Shadriss

SO Enhancer goes bye-bye then. I'll do that and see how it affects that problem, then move on to the animation again. Just to clarify (and thanks for the help on all this, though it didn't really apply) I do not use COT anymore... pulled it in favor of Pure Weathers due to compatibility issues some weeks ago. More when I have it. EDIT: Removing ELFX Enhancer made very little difference. Still darker than a Sith's Soul inside. So, to heck with it, going back to Relighting Skyrim. I can only take so much 'play with it and massage it until it works' troubleshooting.

Meh, it was worth it on my end. :)

Little more on that, Neo? As I mentioned before, I was using it Pre 2.0 with Vividian and had no issues.

I know about nothing about any kind of modding on this level, but good to know that SKSE came through just as I was needing it. Don't suppose you know any tutorials or whatnot that could point me in the right direction? As I said, my level of knowledge on mod creation is as close to zero as makes little difference. I don't even know enough to be dangerous... Interesting thoughts, Aiyen... but to me, that still reeks of deus ex machina. Almost the literal translation of the term, in this case, though the Daedra aren't Gods. Your thoughts on reading a book to learn magic were a small chuckle, I must admit... but my immediate thought was that the spell tomes would be exactly the same circumstance - only using pure magic instead of the soul element. Magic is often felt and perceived differently from person to person (drawing on the majority of magic using myth here, not just Skyrim... sue me!), so for it to be written down and be usable by anyone would run into the same limitation. Even were it difficult to learn in this way, it is not beyond the possibility that this origin point (person) would have written down his/her process... and that even if some aren't able to learn from those writings, some still would be able to. Even if it's mostly a moot point, it's still a great discussion point!

Uhm... the installer for the brighter interiors/nights lists it as Vanilla AND COT. TO me that meant either/or... was it meant to be a literal AND? That asked, I'll go try that w/o that portion, but yes, I am using ELFX Enhancer as well... I was before I switched the Relighting Skyrim and then ELFX 2.0 came out, and no I switched back... though I did take out COT as well, now that you mention it. Yeah, I'll go mess with that.

The Magic has to have come from somewhere - it had to have been created before it was destroyed for us to learn it. The sheer number of enchanted items out there is easy to explain, of course, since once you know the process, you can make as many of that as you wish. But there had to have been an origin - some way it was originally developed. And a deus ex machina explanation just doesn't work for me. *shrug* I hadn't intended for these books or whatever (starting to look more like a whatever) to be easy finds at the local bookstore, understand... just an alternate way to locate an enchantment that may not come up randomly after many hours of play for the completionists like myself. You are right that it's the breaking that does it - the same way the Chinese learn to make new technology by taking it apart. There's a reason they are outstanding reverse engineers, but that doesn't mean it's part of the process - it means they are standing on the shoulders of those who did the original work because they don't know how to innovate it themselves, much as we in Tamriel are standing on the shoulders of whatever mage came up with the process originally. I'm aiming to kind of address that seeming gap in magical lore. I have, and the ENchantments are in a completely different category. My real options, so far as I see them with my extrememly limited knowledge of the system are to either A) Create individual armor and weapon pieces that look like books and must be read (disenchanted) at the Enchanters Table to learn them (the Kryptoper suggestion), or B) Learn a small amount of scripting to run on the book being read to simulate the same idea as Spell books. I'm tending towards A, mostly because I am afeared of scripting and the Python Demons of Skyrim. If you can think of another approach, by all means - I'm brainstorming right now, not doing any serious work on this. Heck, I still have to figure out how to make a new plugin in the CK. The majority of my time investigating this concept has been along the lines of "OK, CK is installed... boot it up and... WHAT THE HECK IS ALL THIS?!" Fun times... fun times.

Well, if I went Krypt's route, it would be no different than any other disenchant... the only difference would be that the object being destroyed is a book, which happens with Spell Tomes anyhow. The only restriction then would be that you still have to get to an Enchanters station to 'learn' the enchant, but as those are pretty much everywhere, that isn't a huge problem. Of course, it DOES mean learning a completely different side of the CK than I've delved into so far. I'll have to think more on this, but it may be that that would be the simplest way, rather than putting in some kind of scripting that could just cause more issues elsewhere.

Not a bad take on it, and if it were possible (in vanilla) to disenchant Daedric Artifacts (don't think this is possible, but I may be wrong) I'd leave well enough alone. But, as far as I know, not the case. I've done a little hunting and learned a little bit. Came across (finally) a page that talked about modding books. It was enough to get me most of what I need to make the items, except that as far as I can tell, Enchantments are learned through a separate system than spells (no surprise). Which means I may need to learn a little scripting to have the book teach the enchant, since I can't have it called up under the Spells heading like the others ones. So, that plus a little work and figuring out placement/creation recipes, and this could easily be a go. I figure to just use the Spell Tome art, since any enchantment can be directly tied to one of the main schools of magic (and, in fact, list these in the CK).

Let me start by saying that, if I had even the slightest clue how to do this, I would be more than happy to do it myself. In fact, if you have the knowledge I'm looking for, PLEASE direct me to the relevant tutorials or what not, preferably text versions, since video ones tend to give me headaches. Right. So, the one thing that truly bothers me in Skyrim (Tamriel, really) is the basis of Enchanting. Not the Soul Gem aspect, that's a decent mechanic. But the LEARNING of Enchantments, that's a sticking point. As it is, and from anything I've seen lore wise, this skill should never even have come into existence. Observe: How to Learn An Enchant: A) Find an enchanted item. B) Study it. C) Break it (this is why we can't have nice things...) D) Learn new enchantment by breaking it. By this logic, the need to break something already enchanted to learn an enchantment, the skill would never have come to be. Therefor, it is logical to suppose that there must have been, at some point, the ability to learn it through some other means. Hence, the beginnings of my mod idea. Learn Enchants from books. Simple. In my vision, they would not be something that could be bought off the shelf (or the current system would never have come to be), but a rare find deep in some dungeon, or perhaps a created item associated with some similar standard school spell (IE Flame Bolt for the Fire Enchantment). The exact mechanic is still to be determined, honestly. But the point is that it makes more sense to me that this should exist... ... Also, it would make it easier in some ways to be sure I've gotten every possible enchantment w/o trusting to luck to find that ONE LAST ONE I'm looking for. Again, not looking for anyone to take up the torch, I'm looking for the basics on how I would even begin to do something like this. Every tut I've seen for mod creation seems to hover around armors and weapons and nifs (oh my!), and so are not the easiest to make use of. Thanks all in advance.

For my centennial post on the might STEP Forum, my thoughts on your list. It's pretty much a straight "went down the list, and had this thought" kind of thing. *shrug* SO yeah... Bones to Bonemeal : Pretty straightforward, but it does occur to me that bigger body parts should produce more bone meal. Or maybe a pair of hands or feet producing one bonemeal... something to show that you get more of the end product out of a bigger beginning product. Crate to Firewood : Similar to the above. With the amount of camping I've done where I've burned old pallets instead of logs in my fire, I think it's safe to say that a crate would give a smidge more than a single piece of firewood. Maybe up to three or four would be more realistic for the materials present? It would certainly align more with the amount of wood you are planning for barrels and the like. Gold Utensils : I'm of two minds here. First, I agree with the results being in ore as opposed to ingots. I'm not sure on the numbers you get back though. My division of mind, honestly, has to do with two seperate setups, one with CCOR and one without. Using CCOR, where 5 ore = 1 Ingot, the numbers seem good. But for vanilla, where IIRC 2 ore = 1 ingot, then I think you would be able to get far more value out of the broken down item than the item itself is worth. Actually, that may be true with the CCOR version as well. This actually spawns another question in my mind - how are these items priced now that I can stick them in my Infinite Pocket of Infinity? And how do they balance against what I could get for them if they are broken down? Urn Fragments : If there are two different sizes, why do both break down to the same amount of clay? Both the Large and Small versions yield a single piece. Those things aside, the numbers look close to whats in my head - at least close enough that any difference would be pure personal preference.

:) I'll have a look. At the least, I'll get it in the queue for testing after I resolve a lighting problem and animation issue I'm experiencing. EDIT: That's what I get for posting before clicking. :) Let me rephrase - I'll CHECK THE LIST in a short while and see what I come up with. :)

Vividian - VIVID with the new version of ELFX, yes. FAR darker than the old one, never mind the Relighting Skyrim mod. And those are the ones I meant as well. Those may be in a different part of the box than I was looking though - I was messing around with settings that deal with, as far as I can tell, the exposure levels and eye adjustment. Only ones I've found to this point, which just makes the need for a full comprehensive guide of what settings are where even more useful. EDIT: Found the ones you refer to. The ENB currently has the interior cells set to intensity .95 and a curve of 1.0... that's after I altered them slightly to see if they made any difference. With the game gamma set to mid-range, it's still darker than a Sith's soul. Any input as to how these settings actually work?

As a stand alone comment, out of it's complete context, it wouldn't be. I'm sorry if you take my comment in a way it wasn't intended, but the short version is that, because of all the things I listed before, I didn't have to think too hard about it's inclusion. If you don't agree with my reasoning, that's fair enough - if we all thought the same, mods wouldn't be needed to make good games even better. I ask, again, that you not make this a crusade. While I've done no modding myself for Skyrim, I did spent just short of a decade producing several for the (now ancient) Quake3 Engine, and I understand fully the frustration that you are feeling at this moment. To continue the metaphor you used in your last post, I don't go into a restaurant to tell them I won't eat their food... I go in to help them make it into something I will eat. By stating the issue, identifying it, I hope to inspire you to go beyond what work you have already done and attempt to either find a way to resolve the issue or, at the least, to perhaps mitigate it. That is the purpose of forums such as this - at least in my mind. The work you have done is, by comparison to anything I am able to produce for this game, stellar. I simply believe that it can be better, and hope that you can match my vision to your reality. You asked for feedback - you received it. Perhaps it is something that can't be fixed. But until that is known for certain? I've seen amazing work pulled of that nobody thought could be done. This mod and this idea could easily be the next one on that list. And on that note, I'll step back... maybe I've replied once too often as is, but as I mentioned earlier, I do want to avoid a flame war.

I've been using the in-game UI... and the settings use the same names as in the INI file, which do little to tell me exactly what does what, and how the numbers affect it (IE This setting affects this light level, and lowering the number gives brighter results). Trial and error, as I said. Have Deadly Monsters installed (mostly because it came with Deadly Overgrown Lizards) though I haven't changed any of it's settings, since I want to get a feel for what Dynamic Difficulty does for the game. All that said... yeah, we're getting wildly off topic. :)

No worries Al. What it really means, to expound on Dub's terse reply is this: In some mod's installers, they are programmed to search for and identify other mods, particularly if the mod has built in mod-patches to make it play nice. The idea is that you don't have to read anything or check anything, because the installer already did it for you. The warning really just means you need to pay attention during the install, in case something like this is trying to happen, because the way MO does things means the installer won't see those other mods. So, in short, what Dub said. No worries. Keep Calm, and Mod On.

On the second part, you know as well as anyone here that you can be pointing your cursor right at an object, and still get the interaction for another one that, in Skyrim's mind, is between you and the intended object. That said, I'll acknowledge that point because... You are going way overboard (IMO) about the physics issue. I readily agree, as has everyone here, that using vsync corrects the worst of the problems related. What we refer to is the side effects of having the added physics-enabled items. Things that have been mentioned include the way you can take damage from bodies just by walking over them, caused by HAVOK going wonky for a moment as a result of it's math; The Flying Mammoth (Sorry, Aiyen, for the incorrect attribution earlier), caused by exactly the same calculations; and high-velocity random flying objects that can be caused by (shockingly) the same calculations in addition to (and not only from) the aforementioned v-sync setting. The argument is not that the engine has problems with physics and v-sync, which you seem unable to get away from. The concern is that, with the sheer number of additional items being physics enabled, more and more obvious issues of the types mentioned above can become far more noticeable. This is not an attack on your work in any way - it is a simple consequence of the engine, it's limitations, and the way HAVOK works it's voo-doo magic. Try to keep in mind that, unlike most forums on the net that deal with mods and modding that I've seen, we are not here to rip apart ideas or denigrate a persons work. We look at, analyze, and try to provide feedback. Nothing anyone has said, including my single comment, is meant in any other fashion, and to have you reply as you did to my comments is, quite simply, uncalled for. Please, for the sake of the moderator's sanity, try not to lose your cool like that. It can only end in flamage, trolling, and other stuffs that none of us wants. Honestly, if not for the simple and unavoidable (for now...) physics weirdness, I'd go for this. I simply choose not to potentially be in the direct path of a random edible missile.

Saw this earlier, toyed with the idea, and ultimately dropped it. 1) OK, yes, a more immersive experience. I can't really argue with that idea, so far as the compass use is concerned. 2) However (comma) trying to use the game map as if it were a real map is just not feasible in my mind. I can't get close enough in the large map to use it for navigation locally, and the local map doesn't zoom out far enough to be effective either. Add to this that I am able to, in essence, stop time while I check my map, and we have a clumsy interface that breaks immersion in it's own way. Kudos to the author for finding a way around an engine limitation, but I simply don't see that this will really add anything to the experience.

Forgive me for this... but... Would that be DOG tired?

Negative on this, Dub. From what I've been able to gather, that particular issue has to do with character physics in particular. IA v7 added support for Breast and Butt bouncing enabled body replacers, and that altered the gravity settings (I'm just repeating stuff from the IA Postings on Nexus, so I may be getting this slightly wrong). As a result, HAVOK didn't know how to handle collisions between NPCs and the cart, resulting in episodes like Red's 'Mammoths can fly' scenario. On subject, I have to kind of go in with Tech on this one - on the surface, it seems like a great idea for realism and the like, but the physics side of it (combined with the picking up a cart when all I wanted was a head of cabbage issue) makes this one an easy mod to pass on. No offense to you or your work - I still can't make head or tail of the CK, so you are still light years beyond my ability.

I'll have to look into this as well, but given that this didn't start until after I REMOVED items from my mod list, it's more likely an incompatibility on my end than a script load issue. ESPECIALLY in Embershard, when I've barely done anything. Heck, I removed Frostfall from my mod load order, and it's a fairly heavy script load. Never had the problem prior, as I mentioned. RE: Followers I just have no use for them. Period. Even if all the other issues weren't there, I just don't find them useful. Unless there is a mod that keeps them from fouling my bow shots from range while they attack other NPCs, it is very unlikely that I will change my mind on this stance. RE:Lighting (Or Lack Thereof) While interesting workarounds, they are just that - workarounds. Prior to installing the 2.0 ELFX, it was dark, but I could see well enough to navigate the interior cells and dungeons. Now, it's pitch-black, and that's with in-game gamma maxed out. I'm also using Vividian - Vivid, and I think the two of them combined are what are making it overly dark. Trying to get the shader settings to 'lighten up' a little, but so far, with no ENB setting documentation that I've been able to coax out of Google so far, it's a lot of guessing and assumptions. And we all know how painful THOSE can be. Appreciate the feedback so far though - just hoping I'll be in a position to start testing the actual fix soon... assuming (AGHH!) that it even is one. Edit: One thing I DID add that may be an issue, or so I've heard... OBIS has a bunch of mixed reviews. I know Neo uses it in his SRLE lineup... any comments regarding that?

As noted earlier, I can freely move my character after attempting to mine the nodes... I just can't do anything else. No menus, no hotkeys, no nothing. I can't even move the camera angles. No followers involved... I hate the things, honestly, since followers can't sneak for crap and feel a need to attack on sight, as opposed to bypassing or setting up elsewhere for a better angle. I usually play as an archer/sniper, and followers just get in the way. Still evaluating the change (if any) that adding in the SIC/CCO patch made. I'm having to fight my TV/ENB settings, since I just added ELFX 2.0 into the mix instead of Relighting Skyrim, and it's now so dark that I can't see ANYTHING in the Helgen start dungeon. Like, you know... the dead mage in the cage in the torture room? Can't see him. At all. That part of the room is totally black. So until I get that done, I have to shelve this problem.

I thought that was a given? WOnderful... yet MORE books to try to find...

... Didn't know there was a conflict between CCO and SIC. I'll get that patch and see if the issue vanishes...

I recently pared down a number of mods from my overgrowing list, and started a new run. The only mods I have that affect animations (that I am aware of...) are from STEP recommended mods, and thus, I was surprised to find this happen three separate times now. Specifically: Here I am, in Embershard Mine. Bandits lie dead around me, mute testament to how much of a bad idea it is to mess with me in the dark, and I think to myself hey, I need more iron ingots. So I step up to the mine, wield my mighty pickaxe (fine), and hit the E button... and just stand there. The game puts all my weapons away, swaps to third person, and then I stand there, doing nothing. OK... odd. I try to move around, and fine I can do this... in a full 360 degree fashion. IE, the camera stays at the same angle, and as I move around, the character itself changes angles to match my keystrokes. I cannot, however, go back to first person view... or get out my weapons... or, really, much of anything else. It's fairly obvious it's hanging on an animation, though why that would be is the question. Since I only removed mods in my recent purge, and did not add any in, I find it hard to believe it to be a mod incompatibiltly issue. For reference, I have AV, EBD, and DSR as Proccer patches, run through SUM, a mostly complete STEP lineup, and a minor collection of other mods that, if really needed, I can type in here later. FNIS was run on at least three separate occasions while I was troubleshooting, so I am fairly sure that is not an issue either. Thoughts on where or how to begin troubleshooting this?

Unless, of course, you use other mods associated with the carts... like, say... Touring Carriages, which use the exact same system. It was actually this that led me to the conclusion I posted earlier. The physics problems are still there, underlying the whole thing. Granted, if you use nothing else that seems to aggravate the problem, yay. Me? I'd rather not put something in that could cause problems in some other way I haven't found yet. I like the look of a lot of those armors myself, but apparently SOMETHING changed between 1.6 and 1.7 to cause the issue.