Why CEP 2 and not CEP 3?

As you already know, plans for CEP2 are being dIscussed here.

which might extend to new content (under discussion in the thread linked above).

Regarding CEP3, I’m reluctant to go over very old ground, nor do I wish to be unnecessarily provocative, but since you insist…

Suffice it to say that many of us offered to help with CEP3, putting a lot of energy into articulating the issues, and offering to do the grunt work. Perhaps our help was not wanted, as the project went off in its own direction.

CEP3 seems to offer new content to start-up module builders only.

That left the community with 2 slightly different issues:

  • No support for legacy modules using CEP2
  • No clear direction for builders with modules-in-progress using CEP2 since they were not supported by CEP3

Potentially, CEP2 builders might take a chance on rebuilding their modules with CEP3 haks, but there are issues:

  • Not clear that the new content is worth the rebuild and test effort
  • Uncertain which CEP2 features have been taken out of CEP3
  • No input to CEP3 project direction
  • Not clear whether CEP3 will be supported or developed in future

At this point, Pstemarie took on support of CEP2, producing 2.67 to help those of us who are still building on that platform.

The new team took over when Pstemarie stood down.

Strategy is under discussion (see link above) but there are no plans for breaking compatibility with 1.69 or legacy CEP modules.

As for EE content, 2.67 already illustrates how it can be successfully included as an optional extra.

Going forward, the project has simply forked. As I see it, existing CEP2 builders will be served by the CEP2 team, while new builders can decide for themselves whether to go with CEP2 or CEP3.


Will the models upgrading or replacing CEP2 existing models make use of EE features like fancymaps? Yes/no would suffice.

Well, in regards to CEP 3 it should be fine to use with older modules as long as its running on NWN:EE, I run a PW too and I updated mine from 2.65 to CEP 3 without any issues.

I don’t recall ever having anyone volunteer to assist with CEP 3, and so after a year or so (november 2020 the idea was born) I decided to release the work I had done since there was a lack of interest in developing with me.

I took the project on as it did not seem anybody else had interest to continue with CEP.

My mantra on CEP 3 is just new stuff, and fix what can be fixed to the best of my abilities. Sometimes people drop me a PM asking me if I can implement something (e.g Ancarion Bugbears) and then I implement that, given that the quality is up to what I feel is the standard, but goal is to provide the best resources and tools for builders that is already available into a pack.


Short answer:

  • CEP 2 will not use fancy maps to accommodate old mods, but eventually will try to improve old models within the limits.
  • @Winternite’s CEP 3 is EE focused, so more high quality models that cant run on NWN1.69

Feel free to pick either.

1 Like

@Stonehammer True for now, though future strategy is still under discussion.

As you know, CEP2 already allows builders the option of using the official EE models.

OK so no from Stonehammer (finally a straight answer!) but a “maybe yes” from Proleric since the future isn “under discussion”…?

A cop out answer saying CEP “allows builders the option of using the official EE models” since unless you somehow invented NWN CC DRM I can’t see how you can stop someone changing any part of it, and this applies to any content pack made up of anything.

I’ll take Stonehammers response on this, fixes and 1.69 only compatible stuff for CEP2 and that CEP3 will have EE stuff.

For the benefit of general readers, let me be clearer - when using CEP2 in the toolset now, the appearance dropdown for creatures and placeables is annotated (EE) when the model only exists in EE. 1.69 builders who miss the annotation will simply find that the model doesn’t exist for them, so they can choose another.


Your responses are starting to read like trolling. You seem to be purposely trying to find fault and read things in the worst possible light. Dang… no “dislike” button.


Come on grow up, I am not breaking any rules or trolling. I’m entirely serious and if I can’t ever ask “why are you not helping CEP3 and what are you actually doing regarding EE features” then someone else would eventually.

Trolling, pah. If nothing else I’m frustrated that the community part of it is behind closed doors but whatever, that ship apparently has sailed!


So now we just remove posts because we don’t like them?

Which posts have been removed? I don’t recall any such event in this thread. Please explain. Is it my aging memory?


No posts were removed from this thread based on the thread history. When it does occur, a link is available where the post was made that admins can see - and click on - to review the removed post. There is no such link.

For future reference, you can review your own posting history under your account and use this as well to track down threads you participate in.

Even when i’m not a cep user I think what Proleric and others are doing (not letting cep2 become abandonware) is great. My Thanks to them.


Like a lot of folks, NWN:EE rekindled my interest and brought me wandering back. One of the first things I noticed was that, not just a particular project was forking, to use the developer term as @Proleric did. Rather, the entire community seemed to be forking between the two versions of NWN1, to a certain extent.

I’m comfortable with that sort of thing (RL professional risk) but I also appreciate @Jasperre’s point. FWIW, I reached the same conclusion on my own. If you’re working your way up the learning curve it helps to reduce the amount of material to learn as much as possible. So, before my rlRL (really lame Real Life) interfered, I had decided to focus on learning just 1.69 + CEP 2 building rather than try to sort through the differences between “branches” myself.

The community of NWN fans and builders operate as an open-source community around divergent versions of the same closed-source game. Differing perspectives & expectations are inevitable.

Mayhap I proselytize too much, but I encourage folks to be “open-sourcerors,” pick what you want from this smorgasbord, shape it to your liking, and leave the rest. I accept the occasional flame fests, not just because it’s worth it for the overall benefit of the forums, but because it shows people care enough to carp about stuff. :wink:

1 Like