I more mean "henchmen" in the old 2nd edition AD&D than the current version. Back in those days, henchies were low level "followers" of more powerful adventurers/heroes, sort of like a knight's squire. This is a good reason the player is such a low starting level.

I like this idea alot, it provides a good introduction the main story.  What I'd really like to do though is have a custom starting story based on the character's background or class, much like in Dragon Age.  This really help with immersion and setting.  This can be done by making the starting area, places you will later visit in the game.  A copy of each area is made, put into a separate module, and equipped with different scripts, and conversation (this should minimize the extra work load).  Given this doesn't work that well for the SOZ style of play, but what if we had the PC play solo with their main character lv 1 through 4, then introduce the SOZ system once the real campaign starts.  All the starting stories can end with the PC getting recruited by the well-known adventures knighmare mentioned, where they join-up with their custom SOZ party, and thus begins the main plot.  Because the starting stories are a separate module it should transition really well, it gives a back story to the character and the chance to play a campaign levels 1-20.  I'd be willing to do the extra scripting and design necessary to make this addition if you all like the idea.


Game Dynamics (Tarrasque rampage in particular):

WyrinDnjargo wrote...
Just throwing this out there as an idea, but what about some time dependant thing where you can actually
have the tarrasque rampaging around the OLM destroying locations if the PCs cannot get there in time to stop it rising - more pressure on PCs toact then before the death toll counter peaks and locations are destroyed. Maybe I just like the image of the huge creature stomping over the map that the PCs had gotten to know, now with a trail of
destruction in its wake...

I am very much in favor of the Tarrasque rampage idea, although there are a few tricks I would use to implement it.  Time based destruction is good but it has to be controlled.  The Tarrasque should start his time based rampage until a certain point in the game (preferably the part where recruiting missions start see below), and should slow or speed his pace based on the PCs progress.  There should also be a point where he sort of settles down wondering the areas he's already wrecked havoc on rather than advancing, to keep him from destroying the plot critical city before the PCs are ready to fight him (though this should only happen if the PCs are really taking their time).


It would also be cool for the villages and cities to enter an evacuation state as the Tarrasque approaches, that might be pretty hard to script though, but dynamic systems like this are what make a good game great.



Recruitment:

Quixal wrote...
First, for something like the Tarrasque it is unlikely that only one group would be tasked to deal with it. Not only would a given faction likely hedge their bets with more than one group but it is likely a lot of people would have a personal interest in seeing the threat ended, altered or maintained. I think you shoudl run into other groups.

I would really like a game play mechanic in which the PCs can recruit allies for the final battle.  Given not many people will be too eager to face the Tarrasque, so your potential allies are limited.  I was hoping to make a brass dragon who you can recruit by beating him at a game of  riddles (this also because I really wanted to put this riddle mini-game I've been programming to use).  I really think it will make the final battle that much more spectacular if you go in in fight with the allies you worked so hard to recruit.



Backstory:
DNO's backstory is quite good and very elaborate, but the one thing I'm missing is: if the Tarrasque was slain, why is he still around?  I had a different idea myself I'll post it in bit once I've worked out the details.


Other Villains:
Obviously we're gonna need more villains than just the Tarrasque himself.  Alot of people have been kicking around ideas on this, here's my 2 cents:

kamal_ wrote...
Given that the T is functionally immortal, there are easily factions that could view it's continued existence as important.

The T was supposedly created to kill gods. Someone could view it's existence as a check if the gods got out of hand (cough, even a good guy who views the T as a necessary evil).

The T is viewed as a living elemental force of nature (remember the T is neutral, it has no concept of good and evil because it's too stupid), so druids or other groups could want to preserve it. After all, forest fires are part of nature too, and lead to regrowth, so it would be easy to think of a druidic group that did not mind, or even encouraged, forest fires.

I was very skeptical about the "Tarrasque cult idea" since cult villains have been made awfully cliche by modern games and typically lack plot depth but I really like kamal take on it.  For the record I am very much in support of the Druid antagonist idea.

Also keep in mind, most people will view the Tarrasque approaching as a coming apocalypse and chaos may insue (looting, theft, and violence between ordinary citizen in their desperation to flee).  And of course there are also those who take advantage of such chaos.



So much for keeping it short[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/pinched.png[/smilie]

sorry guys

[edit: fixed the formating]

Modifié par Shaun the Crazy One, 23 février 2011 - 04:13 .

[manageri]

Villain suggestion: since the lands being pownzored are mainly human the Eldreth Veluuthra would have an incentive to steal the artifact so mr T can't be stopped.

[Shaun the Crazy One]

I recently noticed that these new BioWare forums have a Polls
feature.  If we wanted to vote on major decisions that effect the whole
campaign that would be a good place to do it.  Alternatively we could
just let CW make all the major calls since he is the project
coordinator.



Regardless of how we make the decisions that effect the entire campaign I
think we should leave all the decisions about the individual areas to
that area's designer(s).  Although for larger and more important areas I
think it would be better to have several people collaborating.



As far as the global content goes we will need:

• An agreed on set of mods, preferably combined into a single hak
• A document detailing plot flow (which DNO has already started on)
• A detailed map that depicts local terrain (Which we already have in we go with Chaos Wielder's OM, also see this link DNO posted earlier)
• Quest and script stuff that will undoubtedly come up (but let's cross that bridge when we get to it)

I also think it would help if people who plan on pitching in make a post
saying what their good at and what they'd like to contribute.



I'm best at level design (although I notoriously slow at it),
Blueprinting, and voice acting.  I'm also pretty good when comes to
scripting and dialog, and I know absolutely nothing about creating or
implementing custom content.  I hope to head up the design and the
different starting stories (if we decide to go with them), I have an
area in the works for a dragon's lair (this was going to be for SOZ
holiday project 2), and I'd like to design a crypt level with lots of
cleaver traps, fun puzzles, and angry zombies (can zombies even be
angry?).

[Kaldor Silverwand]

Shaughn78 wrote...

If I'm wrong correct me but we should be able to make this compatible with kaedrin and still be able to do some custom stuff without the HAK.
Each builder will be making their own module and will be applying the k_mod scripts. If someone wishes to modify their on rest script they should be able to create their rest script my_mod_rest. Do their area specific stuff then at the end of the script if the rest is successful execute the k_mod_rest script.
This should allow for the custom changes while still not interferring with kaedrin's content.

No problem in Computer Science that cannot be solved by adding another layer of indirection. I hadn't considered chaining from non-standard scripts to the standard ones which may or may not be overridden by Kaedrin's. You may be right. I'm not certain. I'm a little concerned about all of that SoZ specific code which, if SoZ is the baseline, we probably would want to execute, even though as is it will not be executed by Kaedrin's scripts because the modules won't be named the same as the modules in SoZ. Also I am uncertain if chaining two rest scripts would really work except in the cases in which the first script disallows resting.

We do not want to go with a hak version to modify kaedrin's content. From experience it makes keeping a game current very difficult and there are a number of games out there that are compatible with older unavaliable versions of kaedrin's content.

I do agree that using a hak for Kaedrin's stuff, when his stuff is still being actively developed, would be a mistake.

Regards

[Shallina]

You just need to call kaedrin CMI script and to name your script differently than what it was named in the OC for Kaedrin compatibility. The way Kaedrin made it, is made for that. He has a page on his site that explain on how to do it.



Of course if you insist on using the same name as in the OC it's your loss.



No big deal at all.



The only porblem if is you want to use custom spell and feat, or tlk that kaedrin use, or if you want to do stuff that will need 2DA modification that kaedrin use.



If you do thing that require 2DA modification that kaedrin use than you'll need to work with a frozen version of Kaedrin. Unless if Kaedrin report your 2da modification in his.

[WyrinDnjargo]

Shallina wrote...

You just need to call kaedrin CMI script and to name your script differently than what it was named in the OC for Kaedrin compatibility. The way Kaedrin made it, is made for that. He has a page on his site that explain on how to do it.

yeah pretty sure all i did for the 'only rest when near specific waypoints' system, as well as the other module scripts, was bung in an execute script function at the end to call Kaedrin's stuff. Scvary how quickly I forget the details, but I'm 90% sure it works ok. BTW that rest sytem is easy enough to adapt for lmiited/once-only resting too.
As for including Kaedrin's - personally,, although I don;t use it extensively, I think its key and what keeps several of the players of NWN2 still around at this stage in the life cycle. Why not reward that...


Great to see the enthusiasm, but (and sorry to be the little black raincloud) I can see the spectre of scope creep looming.. Any plots that need more writing and more journal entries to keep track of, are going to slow production time down, especially if they need cross area/dialogue continuity (not sure what the release schedule you were envisaging for this CW?).  Hate being the turd in the fishbowl, but, guys, we've seen enough of this before now. More than happy for someone to prove me wrong - and maybe this is just me posting with too little sleep. I guess it comes down to how much the plot governs the sandbox - and how many areas have plot related issues to hop back and forth between rather than being stand-alone plug-and-play dungeons

As for what I'll work on - basically point me at a prefab (or provide an area) and I'll work it up

[Shallina]

Dialog continuity only involve the main hub, each plot related story are independant.

[Arkalezth]

manageri wrote...

Totally true but the alternative doesn't make sense either in many cases which is all the more reason to side with gameplay. For example your group blazes through the ebul necromancer's tomb, stops before the boss's room, goes out to rest, and comes back without the necromancer ever having realized all his zombies just got powned and there's a bunch of lathanderites camped outside his lair...right.

I mean, if we can find a different solution. Of course, resting before the boss is better than going out to rest.

I think it should depend on the dungeon difficulty, not the same for all. If you can do fine without replenishing spells, no resting. If you're going to fight a dragon or something similar, then allow resting before the boss.

Modifié par Arkalezth, 23 février 2011 - 10:24 .

[The Fred]

nicethugbert wrote...
What you guys don't get about Kaedrin's is that it's not a matter of including it so much as being compatible with it.  Then the player decides if he wants to use it by putting it in his override if he wants.  The first step is to use his event scripts.  As Fred mentioned, they are just wrappers for his event functions.  So, you can put your code before his function calls.  I suspect his event code just basically maintains properties.

Indeed, it looks like Kaedrin has set this up to make modification of his event scripts easier. However, as I think has already been mentioned, it'd be better to use our own scripts, and have those call Kaedrin's scripts. It would probably be unnecessary, since you'd have one script calling another which calls another, but it would ensure that no matter what Kaedrin did to his scripts, they would still fire without ours needing to be called. This would also allow the pack to be completely optional for players since no scripts would rely on Kaedrin's includes, etc.

manageri wrote...

The Fred wrote...
It could be made so that resting doesn't
damage your bonus XP reward, but leaving does. Then, you can only rest
in certain places. So, you can leave to rest (losing that XP) or, in
large dungeons, rest half-way through. Possibly large dungeons would
have to be split into chunks, however.

That'd work only if you can rest just once per safe area. Otherwise you can just run back a few rooms after every pack which is no different from totally unlimited resting. You're right that with very large dungeons those one time rest areas would propably be necessary.

You could make it so that the area after each resting area has its own XP reward, e.g. L2 is separate from L1. So, You can lose one reward but still get the other. Or, you could indeed make it so that resting areas allow one rest each before you lose the XP reward or something, maybe even rating the player on the number of times they've left and/or rested. Perhaps we're over-thinking this, though, as interesting a discussion as it is.

One other thing to think about, though, is the death system. I'm all for using the SoZ standard, but doesn't that use Coins of Life and temples of Waukeen? In our corner of the world, Waukeen might be less popular, so we'd probably want people to be able to visit various temples etc.

[The Fred]

WyrinDnjargo wrote...
Great to see the enthusiasm, but (and sorry to be the little black raincloud) I can see the spectre of scope creep looming.. Any plots that need more writing and more journal entries to keep track of, are going to slow production time down, especially if they need cross area/dialogue continuity (not sure what the release schedule you were envisaging for this CW?).

I agree. One the one hand, I personally would like to see something awesome come out even if it's later, but on the other, we don't want to overbloat it. The thing is, though, that things like resting systems are a lot harder to add at a later stage than extra dungeons, so I would say it's worthwhile spending time on those. Then, since each mod-maker can essentially do one little project themselves, we should be able to build up a fair few areas between us in not that much time.

Shallina wrote...
Dialog continuity only involve the main hub, each plot related story are independant.

This is perfectly good, but it would be nice if one or two areas linked up and things, it'd make the whole project feel more coherant.

[Shaughn78]

At this point getting as many ideas out and disucussing them is a important step, as is the next step where they need to be thinned down and fitted into the story.



Soon we will also need some better way to organize ourselves. Either using the project board here on this sight, wiki or somewhere else. Somewhere were the design decisions can be laid out without scrolling through numerous post. Who's committed and what they want to contribute.

[The Fred]

Yeah, even if we just used a project or group on this site, it would let us organise different things into different topics. Right now this is a large and quickly self-bloating thread - it's grown to four (almost five) pages in one day - and it'll quickly get out of hand. Being able to discuss things like compatability, mod-wide systems, the big T itself etc. separately would help.

[E.C.Patterson]

Kaldor Silverwand wrote...
I appreciate the work he has done, but by modifying those scripts as he has I believe he has tied the hands of other modders.  I'll gladly look through his scripts again, but I don't think I am mistaken.

Regards

To add myown experience :

Trinity is Kaedrin compatible (but does not *include* it) AND has its own custom module scripts. Integration is pretty much a matter of adding Kaedrin's lines to your own versions and ensuring there are no conflicting 2das. Trinity was made Kaedrin compatible AFTER mod completion (quickly, with the help of Kaedrin granted) and there hasn't been any comment pointing to this causing any issues with the mod and its systems.

Modifié par E.C.Patterson, 23 février 2011 - 01:29 .