Sexlab Submit 01SEP14 1133

[Crate123]

A little critique:

Despite me having 79 speechcraft (and a measly 17 illusion) now Im still only at 10% for most attempts, I didnt realise that every npc in the game had that high illusion/speechcraft. I still think it should have been a proper speechcraft check with modifiers instead of a % chance but enough about that.

I feel that when you go somewhere private with an npc, the line they greet you with when you talk to them again to initiate sex is pretty jarring, "Is someone there ?", that feels quite out of place. How about a simple "yes ?" from the npc ?

 

I also feel that you could make it so the mod discerns a little better between the different positions.

I have twice gotten "Arrok lesbian" when my female character was having fun with a male and I have twice gotten foreplay positions instead of regular sex positions (so the foreplay would lead into another foreplay). As far as I remember, Ashal said he wouldnt be doing this and that it was up to the individual mods to do this.

 

Lastly, I would love if the choice to "keep it simple" gave more options afterwards, such as "I would love to ride you" - leading into the cowgirl positions and maybe a "I like it tender" - could lead into one of the huggging positions.

[redeyesandlonghair]

 

[...]

 

Get a mod called "Trade and Barter". It modifies merchant prices according to several rules, including your disposition towards the merchant.

 

 

zomg!  my relationship with merchants will matter!  especially useful since my game is modded to make merchents total price gougers!  gonnagetitrightaway! \( > w < )/

[80753]

Thanks for the reply. Problem solved. Found the culprit. No CTD again. Very good mod with roleplay aspects.

[dkatryl]

A little critique:

Despite me having 79 speechcraft (and a measly 17 illusion) now Im still only at 10% for most attempts, I didnt realise that every npc in the game had that high illusion/speechcraft. I still think it should have been a proper speechcraft check with modifiers instead of a % chance but enough about that.

I feel that when you go somewhere private with an npc, the line they greet you with when you talk to them again to initiate sex is pretty jarring, "Is someone there ?", that feels quite out of place. How about a simple "yes ?" from the npc ?

 

I also feel that you could make it so the mod discerns a little better between the different positions.

I have twice gotten "Arrok lesbian" when my female character was having fun with a male and I have twice gotten foreplay positions instead of regular sex positions (so the foreplay would lead into another foreplay). As far as I remember, Ashal said he wouldnt be doing this and that it was up to the individual mods to do this.

 

Lastly, I would love if the choice to "keep it simple" gave more options afterwards, such as "I would love to ride you" - leading into the cowgirl positions and maybe a "I like it tender" - could lead into one of the huggging positions.

I'm curious, do you use any kind of a mod that make the other NPC's have a higher level than they normally would?  Those seem to scale the stats as well, I've noticed.  If your character is developed enough to have a 79 speechcraft, I would assume you have done one or two of the guild chains, so for you to have a 10 still, by vanilla skyrim standards, you'd have to be trying to go after a NPC that is the same gender, different race, or married/courting to incur enough penalties to drop you to 10%, because even a level 1 fresh out of Helgen would have a 10% minimum chance (unless the target was married/courting).  And that's assuming you don't give yourself a +1-25% bonus from the MCM option.

 

That said, eh, maybe I'll only use a fraction of the target's speech/illusion skill.  Would make it a "little" easier for those that have mostly vanilla-level NPC's, but should make a significant difference for any that might be running a mod that greatly increases the stock NPC levels or something.

 

As to the responses chosen, again, I am pretty much limited to the dialogs that are listed under the Shared listing, and there is no simple "Yes" or "No" response.  I could change it to "Huh?", I suppose.

 

And yes, I could custom tailor a hundred different position specific choices if I really felt the need, but I just personally turn off the lesbian choices entirely since my character is male, and I turn off the "Foreplay" type animations from the "Normal" sex pool as well.  That also works to avoid having improper ones queue up.  In other words, it's not high on my priority list right now.

 

On a separate note, last night while actually *playing* the damn game for a change instead of spending my entire evening on the mod, I decided that the Post Coital Bliss proc can probably safely go to 100% instead of the current 25%.

 

I also think I will add a different beginning sequence for when your target has a RelationshipRank >= 2, since by that point it can be assumed that you have probably had 'relations' at least once.  Make it seem less like you are trying to hit on a stranger by that point to correspond with the increased success chance by virtue of the higher relationship rank.

[Crate123]

Hmm didnt know that increasing the level of NPC's would increase their skills like that, I suspect SkyRe is to blame for that. 

I havent actually done very many quests yet, I use the skse uncapper so I gain skill points very quickly but they give me almost no xp, so overall I gain xp at the normal rate but I have higher skills (always hated how incredibly hard some skills are to level up), so naturally I have to play on harder difficulties otherwise the extra skills can make a difference even though I dont get extra perks or health/stamina/magicka.

 

Ok if "yes ?" isnt available, how about "I'm waiting" ? that seems to fit the scene.

[TheCaptn]

Something else I've been wondering: Including your spouse/lover/follower in threesomes with submissive NPC's doesn't seem to have any effect on the Lover's Comfort arousal levels, including your own... It'd be nice if that could bring them back down again.

[dkatryl]

Hmm didnt know that increasing the level of NPC's would increase their skills like that, I suspect SkyRe is to blame for that. 

I havent actually done very many quests yet, I use the skse uncapper so I gain skill points very quickly but they give me almost no xp, so overall I gain xp at the normal rate but I have higher skills (always hated how incredibly hard some skills are to level up), so naturally I have to play on harder difficulties otherwise the extra skills can make a difference even though I dont get extra perks or health/stamina/magicka.

 

I thought there was a generic "yes ?" in there somewhere, isnt that what some of them say when you get near them or talk to them ?

I noticed some of the NPC's that were added in, hrm, I think it was "Interesting NPCs", I had a drastically lower chance with them than stock vanilla NPC's, which is probably because they had greatly increased stats on them.  So it is purely conjecture, but I imagine a mod that increases NPC levels would also have scaling stats that increase proportionally as well, otherwise you'd have a level 50 warrior type with still only a 15 in their one-handed, for instance.

 

I ran the numbers out a bit more, and I think the other thing that is resulting in a lower base chance (before the modifiers) is the fact that there isn't any form of "health %" factor like there was in the ambush/grapple/shout checks.  In fact, in the Ambush, there was even a flat +25 (+50 if target sleeping) bonus to account for the fact that your target was probably going to be 100% health, given the nature of the attack!

 

With that said, I think I will revise the forumla two fold.  Currently, it is:

(PSpeech - TSpeech)/4 + (PIllusion - TIllusion)/4 + Modifiers

That means that Speech+Illusion at 100 each, and your Target with a 0 each (unrealistic, but just to run out extremes) would give a base chance of 50%.  In reality, the Target will ALWAYS have some value, so even if it's some humble level 1 NPC, assume they have at least a 10 in each skill, that results in a 45% chance.

 

Now, a less developed Dragonborn, with only, say, a 50 Speech + 20 Illusion versus that same level 1 NPC, this base chance drops to 12.5% base chance, which is probably a bit low.

 

And if the NPC was leveled up a bit due to mods, then that base chance will quickly plummet to ~0%, and the min 10% provision will kick in.  (Which is probably what is happening to you, in particular)

 

So, I think I am going to try something like this:

(PSpeech - (TSpeech/4))/2 + (PIllusion - (TIllusion/4))/2 + Modifiers

So, with that new algorithm, using the same scenario above with the maxed player versus the level 1 NPC with only 10's?

 

(100 - 10/4)/2 + (100 - 10/4)/2 = (100 - 2.5)/2 + (100 - 2.5)/2 = 97.5/2 + 97.5/2 = 48.75 + 48.75 = 97.5%, triggers the 90% max cap (Old was 45%)

 

Same algorithm with the more modest Dragonborn versus the level 1?

 

(50 - 10/4)/2 + (20 - 10/4)/2 = (50 - 2.5)/2 + (20 - 2.5)/2 = 47.5/2 + 17.5/2 = 23.75 + 8.75 = 32.5% (Old was 12.5%)

 

Same algorithm with the more modest Dragonburn versus a leveled NPC that has the same stats?

 

(50 - 50/4)/2 + (20 - 20/4)/2 = (50 - 12.5)/2 + (20 - 5)/2 = 37.5/2 + 15/2 = 18.75 + 7.5 = 26.25% (Old was 0%, which triggered the 10% min cap)

 

That should address the following:

1. The bell curve between a new dragonborn versus a maxes character was set a bit too low in the absence of the health % that the more combat oriented algorithms that this was based off had.
2. Preserves a higher level target being more difficult, without completely neutralizing the player's own skills if they use a mod that raises *all* NPC levels/stats beyond that of vanilla Skyrim

[dkatryl]

Something else I've been wondering: Including your spouse/lover/follower in threesomes with submissive NPC's doesn't seem to have any effect on the Lover's Comfort arousal levels, including your own... It'd be nice if that could bring them back down again.

I don't use Lover's Comfort, so I have no idea what it does or how it does it.

[Crate123]

Weird bug just hit me, suddenly I can't proposition anyone.

I cant pinpoint at which point this happened but I cant ask anyone to have sex with me, I have checked that its ticked in the MCM menu, and I have tested the grapple bit which seems to work so the mod is definately active. Im not suffering from any diseases (any longer...) and Im not a hideous vampire lord monster or werewolf, what could happen that would make the dialogue option go away ?

Oh, I havent installed anything at all today so its not a new mod that messes with it.

 

EDIT:

I reinstalled the mod and it works again, wonder what happened.

 

I like the change you are working on for the dialogue. Its definately something to do with the leveling of the NPC's because some of the Interesting NPC's I had a pretty good chance with but any vanilla NPC was at 15% or lower.

[crusher]

Great work! I'm having a blast exploring skyrim with your mod, found a few things to mention:

 

1) When pc Sumbits just before death 'and' Defeat has also kicked in, things get all wonky and contorted where player model floats in air twisting like a wet towel. Would be nice if Submit superseded Defeat, if both are actively triggered, or if SL actually cued such events, one after the other... rather than turning pc into spaghetti on a fork. Might have something to do with multiple npc assailants and submission animation events prior to SL animation. 

 

2) My custom follower, Ram, gets his SoS member stolen by npc that pc sumbits to, really funny, but rather awkward for Ram. Currently using revealing armors, so SoS is active on male follower during sumbit event. Disable Slot 52 I believe? When gear is taken.

 

3) Suggestion: When pc is tied after rape, make option so they have to either find friendly help per follower/npc to get untied by dialogue [similar to SD feature]. Some funny dialogue comes to mind for followers that untie pc. May even require 'services' for such aid. And the risk of running around nude and tied-up could trigger more trouble from NPC lacking moral fiber, whether hostile or friendly.

 

4) Suggestion: Optional Submit trigger. Add option for player to use shift [walk] + left mouse [attack] to activate submit request; and shift + right mouse [block] to activate submission to npc. No one ever uses walk during combat, good time to start.

 

[dkatryl]

Great work! I'm having a blast exploring skyrim with your mod, found a few things to mention:

 

1) When pc Sumbits just before death 'and' Defeat kicks in, things get all wonky and contorted where player model floats in air twisting like a wet towel. Would be nice if Submit superseded Defeat, if both are actively triggered, or if SL actually cued such events, one after the other... rather than turning pc into spaghetti on a fork. Might have something to do with multiple npc assailants. 

 

2) My custom follower, Ram, gets his SoS stuff stolen by npc that pc sumbits to, really funny, but rather awkward for Ram. Currently using revealing armors, so SoS is active on male follower during sumbit event. Disable Slot 52 I believe? When gear is taken....

 

3) Suggestion: When pc is tied after rape, make option so they have to either find friendly help per follower or npc to get untied by dialogue [similar to SD feature]. Some funny dialogue comes to mind for followers that untie pc. May even require 'services' for such aid. And the risk of running around nude and tied-up could trigger more trouble from NPC lacking moral fiber, whether hostile or friendly....   

1) I don't really know how I could effectively do that, given that Defeat is it's own separate mod, and the low health % you set for the player to trigger Defeat's function is adjustable.  We use separate resources to do everything, (100% of mine are custom resources, so I am fairly confident saying that ) so I wouldn't really have any mechanism to suppress his (or Defeat to suppress mine).

 

2) Hrm, I can't really tell it to "RemoveItemAllExceptTheseSlots", the most I can do is exclude quest items.  Perhaps the easier solution is to simply use the CK to change the SoS "junk" to having the quest item toggeled on?

 

3) This feature was originally just an alternative penalty for players that wanted to get gang-raped as opposed to killed, but also didn't want to potentially lose all of their custom gear or deal with the hassle of resetting up favorites/groups/etc.  Given the style in which it was done, it just made sense to include a shorter duration version for even those that let all of their stuff get stolen.  But I'm not really interested in trying to make it some kind of psuedo-player slavery system, because that is so far outside the scope of intent (Which is really just a glorified 'time-out' period) that it would be bordering on the verge of another mod entirely.  Especially when SD exists for that kind of thing.

 

However, I will say that I did want to add it so that while you are bound & gagged, nearby NPC's would turn to you and masturbate in front of you to add to the humiliation part, but I was having trouble getting it to work and I didn't want to delay the update over essentially some cosmetic fluff.

[dkatryl]

Weird bug just hit me, suddenly I can't proposition anyone.

I cant pinpoint at which point this happened but I cant ask anyone to have sex with me, I have checked that its ticked in the MCM menu, and I have tested the grapple bit which seems to work so the mod is definately active. Im not suffering from any diseases (any longer...) and Im not a hideous vampire lord monster or werewolf, what could happen that would make the dialogue option go away ?

Oh, I havent installed anything at all today so its not a new mod that messes with it.

 

EDIT:

I reinstalled the mod and it works again, wonder what happened.

 

I like the change you are working on for the dialogue. Its definately something to do with the leveling of the NPC's because some of the Interesting NPC's I had a pretty good chance with but any vanilla NPC was at 15% or lower.

I'm at work, so I can check my files, but I *think* the only thing that should temporarily inhibit the ability to chat someone up (other than having been recently rejected) is if you told one to follow you to a more private location, and then tried to talk to another one (that wasn't your active follower).

 

So, other than that, huh, not sure what would randomly cause it to just not it across the board.

[crusher]

one more suggestion: Optional Submit trigger. Add option for player to use shift  + left mouse [walk + attack] to activate submit request; and shift + right mouse [walk + block] to activate submission to npc. No one ever uses walk during combat, good time to start.

 

[dkatryl]

one more suggestion: Optional Submit trigger. Add option for player to use shift  + left mouse [walk + attack] to activate submit request; and shift + right mouse [walk + block] to activate submission to npc. No one ever uses walk during combat, good time to start.

I am quite satisfied with the single Hotkey (with conditionals) that achieves everything I want it to and I don't really see the need to reinvent the wheel here.

[Crate123]

Yeah it was probably because someone was following me. They followed me to High Hrothgar and then when I entered the monastery they disappeared so I figured they werent actually following me anymore but I guess they were. Wonder how I could have fixed that without reinstallingthe mod.

[crusher]

 

 

 

2) My custom follower, Ram, gets his SoS stuff stolen by npc that pc sumbits to, really funny, but rather awkward for Ram. Currently using revealing armors, so SoS is active on male follower during sumbit event. Disable Slot 52 I believe? When gear is taken....

 

 

 

 

2) Hrm, I can't really tell it to "RemoveItemAllExceptTheseSlots", the most I can do is exclude quest items.  Perhaps the easier solution is to simply use the CK to change the SoS "junk" to having the quest item toggeled on?

 

 

 

 

is it possible to exclude/toggle follower for RemoveItemAll, or is follower part of players inventory? Also, I guess that male pc using SoS lose "junk" as well? I'll mention it in SoS VectorPlexus' thread, see if he has solution.

[dkatryl]

Yeah it was probably because someone was following me. They followed me to High Hrothgar and then when I entered the monastery they disappeared so I figured they werent actually following me anymore but I guess they were. Wonder how I could have fixed that without reinstallingthe mod.

There is a custom global variable that is set upon them following, then cleared when you talk to them again.  So reinstalling it effectively reset that global.

 

I suppose I can do something like the original 3-way follower support thing, where after ~a minute or so, they "lose interest" which will then clear the variable and they go back to whatever they were doing.  Enough time to find a spot, but avoid them getting lost and then you're stuck.

[dkatryl]

 

 

 

is it possible to exclude/toggle follower for RemoveItemAll, or is follower part of players inventory? Also, I guess that male pc using SoS lose "junk" as well? I'll mention it in SoS VectorPlexus' thread, see if he has solution.

 

Possible, yes, but I don't plan on doing that, or else you just store your extra gear on the follower and sidestep losing your gear.

 

And, yep, if it affected your follower's SoS junk, it would affect the player.  The better solution is to make the junk considered a quest item, because you can just specify RemoveItem (quest = true) so that if, for whatever reason, the SoS mod needs to remove it, they can still do so, but a generic RemoveItemAll() doesn't also remove it.

[Pinute]

 

 

 

 

is it possible to exclude/toggle follower for RemoveItemAll, or is follower part of players inventory? Also, I guess that male pc using SoS lose "junk" as well? I'll mention it in SoS VectorPlexus' thread, see if he has solution.

 

Possible, yes, but I don't plan on doing that, or else you just store your extra gear on the follower and sidestep losing your gear.

 

And, yep, if it affected your follower's SoS junk, it would affect the player.  The better solution is to make the junk considered a quest item, because you can just specify RemoveItem (quest = true) so that if, for whatever reason, the SoS mod needs to remove it, they can still do so, but a generic RemoveItemAll() doesn't also remove it.

 

 

You might be able to cannibalize ashal's unequip code and offer a toggle in mcm, ''Using SoS". SoS is going to be something that sexlab modders will need to be taking into account going forward, since (iirc) ashal has stated that it will be the default that sexlab 1.2 is built around.

[dkatryl]

 

 

 

 

You might be able to cannibalize ashal's unequip code and offer a toggle in mcm, ''Using SoS". SoS is going to be something that sexlab modders will need to be taking into account going forward, since (iirc) ashal has stated that it will be the default that sexlab 1.2 is built around.

 

The issue isn't UnequipAll(), as that can easily be worked around, but the RemoveItemAll(), meaning afterwards there is nothing left to equip because some bandit done went and ran off with your junk!

 

And while SoS support is being built into the Framework, is the actual item/whatever SoS utilized to give you adjustable junk, is that being added to the Framework, or is it still up to the users to download and use SoS?  Because, for instance, I don't use SoS, so I wouldn't be able to link the actual property to the item properly the actual resource unless it was built into the Framework.

[Rattledagger]

 

1) I don't really know how I could effectively do that, given that Defeat is it's own separate mod, and the low health % you set for the player to trigger Defeat's function is adjustable.  We use separate resources to do everything, (100% of mine are custom resources, so I am fairly confident saying that ) so I wouldn't really have any mechanism to suppress his (or Defeat to suppress mine).

One method to work alongside Defeat is, add an option to Submit where users chooses a lower health% and if they drops below this limit they can't Submit. Example if someone configures Defeat to 20% and Submit to 21% both won't trigger at the same time.

[Crate123]

 

 

 

 

 

You might be able to cannibalize ashal's unequip code and offer a toggle in mcm, ''Using SoS". SoS is going to be something that sexlab modders will need to be taking into account going forward, since (iirc) ashal has stated that it will be the default that sexlab 1.2 is built around.

 

The issue isn't UnequipAll(), as that can easily be worked around, but the RemoveItemAll(), meaning afterwards there is nothing left to equip because some bandit done went and ran off with your junk!

 

And while SoS support is being built into the Framework, is the actual item/whatever SoS utilized to give you adjustable junk, is that being added to the Framework, or is it still up to the users to download and use SoS?  Because, for instance, I don't use SoS, so I wouldn't be able to link the actual property to the item properly the actual resource unless it was built into the Framework.

 

 

While you will still need to download and use SoS, it is being built to use SexLab and vice versa. SoS will bend its schlong so it fits correctly with the SexLab animations, that wont happen until next SoS release though but Ashal has a prerelease so SexLab is ready for it. Thats much more integration than any other body mod can hope for. Also the SoS bodymod itself is actually pretty damn good.

[dkatryl]

 

One method to work alongside Defeat is, add an option to Submit where users chooses a lower health% and if they drops below this limit they can't Submit. Example if someone configures Defeat to 20% and Submit to 21% both won't trigger at the same time.

 

 

 

In a perfect setup, that would definitely work, but I can easily see a situation where, surrounded by NPC's that are wailing on you, you are getting low, say close to the 21%/20% threshold, you push the Submit, it triggers properly because you were above the threshold, but one (or more) and the baddies was mid-swing (or spell was mid-flight, whatever) and hit late, which dropped you down under the threshold, and then Defeat stlll took over.  It would be up to the Player to build in some kind of a deadband to minimize the chance of that happening.

 

But, sure, I can definitely do that, build in a 0-100% slider so the player can choose whatever setting they want, and then set up Defeat's setting, allowing for a deadband to try to deal with "late hits".  And if the player doesn't use Defeat at all, they can just set it to 0% and roll on.

 

However, if I go to that effort, I am almost inclined to just make an adjustable sliding scale automatically trigger the Surrender() and be done with it.  Then, if the player wants to maintain manual control, they set it to 0%.  Otherwise, it would auto-trigger under whatever % they choose.

 

Of course, then I would have to make sure you didn't try to automatically surrender to a bear or something stupid.

[dkatryl]

 

 

While you will still need to download and use SoS, it is being built to use SexLab and vice versa. SoS will bend its schlong so it fits correctly with the SexLab animations, that wont happen until next SoS release though but Ashal has a prerelease so SexLab is ready for it. Thats much more integration than any other body mod can hope for. Also the SoS bodymod itself is actually pretty damn good.

 

I understand all of that, what I am saying is that there needs to be an actual physical item resource to point the Property to when you create the reference in a script.

 

If the actual item resource is not included in the Framework, and I don't have SoS loaded as a required .esp (.esm?) in my mod, then that item resource reference won't exist, and the script call to "re-add SoS junk" or whatever will fail because the property I created in the script isn't pointing to an existing item.

 

That's why the SoS item being classified as a quest item or whatever would prevent the RemoveItemAll() from removing it, because unless you tell it quest=true, it ignores quest items.

[Crate123]

Ahh ok, well you have to talk to Ashal about that I think, Im not sure how he makes it work.