Taking Questions about Mixintos and Overrides


But it checked if the references were correct, right?
It’s been a long time since I last used it, so I don’t remember well the data…


There wasn’t any grave change to manifests, mixin(tos) or smods to my knowledge, so it should still work. And Starhearth.smod has lots of errors, at least the one posted above.

Everything red is bad. In this case, there’s two errors:

  • Starhearth/manifest.jsonMissing alias resource for Starhearth:power_block: Starhearth/entities/power/power_block not foundStarhearth/manifest.json
  • Missing resource for Starhearth/entities/furniture/comfy_bed/comfy_bed_proxy.qb

In short, the latter is the reason it doesn’t work. If any override or mixinto or whatever it’s called these days fails, the whole process aborts.

So, in short: Create that file. Or rename the .obj.qb. In either case, reading the log file or using Jofferson would be a valid approach to solve the problem. The log file will likely be most accurate, while Jofferson gives you a good overview.

Yep. It checks the manifest (including aliases, overrides and mixintos) and tries to check entities too, but those are only semi-supported.


I dont know if 2 errors is lots of errors but ok. Whats with the power block alias error, I have used it fine without problems in my latest build.


There’s an oak_log.json inside the folder, expected is a power_block.json. I doubt that it worked fine for you but if it did, nice :thumbsup:


Ah yes that, I did change it. Can someone point me to @RepeatPan tool?


are you referring to jofferson?


I have a question…
Is it currently possible to add a hat to an outfit?
I’m trying to make a mod with my costumes but when I try to add the hood, it replaces completely the head (as I named that matrix “head”). So the “merge_with_model” is not a merge but a substitution?

I have to revamp a bit these models… they don’t look that well cut off by the middle.

I think I won’t have problem with the hands, but the head would be a nice touch if I can make it.


I don’t think it’s possible yet - I’ve had the same issue - but I’m pretty certain Radiant are aware of the issue. If nothing else, they need to figure it out for their own hats & helmets :wink: .


yea, ran into that problem once too. I know beards are actually doing what you need. You might try to change a beard.qb file to a hat and see what happens.


I think part of the reason may be that Radiant hasn’t decided how to manage hats and hair together - don’t really want pigtails sticking out the sides of a steel helmet after all :smiley: .


There is a way, it would look like this:

“stonehearth:equipment_piece” : {
“slot” : “head”,
“render_type” : “attach_to_bone”


its a little bit fiddly getting the model in the right spot on the head but do-able. If you are just playing around then use this, otherwise I would wait as it will certantly need to be redone when the item RPG elements get introduced.


Well not exactly.Technically speaking it is called a merge because any pieces on the first model that don’t appear on the second model are still there. So if you don’t have a head on the model, it won’t be headless but keep the original head instead. :smile:

Hmmm interesting… i gotta look at this


It was hard to make it work. It still needs more tweaks, and females are out of question…
But here is the result of a day of essay & error:


I’m impressed. Good job! :smile: :thumbsup:


If your using the hat as a onesy why not just merge with model the whole outfit? then you would have variants.


I don’t understand what you mean.
I separated the hat because the outfit was using “merge_with_model”.
If the hat has also that, the head dissapears, as @Avairian explained above. So the hat is in another recipe with the “attach_to_bone” that you suggested.

If everything could be in the same file, it would be ensured that the same person that picked up the hat picks also the matching outfit and viceversa. That would be good, but I don’t know how to implement it.


Ahh now I see what you mean. Sorry for the confusion, ignore my post.


I’m wondering if the solution isn’t to separate hair from head models, then have hats & hair be mutually exclusive. There would need to be a fairly big list of exceptions, but it might just end up being the easiest way in the end to deal with headgear. Have to see what @sdee et al think I suppose.


Ummm I thought I said the opposite? Unless something changed if a craft-able armor/outfit has a head it’ll replace the original head. If it doesn’t have a head it’ll keep the old one.


Yes, I meant that o_0
"If the hat has also that [merge_with_model], the [original] head disappears…" Otherwise, it keeps the original. Sorry if what I said could be misunderstood.