Map 2 NPC Claim #9 [Bloodthirsty Crustacean]

Post by **arvisrend** » Sat Jan 28, 2012 1:07 am

Thanks Thrig!

@BC: Do you think you can come up with a raison-d-ÃƒÂªtre for the ship at 47, -13? Maybe some rogue Telvanni have landed there to gain a foothold in that old Dunmer fortress? (In that case, we can't use the old ship interior, though, but would have to invent something more Telvanni-like... scrolls, magic traps, dremora spawns? But I'm not sure this scenario matches the lore in the first place.)

Also, should the shipwreck be interiored (I am now very much convinced that the 2005 version is useless) or removed?

Post by **Haplo** » Sat Jan 28, 2012 7:57 am

Ships infested with Telvanni are always fun.

Bloodthirsty Crustacean · Mon Jan 30, 2012 3:39 am

File the first. All of Charnelworks/Docks fully NPCd. Catacombs presently untouched.

One small change I have made is to swap the bonewalker smithies out of the residential districts and in to the mortuary complex. The priest's house and records office have taken the places of the old buildings. As they share the same shape, this was simply a question of moving doors and doormarkers, readjusting northmarkers etc.; could be easily reversed but makes the whole complex slightly more consolidated.

By next Sunday: the Upper District NPCd.

Post by **Haplo** » Mon Jan 30, 2012 5:10 am

Huzzah. Thanks BC

gro-Dhal · Post by **gro-Dhal** » Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:27 pm

I like the NPC notes and the blind artifact guy. Keep in mind gender ratios!

Bloodthirsty Crustacean · Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:40 pm

NPC notes are a very helpful addition of one of my predecessors in this claim: can't take any credit for most of the stuff there. And yep, am so doing. Already switched one guy to a gal in the lower district.

Post by **arvisrend** » Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:59 pm

About Ethaso Athones:

Necrom's Overseer of Traffic. Not a very likeable fellow. Screens outlanders to see if they're okay to enter the city. Is frustrated that the higher powers have opened up the city to outlanders. Will refuse any member of the Imperial Legion and Cult unless they are also a member of a Great House. Is responsible for all traffic administration.

Is this really that logical? I'd rather go for Temple membership and/or Nerevarine status. But being a Hlaalu or Telvanni shouldn't help much in gaining entrance to the holy city in my opinion...

As for Nedim Fareloth's drink issues, is that already a quest in planning?

gro-Dhal · Post by **gro-Dhal** » Mon Jan 30, 2012 1:04 pm

If someone's a dunmer, the default assumption should be that they're of the Faith. Like white people in Europe in the Middle Ages.

Bloodthirsty Crustacean · Mon Jan 30, 2012 3:10 pm

Personally I would just scrap that whole thing - because he's just a dude in an office that the player only goes through if they're arriving by docks, and there's no obligation to stop at his office.

He can make mean comments about people in bad factions, but won't actually have any gameplay effect.

On the drinking guy, I liked that note so added a questgiver outside his house who can unlock the door for the player. Details and actual quest progression would need to be planned. Right now all there is is an intro and set up.

Post by **arvisrend** » Mon Jan 30, 2012 6:51 pm

Just a minor bug: apparently you (BC) killed one of the Charnelworks NPCs with fire (which is okay with me) but forgot to remove his Greeting 7 "Umm, can't you see I'm a little busy right now, %PCRace? Can this wait? If you have something important to say, you'd probably be better off seeing Ralis Andolith anyway. She's overseeing this here."

So now everybody in the world has that greeting (as it is no longer bound to an NPC ID).

Something else: In the Crematorium of St. Veloths, there are four sacks named "Shipwrecked Sailor" and "Shipwrecked Captain". Are these kinds of remains really supposed to be kept in sacks?

Bloodthirsty Crustacean · Mon Jan 30, 2012 8:02 pm

On bug 1, that's the kind of bug that it's relatively easy for me to notice and fix myself.

(and indeed I already have) But thanks.

The sack discussion was had in the thread of that claim; I agree it's kind of weird but unless anyone has a better idea..?

Post by **arvisrend** » Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:51 pm

What speaks about regular urns (probably with changed names) and maybe some maritime requisites on the altar, like this?

(EDIT: It's not that I consider them particularly artful... but for some reason a sack sounds like the worst thinkable way of preserving someone's remains to me. That said, shouldn't sailors be buried at sea?)

Mortimer · Post by **Mortimer** » Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:56 am

arvisrend wrote: That said, shouldn't sailors be buried at sea?

For a people as ancestor-worshiping and totemistic as the Dunmer I would imagine your duty to your clan far far far outweighs any connection you might have with your profession. If they were Nords, I'd say by all means bury at sea. But Dunmer remains would be put to better use guarding their tomb as a bonewalker.

Bloodthirsty Crustacean · Mon Feb 06, 2012 1:17 pm

Was busy last night, here's the next update: all of the Upper City NPCd also, leaving just the Temple and Catacombs (as well as wrapping up the wilderness).

I haven't touched those sacks yet, may get around to those later. gro-Dhal gets his spools though.

One important note is that I've tried to minimize the mundane business being dealt with by the Ordinators in Mourning. They no longer do customs duties at the docks, or staff the barracks in the Upper District; these posts have been delegated to 'Temple Guards'. The Ordinators 'HQ' will be in the Temple Pathway complex thing.

Important information needed for next week: on the Catacombs what do we want in there? Any priests/pilgrims/patrolling Ordinators? Bonewalker enemies? Information much appreciated.

Post by **arvisrend** » Mon Feb 06, 2012 1:38 pm

I have been told (by Ada, I think) there should be ordinators-in-mourning (not too many - they should always stand in big halls and have low wander radiuses so they can never block the player's path) and restless ghosts giving quests (although I have, as of yet, no concepts for these quests). I might have got something wrong, though.

If you merge in the farmhouse, I can start making the quest. Or do you plan to give the farmers their generic dialogue first?

Also, have we reached a conclusion about the ship and shipwreck? I am for: screw the shipwreak, make the ship an abandoned Telvanni ship which belonged to a group of rogue Telvanni who have now settled in the Dunmer fortress for some weird reason. Any help with finding a weird reason would be appreciated. :)

The easiest way, of course, would be to screw both ship and shipwreck, and declare the interioring to be complete.

Bloodthirsty Crustacean · Mon Feb 06, 2012 2:21 pm

Because this interior and quest is completely standalone from the rest of file, it is possible to do this in an extremely clean manner.

I'll outline the full procedure at a later point; in this instance all you need to do is just implement the quest direct in to the farm interior .esp. p.s. do have one of the brothers be 'outside' (but for the timebeing just have him stand on a floating table in the void outside the int or whatever)

You can also give them any miscellaneous dialogue you deem appropriate.

Once that's done, I'll merge the whole package into my file.

Yes, ignore the shipwreck, and I'll think about the Telvanni when I come to do wilderness, unless it's a pressing concern? I see nothing wrong with that idea, anyway.

Post by **arvisrend** » Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:43 am

Great; where do I put my greetings? (Since the file depends on TR_data only, I don't have any of these "TR MAP 2 GREETINGS START HERE" delimiters.)

Bloodthirsty Crustacean · Thu Feb 09, 2012 1:59 pm

So are most NPC claims, but they have them? You could load up TR_Mainland.esp, or the Necrom file, alongside, but not active or master, and that should provide them. But I'm pretty sure they're in Data. (note that Greeting 5 does not have those)

And, in greetings 5, too, for quests. 7 for misc greetings.

Post by **arvisrend** » Thu Feb 09, 2012 2:09 pm

Bloodthirsty Crustacean wrote:(note that Greeting 5 does not have those)

Ah, thanks! This clears it up.

Bloodthirsty Crustacean · Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:45 am

I'm having to get my laptop replaced this weekend: haven't lost any (TR) work, but the next update won't come til Monday earliest. Just a heads up for this week - future updates should stay on Sundays.

Also, any votes yea or nay on Bonewalker/undead enemies in the catacombs? gro-Dhal, Ada, you guys have any thoughts on what should be down there?

Mortimer · Post by **Mortimer** » Sun Feb 12, 2012 1:18 am

Shouldn't their hostility depend on if you're a high ranking temple official or not? I feel like bonewalkers were placed there to protect the tomb from looters and vandals, not to inhibit further work done by the temple themselves. Otherwise why not position more guards down there instead of forfeiting your basement to ghouls?

But I'm not gro or Ada so take what I say with a massive grain of salt.

Post by **arvisrend** » Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:49 am

I hate to speak for somebody I am not, but if I am not misremembering Ada's words, his stance on the catacombs was that they should make the native Dunmer visiting them feel at home, while foreigners should feel like welcome (although unexpected) guests... who, as any guests, have to honor the hospitality by behaving and not stealing. So definitely no aggressive monsters.

We even discussed what should happen when the player does steal some stuff. The current state of affairs is, I think, this: If the player is spotted by an ordinator, the usual crime&punishment system kicks in. But even if not, the ghosts do notice the stealing - at least if the object stolen is of any reasonable value -, and make the player know he is not welcome in an appropriately ghostly and subtle way: The sounds change to more aggressive/eerie ones, the lightning becomes colder/darker (there should be a way to implement this), the talking friendly ghosts become a lot less friendly and ordinators mention that they feel the player is not welcome anymore (although they have nothing concrete to pin on him).

I'd still prefer if Adanorcil would post here, as I probably *am* misremembering stuff.

While I am writing this, I am working on the "Preaching to the Converted" (now renamed as "Preaching by Proxy") quest, but it is going slowly...

Post by **arvisrend** » Sun Feb 12, 2012 7:08 am

My quest is mostly done, but it needs some work yet. I'm not talking about the fact that my dialogue is crappy (it is going to need some reworking, but hopefully without changing the technical structure of the quest). I am talking about adding a merchant container and a trading option to Sathys, ownership to the containers in the house, and a second greeting to Indrys. And testing. But I am talking to myself, since I'm going to do all these things tomorrow, unless somebody else really wants to.

So consider this file a WIP, but feel free to playtest it and comment on the dialogue (the scripts and the dialogue are already final).

I used the version after the review, so there shouldn't be interior bugs, but it never hurts to check.

The cell is still called TR_i2-501-tri, although I call that place "Acre of Saint Meris" for lack of a better name. (But hey, it's better than "Palisatt's Farmhouse", isn't it?)

EDIT: see next post for new version.

Post by **arvisrend** » Sun Feb 12, 2012 11:42 pm

Here's the quest. Please look over it, since I suck at testing my own stuff. And please make the dialogue less awful (I'm sure it sounds out of place a lot of times).

Important notes:

- When the interior gets renamed, so should be the reference to it in the script on Sathys.

- I have added a few new containers since this is the only way I know of making ingredients respawn (short of using flora containers), and I believe merchants shouldn't get out of business just because the player buys up all of their stuff. It's only 4 ingreds, though. I wish this would be handled globally, with reasonable respawning containers somewhere in TR_data.

- Indrys should be initially placed outside the house. (A script on Sathys will move him as the quest progresses.)

Mortimer · Post by **Mortimer** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 2:17 am

Tested and picked through and I must say there are no glaring errors bugs or typos throughout the quest. I've gone through and rewritten some redundant passages, fixed some repetitive word choice issues, changed punctuation to improve flow, and fixed minor capitalization.

Other than that I really can't see anything wrong with it. Great job!

Post by **arvisrend** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 3:03 am

Most of these are good changes, thank you. Let me ask a few questions about changes I don't agree with or don't understand:

"" "109178501225322206" "177098780243011607" "Topic" "Acre of Saint Meris" "One day, though, our time here will be over, and despite all the gratitude I owe to the Temple these past years, I am not going to look back. It would be ironic if the merits of my parents would doom me to spend all my life as a farmer in the outskirts of the Sacred City. But perhaps our paths may cross again."

This used to be

"" "109178501225322206" "177098780243011607" "Topic" "Acre of Saint Meris" "One day, though, our time here will be over, and with all the gratitude I owe to the Temple for these years, I am not going to look back. It would be ironic if the merits of my parents would doom me to spend all my life as a farmer in the outskirts of the Sacred City... Maybe we will cross our paths once again when it is over."

Was the "for" really redundant?
Also, it's right that you made the "paths" the subject of the sentence, but I don't like the "But". The paths may cross again because he is going to leave, not despite it. But this shows that my dialogue was unclear...

Something else:

"And even though we have spent the past the twenty-years here, [...]"

Remove this "the".

"110623083299751546" "1390304981611528644" "1558417112673032256" "Topic" "expand his library" "These are a gift? Fascinating, let me see. These are Temple texts, all three of them. Now it makes sense. Let me guess on whose behalf you are doing this. Sathys. Was I right? Let me ask what was the point of this fool's errand.

No, "tell you" was right here. He is explaining it in the next parts of this answer.

"6980115732648931653" "307415272283052049" "2047531351896" "Topic" "expand his library" "They should not be too complex for him to understand, so if you are to find any of the 36 Lessons of Vivec, you had better keep them for yourself

I'm not sure this is good grammar. He is talking about the future. But I'm not an expert in these things.

Now something semantical once again:

Your version:
"14240163962605910789" "3947258373045926682" "2021921095291883445" "Topic" "expand his library" "Both of us may have to leave - the Acre of Saint Meris has never been leased to anyone for a whole lifetime. It is rather a privilege than a job to till this place; doing so for a whole life would be a gift few mortals are truly deserving of. Our future lies far beyond the present, yet he lives here as if he was a guest departing the next morning."

My original:
"14240163962605910789" "3947258373045926682" "2021921095291883445" "Topic" "expand his library" "Both of us may have to leave - the Acre of Saint Meris has never been leased to anyone for a whole lifetime. It is rather a privilege than a job to till this place; doing so for a whole life would be a privilege few mortals are truly deserving of. But this is nothing that should unsettle him right now, let alone make him live here as if he was a guest to depart the next morning."

Your version is more stylistically appropriate, but I can't help noticing that mine is much less ambiguous. Is there any way we could have the best of both worlds?

6plus · Post by **6plus** » Wed Feb 15, 2012 5:29 pm

Ordinators in Mourning are among the best things created by TR, so we should have at least one quest based on them!

Just a little idea:
Player talks to [insert name of a certain Mourner], Mourner asks the player if he's interested in doing them a little favor.
But before that the player must talk to [insert name of a ancestor spirit], when the player does he's asked 3-5 questions (about life/death, ancestors, destiny, divinity/deities...) and gets a rather existentialistic & unimportant sermon.
The player then returns to the Mourner and is sent to [insert name of a crypt/vault...] where he must sleep for at least ~10 hours. After ~7 hours the player is woken by a message box and a journal entry.
Again the player returns to the Mourner, gets [insert reward] and finally gets enlightened. It's a tradition among the Mourners, every year/two years/three years a viable citizen shares the rest of deceased Mourners buried in that crypt, a few chosen Mourners will do the same during the next weeks.

Notes: It shouldn't be possible to fail on the questions (perhaps the sermon depends on the answers).
The Mourners should feel reclusive, shrouded, obscure, mysterious and so should this quest.
In greek mythology death (Thanatos) and sleep (Hypnos) were brothers, that's why the player sleeps with the dead.

Mortimer · Post by **Mortimer** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 2:14 pm

To Arvisrend:

Some of my edits were just things I felt flowed better when speaking them aloud. Remember overall you hold the executive decision as they're your NPC's after all.

For the first change you mentioned I took it to mean "Even though I'm grateful for what the Temple has done for me I still want to leave immediately and never look back". In which case I would put in "despite" over "with".

I would take out the "but" at the beginning of the sentence (that was a bad decision on my part). I don't like ellipses, which is why I tried to take out as many as I could. A compromise in this case would be "Maybe our paths will cross again when it is over."

For the "tell you" vs "ask" conflict, I realized that afterwards; that he then explains what his brother was trying to do. However I feel its too awkwardly worded, "Let me tell you what was". There's too many verbs in that sentence. After thought I feel it should just be "What was the point of this fool's errand?" with the choice "But..." or "Sathys-" then he interrupts you with his next line.

"Had better keep" is good grammar, but if it sounds awkward its much easier to change it to "should keep".

Finally, the last line. I would clarify my first phrase by changing it to, "Our future here is nothing that should unsettle him right now, yet he lives here as if he was a guest departing the next morning." Best of both worlds in that one?

Let me know what you think.

Bloodthirsty Crustacean · Fri Feb 17, 2012 2:45 pm

On Arvisrend's grammar, I'll fix things up when I merge it.

On updates, sorting my new laptop has taken longer than I thought, but I still hope to provide both Temple NPCs and lower-section Necrom misc dialogue this Sunday.

6plus, I like the general premise of some kind of quest like this, but at the same time feel that it's a bit odd in that the player doesn't really do anything, other than become rather oddly intimately involved with a Dunmer ritual.

Post by **arvisrend** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:12 pm

Thanks, Mortimer. I will make some of these changes. And fix a stupid minor bug (Indrys talks as if Sathys would be in the other room, although he himself may be standing outside the house). But I've got a lecture to attend now; will do the changes later today.

Post by **arvisrend** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 8:41 pm

Not done yet, but here are some remarks:

Mortimer wrote:To Arvisrend:

Some of my edits were just things I felt flowed better when speaking them aloud. Remember overall you hold the executive decision as they're your NPC's after all.

For the first change you mentioned I took it to mean "Even though I'm grateful for what the Temple has done for me I still want to leave immediately and never look back". In which case I would put in "despite" over "with".

I wasn't talking about "with" vs. "despite", I was talking about "these past years" vs. "for these years".

Mortimer wrote:I would take out the "but" at the beginning of the sentence (that was a bad decision on my part). I don't like ellipses, which is why I tried to take out as many as I could. A compromise in this case would be "Maybe our paths will cross again when it is over."

Replaced by "Maybe our paths will cross again many day's marches from here." Is this ok for Morrowind?

Mortimer wrote:For the "tell you" vs "ask" conflict, I realized that afterwards; that he then explains what his brother was trying to do. However I feel its too awkwardly worded, "Let me tell you what was". There's too many verbs in that sentence. After thought I feel it should just be "What was the point of this fool's errand?" with the choice "But..." or "Sathys-" then he interrupts you with his next line.

I don't like the question here; he already knows the answer. Replaced by "It is sad that it has come that far; let me at least explain the point of this fool's errand."

Mortimer wrote:"Had better keep" is good grammar, but if it sounds awkward its much easier to change it to "should keep".

It's not sounding awkward, but it sounds like some past conjunctive tense, while the semantics seems to require a future. Or not?

Mortimer wrote:Finally, the last line. I would clarify my first phrase by changing it to, "Our future here is nothing that should unsettle him right now, yet he lives here as if he was a guest departing the next morning." Best of both worlds in that one?

Yes.

Mortimer · Post by **Mortimer** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:53 pm

Ah, in that case the for can go either way. I would say put the "for" back in.

"Many day's marches" should definitely work. The brothers are fairly well educated so their language should reflect that.

I like your fix for the question/answer conflict, that works for me.

http://www.englishgrammarsecrets.com/hadbetter/menu.php
Although Ã¢â‚¬Å“hadÃ¢â‚¬Â is the past form of Ã¢â‚¬Å“haveÃ¢â‚¬Â, we use Ã¢â‚¬Å“had betterÃ¢â‚¬Â to give advice about the present or future.

Maybe this clears some things up?

Post by **arvisrend** » Sat Feb 18, 2012 12:41 am

Thanks, I didn't know about the "had better" exception.

Everything fixed now (including an "If else" in a line of dialogue... it was clearly missing an endif).

One minor dialogue result error fixed. Scripts edited to include more comments.

@BC: You can probably merge this one. It's already adjusted to the new TR_data. What you will need to do (or someone else) is:

- linking the doors,
- moving Indrys out of the house into the yard,
- detailing the yard.

Also, here is one more casperer very close to that building:

2/17/2012 (19:10) TR_Map_2_Section_9.ESP 2/12/2012 (02:10) skraeling Terrain_rocks_GL_01 TR9_Sacred Land Region (39,-13) 326151 -105091 305 "slightly caspering if you look from west and also if you look from east"

Unrelated: What do you think of putting a couple of Dwemer chests with loot beneath the ex_dwrv_statue00 (or even behind the rhombus-formed hole) at TR9_Sacred Land Region (46,-14) 383070 -113958 3894 ? It's only reachable with levitation or lots of jumping, so I think the loot can be moderately good non-random loot.

Nerano · Post by **Nerano** » Sat Feb 18, 2012 7:09 pm

arvisrend wrote: Unrelated: What do you think of putting a couple of Dwemer chests with loot beneath the ex_dwrv_statue00 (or even behind the rhombus-formed hole) at TR9_Sacred Land Region (46,-14) 383070 -113958 3894 ? It's only reachable with levitation or lots of jumping, so I think the loot can be moderately good non-random loot.

Good idea. +1

6plus · Post by **6plus** » Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:21 pm

Bloodthirsty Crustacean wrote:On Arvisrend's grammar, I'll I like the general premise of some kind of quest like this, but at the same time feel that it's a bit odd in that the player doesn't really do anything, other than become rather oddly intimately involved with a Dunmer ritual.

a good point, perhaps it could be the final act (or reward) for some kind of testing-the-player's-worth quest.

kinda like: "You could be our man for a little task, but you must prove yourself first. We just figured out where that necromancer hides, if you get him before we smoke him out, then you're our man." etcetera

Bloodthirsty Crustacean · Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:26 am

Fucking hell: guys, attempting to get TESCS running on my new laptop, but it seems that just porting over all of the BethSoft files from my old one doesn't allow me to just pick up where I left off.

I get all those 'weatChunk' errors that come from not having installed Tribunal/Bloodmoon properly: I only have the Morrowind CD with me here at uni.

Is there any way I can remove those requirements without wreaking havoc on the file? (if yes, could someone upload a version of both the Necrom file and TR_Data.esm with dependencies only on Morrowind)

Is there any way I can trick my PC into thinking I properly have Tribunal and Bloodmoon? (I have both the .bsas and the .esms, I don't know what it wants...)

In a worst case scenario, I will be home (and on holiday) in 3/4 weeks time. I don't intend to drop this claim.

EDIT: Attached is my Warnings.txt: looks like it's not recognising TR Data either. Any ideas what I'm doing wrong?

Post by **arvisrend** » Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:51 am

Do you have the Steam version? Do you have some kind of obsolete CS? (Here is [url=http://www.mediafire.com/?47pg6h1k9qibq9j]my version of the CS[/url].)

Have you registered the BSA files (Tribunal, Bloodmoon, TR_Data) in the [Archives] section of Morrowind's INI? The BSAREG.EXE program not always works. (I'm not saying it ever works...)

Do you have the new TR_Data.bsa? (Not that this could cause any of the bugs.)

Nerano · Post by **Nerano** » Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:29 am

Are you sure you have copied all files? I have done this before (copying the whole directory instead of reinstalling everything again), and never had such problems. The errors are typical, if one tries to open Tribunal.esm or Bloodmoon.esm with an old version of CS. If arvisrend's advices don't help, try to get the GOTY version, or take a break to regenerate your modding powers

Post by **Haplo** » Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:34 am

Are you manually selecting TR_Data.esm and TR_Mainland.esm/.esp (whichever ones you're using, if you're using them) in the load order for the Construction Set? Remember the Morrowind CS will only autoload up to three master files, in this case Morrowind, Tribunal, and Bloodmoon. If the .esp you are trying to load depends upon 4+ master files, and you don't select all of them, the CS will crash.

Also, holy fuck clear out your warnings.txt file 0.o 1.9MB

Post by **Haplo** » Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:36 am

arvisrend wrote:Let me tell you what was the point of this fool's errand.

Change this to "Let me tell you what the point of this fool's errand was." or, I prefer: "Let me explain the point of this fool's errand"