Jump to content

TES5Edit - Which record types DON'T need conflict patches


keithinhanoi

Recommended Posts

Does that actually work for you? Every time I try messing with that list, even by just removing the last mod (let alone a mod that's in the middle of the list), the file goes all nope and starts spewing out unresolved references next time I load it. :|

Hm.. I didn't try anything besides checking if I get the remove command to show up. Where do these error message you speak about show up, in Tes5Edit when you load the mod into it?

 

@Kelmych ofc it is adviced to only remove masters that have no remaining references.

Edited by blattgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hm.. I didn't try anything besides checking if I get the remove command to show up. Where do these error message you speak about show up, in Tes5Edit when you load the mod into it?

I already explained that in my earlier reply to your question:

2. If your implicit masters are listed at the end of the list in the plugin's header, you should theoretically be able to manually remove them one-by-one by right clicking on them while viewing the plugin's header record, and choosing Remove. The potential danger here is that there might actually still be records in the plugin referencing to that master, and by removing it from the header, they become invalid references. So, after manually removing masters, a check for should be done by right-clicking on the plugin name in the left-hand pane, and selecting Check for Errors. If no errors are found. then it's safe to save the plugin. Otherwise, you'll have to use option 1 above, and/or hunt down the records referencing the master that you want to remove.

But, I believe any errors existing in plugins that TES5Edit find while loading them will show up in the messages. The thing is you are talking about removing a master after loading everything, and my recommendation is to do an immediate check for errors. Why waste time finding out things are borked in the game?

Does that actually work for you? Every time I try messing with that list, even by just removing the last mod (let alone a mod that's in the middle of the list), the file goes all nope and starts spewing out unresolved references next time I load it. :|

Well, if you're playing "god" and manually adding a master to a plugin that is implicit (ie., TES5Edit didn't add it automatically,) and you haven't changed the order of the masters or added any records that added more masters to the list yet, then yes, this does work. I've done it a number of times.

 

But always check for errors immediately after, of course!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh nvm, yeah the check for errors command is pretty helpful. I'm also getting weird errors after adding and removing USKP as a master without adding any references from USKP to the patch. Weird stuff.

 

That whole custom masters thingie might be a bad idea after all, at least for me. I'll drop it.

Edited by blattgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

Hey, so I know this is suuper old, but I might have an idea on what MHTD does.

 

When I first overtook Real Shelter, I told everyone to put both realshelter.esp and rspatch.esp at the end of their load order.  Since I decided to use the vanilla realshelter.esp file, rather than the dawnguard+dragonborn version, every worldspace and sub-worldspace in tamriel had their MHTD removed as the final record.  After I launched the new version, there was a significant amount of reports stating that their Skybox became completey messed up.  It was like a good chunk of the skybox, particularly the area directly above you, just shifted closer to you and flattend.  As a result the clouds did not match up any longer,or just disappeard, and nothing but completely removing realshelter fixed it. 

 

Now I have it so people treat realshelter.esp like an esm and keep it as high up in their load order as they can, and this issue has not been a problem ever since.   As this MHTD was the only conflicting element in the worldspace record, perhaps that MHTD deals with weather/skybox visual calculations.  (or perhaps skybox (or rather, skydome) vertex modifications?)

Edited by ThreeTen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

I have run into a conflict between 2 mods and am not sure how to patch. It concerns Inconsequential NPCs and Immersive Citizens.

 

Both mods edit the Ownership XOWN data of the same FormID (000C8F05 <AAArcadiaMotherIdleChair>). 

 

I guess both mods  try to make a different NPC use the chair. Inconsequential mod actually adds 2 new NPCs in Aracadia's Cauldron.

 

Inconsequential NPCs adds to XOWN data: AAAWhiterunFamilyArcadiaMother "Penelope" [NPC_:6908B8AB].

 

Immersive Citizens adds to XOWN data: Arcadia "Arcadia" [NPC_:00013BA4].

 

Inconsequential NPCs add behaviour to Arcadia's Mother, while I assume (haven't tested and cannot be seen in tes5edt) that Immersive Citizens adds/changes behaviour of Arcadia.

 

Anyone here have an idea which one to opt for, in order to best avoid any conflicts? I don't see XOWN in the list of record types not to patch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Nearox,

 

XOWN is definitely a record that needs conflict resolution. Especially in cases where one mod has it and another does not.

In this case though, it is rather a trade-off than a conflict problem. Arcadia will use it or her mother?

Well from a reality's point of view I would say her mother as she is an elder person!!!  ::D:

 

I cannot say that doing this is right or doing that is wrong...i cannot remember what I have done to my patch (will check it tonight though).

By the looks of it I tend to favor IC but you can easily check it in game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm I see... Indeed I had thought of the trade-off. Was wondering if the XOWN-function could potentially break the behaviour of  Immersive Citizens, in a way that would lead to CTDs or other bugs?

I don't think anything would break in spectacular fashion, perhaps just having one of them stand around a bit more than usual (because one of the NPCs is blocked from using the chair).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anything would break in spectacular fashion, perhaps just having one of them stand around a bit more than usual (because one of the NPCs is blocked from using the chair).

Yeah makes sense. 

 

Guess I been just a bit careful not to break Immersive Citizens, because the author said most conflicts cannot be resolved via tes5edit. But I suppose he was referring to markers and navmeshes. 

 

Either way I am going to give preference to Arcadia's mom here, and will check the behaviour of Arcadia to see if there's anthing strange :P

 

Thanks guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

Hei to all.

 

I am pretty much surprised that after reading the whole post there is not comment about it (or i have jumped over it), and there is NO load order that does not report that error o red flag better said.

Try it check it in TES5Edit, load any bunch of mods and you, for sure will find the red flag under worldspace.

 

I am talking abouth XCLR - Regions.

 

I am trying to make a merge with all small towns modifications. For example

 

The "Provincial Courier Service" by Arthmoor has:

                                         

                                      XCLR - Regions

                                                                     TundraMegan01 [REGN:00041449

                                                                     avNavmeshBatch4 [REGN:0008EED7]

                                                                      WeatherTundra [REGN:000C5858]

                                                                     BorderRegionSkyrim [REGN:000C5859]

                                                                      Brie2npassTundra03 [REGN:000CAD0A]

 

Then the next mod, also from Artmoor "Darwater Crossing" leaves in blank those fields, but then "Karthwasten" also from Arthmoor, Adds THE EXACT same names and record values... and so on. One put it the next takes it away for the next put them back with exactly the same values, and depends who is the last mod in the load order, the values will be carried or not.

 

As i said, at leas in my experience modding eh game (not making mods) is that those red-flags are always present.

 

I have asked several time in several places, but never got an answer about it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi richardo,

 

The reason is very simple why you see these XCLR-Regions added in one mod and not be present in another.

These regions are part of the Dawnguard DLC (Dawnguard.esm), therefore only the mods that have this DLC as a master contain these regions in their persistent worldspace cell.

 

If your last loaded mod does not have them you can safely forward them into your general patch that loads last.

 

Hope this clarifies your question. ::):

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, it clarifies it, and it is an answer for a question i have asked many times, and i was totally unsure, because it seems that some records are forwarded at run time and does not need to be forwarded manually, that is not the case here.

 

Thank very much mate, i appreciate it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines, Privacy Policy, and Terms of Use.