Project Temple+ * RELEASED *

[Sitra Achara]

Quick update:

Pug is making headway on an improved UI framework that should make it easier to introduce new GUI elements. First item that got overhauled is the game console, which makes life easier for us when testing stuff The cheats menu may evolve into a sort of Dungeon Master / ingame editor in the near future.

I'm back on track with the Arcane Archer. The Imbue Arrow ability turned out to be a big PITA, since a lot of the inner workings of spell casting and ranged attack handling had to be recreated / exposed to python and made to work simultaneously. It still has some rough edges but the bulk of it is done. Still have quite a bit more to do with that class, but I think it should be done in 2-3 weeks. As a rough estimate 1.0.30 should be out by the end of January.

Custom feat requirement via Python script are also in for v1.0.30, which enabled Black's Melee Weapon Mastery. IIRC Elestan also had some plans for that? Anyway it should open up some new avenues, together with all the other new python methods that were recently added.

Along the way I've also made a few fixes, including solving the infamous Infinite AoO bug for Greater Invisbility / Invisibility Sphere / Sleet Storm. The latter is now restored to its original form for Co8 (it was replaced by an instantaneous effect because of the AoO bug, which wasn't nearly as cool as the original).

Have a screenshot

 

[Elestan]

Custom feat requirement via Python script are also in for v1.0.30, which enabled Black's Melee Weapon Mastery. IIRC Elestan also had some plans for that?

My main desire there is to allow the class abilities as feats option, which is necessary to implement the SRD Generic Classes. But I'd like to finish my first playthrough of the game before I start modding; I'm currently in the Nodes.

 

[Endarire]

Sitra: Alleluia!

 

[r0gershrubber]

I just wanted to pop in and say 'thanks!' for your updates. I look forward to seeing the remaining DMG PrCs deployed.

Any idea when the Dragon Disciple will be ready?

 

[gunman]

Instead of adding content, try to fix some the most annoying issues.

For the love of God, can you enable showing the path for any action such as move, attack, cast spell that require movement etc, like it is shown for charge or withdraw? I'm tired of pixel hunting for the right spot, only to end up moving right in the middle of enemies getting slaughtered by AOOs.

Also can you make the sneak movement speed faster? As it is now, it is unusable.

 

[Sitra Achara]

I just wanted to pop in and say 'thanks!' for your updates. I look forward to seeing the remaining DMG PrCs deployed.

Any idea when the Dragon Disciple will be ready?

Cheers! Haven't really started the Dragon Disciple yet, so not sure yet. Probably not before March.

 

[cowking]

There are some jarring typos and glitches in the new content descriptions. Also there's no link to see blackguard spells.

Spoiler

Also you should list (advertise) some great features of this mod like alphabetical spell lists and fixed mouse cursor acceleration so anyone googling a fix for either finds temple+.

Btw is it possible to get humble npcs somehow working with this + co8? Does "HP per level up" affect monsters as well?

 

[thesheeep]

So... multiplayer, when? :D

 

[Sitra Achara]

There are some jarring typos and glitches in the new content descriptions. Also there's no link to see blackguard spells.

Spoiler

Thanks, fixed for next version.

Also you should list (advertise) some great features of this mod like alphabetical spell lists and fixed mouse cursor acceleration so anyone googling a fix for either finds temple+.

I never thought to single those two out from the changelist

Btw is it possible to get humble npcs somehow working with this + co8? Does "HP per level up" affect monsters as well?

Humble NPCs should work if you're using Co8.

Re. HP per levelup, pretty sure it'll affect monsters too (the portion of their HP that is derived from class levels, to be exact - not all have those).

So... multiplayer, when? :D

Heh, don't hold your breath!

 

[thesheeep]

So... multiplayer, when? :D

Heh, don't hold your breath!

No worries, I won't

But with this, it definitely seems in the realm of the possible now. Technically thinking, I'd say it is "just" a lot of work, with the biggest challenge being keeping host & clients in sync.
Probably the best chance we ever had to get a proper D&D 3.5 experience online. Pretty sure no one else is going to bother any time soon. So you got loads of time!

 

[Sitra Achara]

So... multiplayer, when? :D

Heh, don't hold your breath!

No worries, I won't

But with this, it definitely seems in the realm of the possible now. Technically thinking, I'd say it is "just" a lot of work, with the biggest challenge being keeping host & clients in sync.
Probably the best chance we ever had to get a proper D&D 3.5 experience online. Pretty sure no one else is going to bother any time soon. So you got loads of time!

If we pursue multiplayer, it'd probably be restricted to an arena mode locked in turn based combat to keep things simple. Maybe next year

 

[thesheeep]

If we pursue multiplayer, it'd probably be restricted to an arena mode locked in turn based combat to keep things simple. Maybe next year

I don't think anyone would expect such a thing earlier.

However, my basic idea, if I had to do this, would be:
Let the game do most of the work.
The host is basically in a "normal" game, except for a chat within the game, and except for combat, in which he controls only his own chars. Host controls all of the movement and party outside of combat (at least for a start). The only thing transferred to client(s) is key commands (clicked here, selected spell X, basically).
The client only transfers key commands during combat, during his own chars turns. I'd leave the client without control in "movement mode" to prevent dealing with stuff like players going to different (parts of) maps. At least at first.

This would keep the amount of transferred data to a minimum. The only thing transferred would be input commands and chat. And game states, to make sure host isn't able to click somewhere if client hasn't yet loaded a new map, etc. And of course, save game & character data has to be transferred at game start.
Of course, this is assuming the simulation is otherwise deterministic. If it isn't, random seeds would have to be transferred as well (which would possibly be the most severe change to the game code).
If I'm not making crazy assumptions here, this sounds pretty much doable, albeit lots of work. Creating a basic TCP socket infrastructure isn't too much of a problem in C++.

I would not, under any circumstance, try and create a full object-state-synchronization (with prediction ) as you'd do in an FPS game. Doesn't work well at all for any kind of strategy game, and the game would have to be set up for it from the get-go, which ToEE obviously wasn't.

 

[Sitra Achara]

If we pursue multiplayer, it'd probably be restricted to an arena mode locked in turn based combat to keep things simple. Maybe next year

I don't think anyone would expect such a thing earlier.

However, my basic idea, if I had to do this, would be:
Let the game do most of the work.
The host is basically in a "normal" game, except for a chat within the game, and except for combat, in which he controls only his own chars. Host controls all of the movement and party outside of combat (at least for a start). The only thing transferred to client(s) is key commands (clicked here, selected spell X, basically).
The client only transfers key commands during combat, during his own chars turns. I'd leave the client without control in "movement mode" to prevent dealing with stuff like players going to different (parts of) maps. At least at first.

This would keep the amount of transferred data to a minimum. The only thing transferred would be input commands and chat. And game states, to make sure host isn't able to click somewhere if client hasn't yet loaded a new map, etc. And of course, save game & character data has to be transferred at game start.
Of course, this is assuming the simulation is otherwise deterministic. If it isn't, random seeds would have to be transferred as well (which would possibly be the most severe change to the game code).
If I'm not making crazy assumptions here, this sounds pretty much doable, albeit lots of work. Creating a basic TCP socket infrastructure isn't too much of a problem in C++.

I would not, under any circumstance, try and create a full object-state-synchronization (with prediction ) as you'd do in an FPS game. Doesn't work well at all for any kind of strategy game, and the game would have to be set up for it from the get-go, which ToEE obviously wasn't.

It'd still probably need some measure of state sync, e.g. when you encounter an enemy patrol the exact enemy location at combat start could be different between host and client.
Also I'd start with the arena mode anyway since the client would probably get bored in the realtime phase due to not being able to control anything.

 

[thesheeep]

It'd still probably need some measure of state sync, e.g. when you encounter an enemy patrol the exact enemy location at combat start could be different between host and client.

Why? I mean, if both client and host run the exact same simulation, how could the results differ (assuming same random seeds, which can be forced)?
In newer games, this is far more of an issue due to threading, but I doubt ToEE has any kind of threading in it, or has it?

 

[Sitra Achara]

It'd still probably need some measure of state sync, e.g. when you encounter an enemy patrol the exact enemy location at combat start could be different between host and client.

Why? I mean, if both client and host run the exact same simulation, how could the results differ (assuming same random seeds, which can be forced)?
In newer games, this is far more of an issue due to threading, but I doubt ToEE has any kind of threading in it, or has it?

No threading, but if the player runs up to the patrol there could be a small variation in the time when the command was issued, which would translate to a small variation in enemy position.
I guess you could delay the command until acknowledged by the client to solve that, at the cost of UI responsiveness.

 

[thesheeep]

For that kind of problem, in RTS games at least, a lock-step mechanism is used (look it up).
Basically, all commands within a certain time are collected, sent to all players and executed at the same time everywhere (say, all collected commands are executed every 100ms). The game itself collects these "steps" of commands (like, all commands commands within these 100ms) ahead of time - so what you actually see is like 300ms behind the actual input data the game already has.
That comes with a certain delay, of course, but that is usually "played over" with a sound effect.
It is also a pretty sophisticated thing to pull off, so a more brute force data transfer from host to clients to make sure everyone has the same starting position in combat might be preferable here, after all.

 

[MuscleSpark]

Wouldn't multiplayer work with Nvidia Share? It's a turn-based game so latency doesn't really matter, the only annoying part would be that both players can't control stuff at the same time (and that it uses a lot of bandwidth to stream).

 

[Slimu]

I want to start a playthrough of ToEE with CoE and Temple+. Is this a good time or should I wait until further patches for Temple+ are released? Is the base game now stable and (mostly) bug free?

 

[cowking]

Temple+ breaks cleric's magic domain spell list a little bit (could be other domains affected as well). The overly long string name (possibly related to alphabetical spell list?) for globe of lesser inv. causes some kind of line rollover.

On the left = CO8 with temple+
On the right = CO8 with front-end.

Spoiler

Also every new feat lacks an entry in the main wiki accessed by the "?" button.

 

[cowking]

Temple+ breaks the lining for BAB/save charts in the game wiki for every class. Does not happen with TFE-X.

Spoiler

You really need to go over every single alteration you have made to the wiki and fix them. It's very offputting and gives a bad image to a new user.

 

[Elestan]

You really need to go over every single alteration you have made to the wiki and fix them. It's very offputting and gives a bad image to a new user.

Please keep in mind that nobody is paying them for their improvements, so while politely reporting bugs is always appreciated, making demands of them does not seem appropriate.

 

[Black]

They've been paid with very many brofists.

 

[drafting3]

Long time ToEE lover. I have uninstalled/reinstalled this game so many times I have lost count. I stumbled upon the Templeplus project and decided to check it out.

You guys rock. Thanks for breathing life back into one of my favorite games.

Are there any links to tutorials or guides on how to create new feats/abilities/classes? I am pretty good at reverse engineering software, but I need pointed in the right direction.

Since you released the mystic theurge and arcane trickster, we really need the practiced spellcaster feat. That shouldn't be impossible to code. I'd like to try unless you're already working on it. There are TONS of other feats/spells/abilities/classes to add. I would like to dabble a little.

 

[Sitra Achara]

Long time ToEE lover. I have uninstalled/reinstalled this game so many times I have lost count. I stumbled upon the Templeplus project and decided to check it out.

You guys rock. Thanks for breathing life back into one of my favorite games.

Are there any links to tutorials or guides on how to create new feats/abilities/classes? I am pretty good at reverse engineering software, but I need pointed in the right direction.

Since you released the mystic theurge and arcane trickster, we really need the practiced spellcaster feat. That shouldn't be impossible to code. I'd like to try unless you're already working on it. There are TONS of other feats/spells/abilities/classes to add. I would like to dabble a little.

Hi!

You can find some modding doc on the wiki linked in my sig.

Haven't given practised spellcaster a stab yet, but I think it shouldn't be too hard (just add a hook for a caster level mod event (ET_OnGetCasterLevelMod) and add a bonus based on the base caster level and critter HD).
The tricky part is letting the player choose which class to boost, but in other similar situations I just applied it to the highest casting class which should be good for 99% of cases.

 

[YES!]

I also wanted to express my gratitude and love for the people working on this and new content or whatever.