SkyrimLL/DeepBlueFrog mods conversion to SSE

[VirginMarie]

26 minutes ago, DeepBlueFrog said:

Hold on a minute... if I understand correctly:

 

- DD5 introduces a filter that is always on 

- That filter can disrupt/break non DD related mods

- DD removed the option to turn off that filter from MCM

 

Did I get that right?

 

That seems rather intrusive.

 

I didn't read the rest of your posts in details yet.

Do you think there is a possibility for other mods like SD+ to add their own 'Turn off that DD5 filter' in their own MCM menu?

You have that exactly right. Very intrusive. I'd made one edit... "That filter can disrupt/break non DD related mods" to "That filter can disrupt/break non DD related mods using sexlab scenes, if an actor has devious devices from another mod equipped"

 

If users use Devious Daedra, they can turn off the filter.

If you want SD+ to turn it off itself, I've provided sample code that will do that, plus will work cooperatively with Devious Daedra, allowing it to be the default if installed. Users can have the filter on for other mods if they wish, and off for SD+ etc.

[DayTri]

5 hours ago, VirginMarie said:

If you are interested to know in detail the problems the DD Filter causes, I've documented it HERE. There's not much difference between DD4 and DD5. The main difference is what I've described as "mode 3" in that link, but from a backwards compatibility point of view, old mods use the default "mode 1".

"HERE" link is broken, seems to go to a deleted thread, could you report the summary?

[Nevi_]

1 minute ago, DayTri said:

"HERE" link is broken, seems to go to a deleted thread, could you report the summary?

The mod was just banned... again.

 

[VirginMarie]

9 minutes ago, DayTri said:

"HERE" link is broken, seems to go to a deleted thread, could you report the summary?

It's broken as of only a short while ago because they took down my Devious Daedra mod again. The first time it had a DD patch and that was the reason, this time I've not heard any reason yet. I have a backup of the document...

 

 Why mods may not be compatible with DD5's Filter

This write-up is long. You don't need to read it to use Devious Daedra. It's here in-case you want to understand in detail, why it's necessary to be able to turn DD's Animation Filter off. I don't want to forget the details from extensive testing, so I documented it. I learned this info when I tested the DD5 Filter with Shout Like a Virgin, and provided problem reports during DD5 Beta testing.

 

The following detail is all specific to DD5's Animation Filter...

Spoiler

Spoiler

How does the Filter work?

• If DD is installed, the DD Filter is always active, intercepting any start of a Sexlab scene, from any mod, including mods that do not use/require DD, potentially changing the behavior of any Sexlab scene
• When a Sexlab scene starts, DD is always executing scripts checking for blocking devices. More work occurs if any actors are wearing DD devices which block "access"
• With DD5 there is no way to turn this off unless patched

What does the Filter do? / What is the functionality?

• Filters for device-valid animations. The goal is realistic animations for the devices worn
• Reverts to DD's private bound animations if there is heavy bondage (wrists restrained). This is limited to 2 actors
• Auto-hides devices (removes the 'render' part of a device) if needed to find a valid animation

What are the user's options?

• Two DD MCM settings to toggle "aggressiveness" and "use bound animations". This functionality is not clear to me as it's not consistent for all "modes" (the modes discussed below). I can't define the intended behavior, but know these settings make little difference to the outcomes below
• The toggle to turn off the Filter in the MCM has been removed in DD5, without any technical reason to do so

What are a mod author's options?

 

There are 3 options, and a 4th if using Devious Daedra. I will call them Modes, as follows...

 

Mode 1  To start a scene, use function calls to Sexlab only. Mod may not be using/requiring, or even aware of DD 

• DD intercepts after the Sexlab scene starts, doing the functionality above
• User/mod can't turn Filter off
  • Problems: All stability problems listed below / All behavior problems listed below
  • This mode can be unplayable, particularly with lots of blocking devices or creatures
    • This is the most common mode, for most mods
    • This mode is forced upon all Sexlab scenes, just by having DD installed, with no choice to opt out

 

Mode 2  Use DD's function SelectValidAnimations(), then start the Sexlab scene by calling Sexlab

• DD intercepts after the Sexlab scene starts, doing the functionality above, often doing less than mode 1, since animations were already pre-filtered by the function
• User/mod can't turn Filter off
  • Problems: All stability problems listed below, but less frequent / All behavior problems listed below
  • This mode can be more playable than mode 1
    • This mode is used by few mods, Cursed Loot being the only one I know of

 

Mode 3  Use DD5's new StartValidAnimations(). DD takes care of starting the Sexlab scene

• All the functionality occurs before the Sexlab scene is called
• User/mod can't turn pre-Filtering off
• This function was added at my request, during beta testing, however I badly needed and asked for the option to turn the pre-filtering off, but this was not provided
  • Problems: All behavior changes listed below / Only the Stacked stability problem which is less frequent
  • In my case, even if "Stacked" were rare, the behavior problems make this mode incompatible for Shout Like a Virgin, breaking quests, therefor SLaV cannot use this mode in it's current form
    • This mode is new with DD5. Likely not used by any mod at the time of writing this, or possibly used in part by Cursed Loot 9 Beta

 

Mode 4  Use Devious Daedra. Users can simply use the Enchantment to toggle, or a mod can override using a function call before each call to Sexlab to start a scene

• None of the Filter functionality occurs when desired by the mod or the user. You still get the new DD5 gagged voice
  • Problems: Almost none. After a full playthrough, maybe 1 Stacked out of 50 scenes. The key is that the behavior of Sexlab remains unchanged, as mods were designed and tested to expect
    • This mode is what Shout Like a Virgin 7 uses, if you install Devious Daedra 

 

The problems can be broken into these 2 categories... Stability and Behavior. None are considered DD bugs, but nevertheless, they are problems that will impact mods, sometimes breaking them.

 

Scene Stability Problems

1. Startup Delay/resetting animation
   • A Sexlab animation starts, you see the entry animation, sometimes it progresses beyond the first stage, the animation being device inappropriate. Then the actors reset, and another animation starts. This can look pretty smooth and fast sometimes, but other times it can look very messy
2. Stacked 
   • Actors stand on top of each other, not animating. You don't see a functional scene
3. Stuck 
   • Actors start the first animation, and remain in that animation forever, or until you press the advance key to move through the stages. You don't see a functional scene
4. Misaligned/spinning around
   • Mostly only occurs for creatures. In my tests, almost always for certain creatures, like the wolf. You barely see a functional scene

IMO, each of these are beyond being just a visual glitch. They are unacceptable and breaking. This is not a good trade-off in the name of realism. Problems are most common but not limited to scenes with... multiple blocking devices, particularly heavy bondage, and creatures. 

 

Scene Behavior Change Problems

1. Scene Does not Start
   • This is what happens if no valid animation was found. You may see the "Startup Delay", then an abort. Or you may see nothing
   • If this occurs and the mod has no fallback, quests can break. A user may not even realize a scene was meant to start
2. Device Hiding
   • Device hiding can be "story breaking". Example in Shout Like a Virgin... you are given a reason that a device is removed, it never happens silently, till now. This can also result in virginity loss, when it should not have been possible
3. Lack of Variety in Animations
   • This is not breaking, but not the same or expected user experience. Some people prefer variety over perfect realism, and will abandon a mod that does not give them this
4. Delayed Startup
   • The delay can be significant. Sexlab is not very fast to start scenes alone, and with DD's Filter, this delay can be doubled or tripled
   • Not fun when using something like SLaV's Love Shout while in combat where you expect fast action, or you would give up on the feature

I would predict that of all problems, including the Stability section, "Scene Does not Start" will have the most far reaching impact to existing mods, now with no option to turn the filter off in DD5's MCM. It will be hard for users to even realize that's what happened.

 

Testing results could vary depending on script load and computer specs. I used up-to-date hardware and a very minimal mod load, thus I believe the problems are NOT limited to a script heavy load order.

 

What's different in DD5 versus DD4?

• Bugs found during beta testing were fixed (I mean bugs, not the "problems" lists above which all remain). It's still far from well tested since almost no other major DD content mod author participated in the beta testing
• New function StartValidAnimations() was added. Defined as Mode 3 above
• I think the "device hiding" is new, or at least significantly more prevalent
• Gagged voices is new but not really part of the Filter. Still works when patched by Devious Daedra
• Stability and behavior problems in general, are about the same, but there's differences
• I'm sure I'm missing something

 

 

 

 

[DayTri]

5 minutes ago, VirginMarie said:

It's broken as of only a short while ago because they took down my Devious Daedra mod again. The first time it had a DD patch and that was the reason, this time I've not heard any reason yet. I have a backup of the document...

 

 Why mods may not be compatible with DD5's Filter

This write-up is long. You don't need to read it to use Devious Daedra. It's here in-case you want to understand in detail, why it's necessary to be able to turn DD's Animation Filter off. I don't want to forget the details from extensive testing, so I documented it. I learned this info when I tested the DD5 Filter with Shout Like a Virgin, and provided problem reports during DD5 Beta testing.

 

The following detail is all specific to DD5's Animation Filter...

  Reveal hidden contents

Spoiler

How does the Filter work?

• If DD is installed, the DD Filter is always active, intercepting any start of a Sexlab scene, from any mod, including mods that do not use/require DD, potentially changing the behavior of any Sexlab scene
• When a Sexlab scene starts, DD is always executing scripts checking for blocking devices. More work occurs if any actors are wearing DD devices which block "access"
• With DD5 there is no way to turn this off unless patched

What does the Filter do? / What is the functionality?

• Filters for device-valid animations. The goal is realistic animations for the devices worn
• Reverts to DD's private bound animations if there is heavy bondage (wrists restrained). This is limited to 2 actors
• Auto-hides devices (removes the 'render' part of a device) if needed to find a valid animation

What are the user's options?

• Two DD MCM settings to toggle "aggressiveness" and "use bound animations". This functionality is not clear to me as it's not consistent for all "modes" (the modes discussed below). I can't define the intended behavior, but know these settings make little difference to the outcomes below
• The toggle to turn off the Filter in the MCM has been removed in DD5, without any technical reason to do so

What are a mod author's options?

 

There are 3 options, and a 4th if using Devious Daedra. I will call them Modes, as follows...

 

Mode 1  To start a scene, use function calls to Sexlab only. Mod may not be using/requiring, or even aware of DD 

• DD intercepts after the Sexlab scene starts, doing the functionality above
• User/mod can't turn Filter off
  • Problems: All stability problems listed below / All behavior problems listed below
  • This mode can be unplayable, particularly with lots of blocking devices or creatures
    • This is the most common mode, for most mods
    • This mode is forced upon all Sexlab scenes, just by having DD installed, with no choice to opt out

 

Mode 2  Use DD's function SelectValidAnimations(), then start the Sexlab scene by calling Sexlab

• DD intercepts after the Sexlab scene starts, doing the functionality above, often doing less than mode 1, since animations were already pre-filtered by the function
• User/mod can't turn Filter off
  • Problems: All stability problems listed below, but less frequent / All behavior problems listed below
  • This mode can be more playable than mode 1
    • This mode is used by few mods, Cursed Loot being the only one I know of

 

Mode 3  Use DD5's new StartValidAnimations(). DD takes care of starting the Sexlab scene

• All the functionality occurs before the Sexlab scene is called
• User/mod can't turn pre-Filtering off
• This function was added at my request, during beta testing, however I badly needed and asked for the option to turn the pre-filtering off, but this was not provided
  • Problems: All behavior changes listed below / Only the Stacked stability problem which is less frequent
  • In my case, even if "Stacked" were rare, the behavior problems make this mode incompatible for Shout Like a Virgin, breaking quests, therefor SLaV cannot use this mode in it's current form
    • This mode is new with DD5. Likely not used by any mod at the time of writing this, or possibly used in part by Cursed Loot 9 Beta

 

Mode 4  Use Devious Daedra. Users can simply use the Enchantment to toggle, or a mod can override using a function call before each call to Sexlab to start a scene

• None of the Filter functionality occurs when desired by the mod or the user. You still get the new DD5 gagged voice
  • Problems: Almost none. After a full playthrough, maybe 1 Stacked out of 50 scenes. The key is that the behavior of Sexlab remains unchanged, as mods were designed and tested to expect
    • This mode is what Shout Like a Virgin 7 uses, if you install Devious Daedra 

 

The problems can be broken into these 2 categories... Stability and Behavior. None are considered DD bugs, but nevertheless, they are problems that will impact mods, sometimes breaking them.

 

Scene Stability Problems

1. Startup Delay/resetting animation
   • A Sexlab animation starts, you see the entry animation, sometimes it progresses beyond the first stage, the animation being device inappropriate. Then the actors reset, and another animation starts. This can look pretty smooth and fast sometimes, but other times it can look very messy
2. Stacked 
   • Actors stand on top of each other, not animating. You don't see a functional scene
3. Stuck 
   • Actors start the first animation, and remain in that animation forever, or until you press the advance key to move through the stages. You don't see a functional scene
4. Misaligned/spinning around
   • Mostly only occurs for creatures. In my tests, almost always for certain creatures, like the wolf. You barely see a functional scene

IMO, each of these are beyond being just a visual glitch. They are unacceptable and breaking. This is not a good trade-off in the name of realism. Problems are most common but not limited to scenes with... multiple blocking devices, particularly heavy bondage, and creatures. 

 

Scene Behavior Change Problems

1. Scene Does not Start
   • This is what happens if no valid animation was found. You may see the "Startup Delay", then an abort. Or you may see nothing
   • If this occurs and the mod has no fallback, quests can break. A user may not even realize a scene was meant to start
2. Device Hiding
   • Device hiding can be "story breaking". Example in Shout Like a Virgin... you are given a reason that a device is removed, it never happens silently, till now. This can also result in virginity loss, when it should not have been possible
3. Lack of Variety in Animations
   • This is not breaking, but not the same or expected user experience. Some people prefer variety over perfect realism, and will abandon a mod that does not give them this
4. Delayed Startup
   • The delay can be significant. Sexlab is not very fast to start scenes alone, and with DD's Filter, this delay can be doubled or tripled
   • Not fun when using something like SLaV's Love Shout while in combat where you expect fast action, or you would give up on the feature

I would predict that of all problems, including the Stability section, "Scene Does not Start" will have the most far reaching impact to existing mods, now with no option to turn the filter off in DD5's MCM. It will be hard for users to even realize that's what happened.

 

Testing results could vary depending on script load and computer specs. I used up-to-date hardware and a very minimal mod load, thus I believe the problems are NOT limited to a script heavy load order.

 

What's different in DD5 versus DD4?

• Bugs found during beta testing were fixed (I mean bugs, not the "problems" lists above which all remain). It's still far from well tested since almost no other major DD content mod author participated in the beta testing
• New function StartValidAnimations() was added. Defined as Mode 3 above
• I think the "device hiding" is new, or at least significantly more prevalent
• Gagged voices is new but not really part of the Filter. Still works when patched by Devious Daedra
• Stability and behavior problems in general, are about the same, but there's differences
• I'm sure I'm missing something

 

 

 

 

Seems like a very silly reason to ban the mod, to me.

 

The restriction that you are not allowed to rebundle or patch DD was only added 3 years ago, it was never in prior versions of DD. (git blame is here: https://github.com/DeviousDevices/DDi/blame/1c984b9bae042dc9d44147c7d11cdc65a4c4e37f/00 Core/Devious Readme - Integration.txt#L115)

 

So if your patch forks from the old version of DD, should be fine?

[VirginMarie]

3 minutes ago, DayTri said:

Seems like a very silly reason to ban the mod, to me.

 

The restriction that you are not allowed to rebundle or patch DD was only added 3 years ago, it was never in prior versions of DD. (git blame is here: https://github.com/DeviousDevices/DDi/blame/1c984b9bae042dc9d44147c7d11cdc65a4c4e37f/00 Core/Devious Readme - Integration.txt#L115)

 

So if your patch forks from the old version of DD, should be fine?

As stated, the 2nd version they just took down has no patch of anything.

 

Careful, we could get in trouble with LL staff even just talking about this. I have no idea how this could happen.

[axz2]

47 minutes ago, VirginMarie said:

Careful, we could get in trouble with LL staff even just talking about this. I have no idea how this could happen.

The ban seem unjustified, but even if it somehow is, banning people for talking about it seems really messed up. 

 

I guess its just one more reason for me to avoid Devious Devices.

[VirginMarie]

11 minutes ago, axz2 said:

The ban seem unjustified, but even if it somehow is, banning people for talking about it seems really messed up. 

 

I guess its just one more reason for me to avoid Devious Devices.

Well I'm paranoid now. I don't mean we can be banned for talking about it. But we could see moderators giving warnings, depending on what is said. There was moderation in the Devious Daedra support thread because of the polarizing views of it were being discussed and heating up.

 

Speaking of avoiding Devious Devices, god, I sooooo very much want to drop my dependency on it, but that is hard. I've been planning in my head, and recently even on paper, how to go about writing a light weight replacement for DD. But the problem is, even with a new framework to use, if DD is installed, its there still, changing your sexlab scene. So I'd have make a new sexlab too, lol, unless what Daedra does, becomes acceptable, or Kimy makes the change needed herself.

[axz2]

1 hour ago, VirginMarie said:

But the problem is, even with a new framework to use, if DD is installed, its there still, changing your sexlab scene. So I'd have make a new sexlab too, lol, unless what Daedra does, becomes acceptable, or Kimy makes the change needed herself.

But if you have a new light weight system then people wouldn't have to install DD.  Making a new Sexlab seems overly ambitious, esp. since it isn't just replacing the framework but getting everyone to support it.  Making a replacement for DD might be a lot of work, but seems more realistic.

[VirginMarie]

2 minutes ago, axz2 said:

But if you have a new light weight system then people wouldn't have to install DD. 

Yes but during a transition period, most will still have DD installed due to no choice. And DD will linger in people's load orders for eons. One of the keys to a good DD replacement, is that it be "DD aware" without having a dependency, otherwise your mod can't play nice with other mods with DD devices equipped. 

2 minutes ago, axz2 said:

 

Making a new Sexlab seems overly ambitious, esp. since it isn't just replacing the framework but getting everyone to support it.  Making a replacement for DD might be a lot of work, but seems more realistic.

Well yes a replacement sexlab is a bit nuts. If I did it, it would be super simplified, just enough for what SLaV needs and hopefully a few other mods that are looking to join the party, and it would, like a DD replacement, need to sit side by side with Sexlab which will be needed forever. Come to think of it, I could just patch Sexlab instead which is permitted. But how is that patch different than one that only gives CHOICE to turn the intrusive DD Filter on and off? Currently such patch would get banned. 

[DeepBlueFrog]

1 hour ago, VirginMarie said:

Yes but during a transition period, most will still have DD installed due to no choice. And DD will linger in people's load orders for eons. One of the keys to a good DD replacement, is that it be "DD aware" without having a dependency, otherwise your mod can't play nice with other mods with DD devices equipped. 

Well yes a replacement sexlab is a bit nuts. If I did it, it would be super simplified, just enough for what SLaV needs and hopefully a few other mods that are looking to join the party, and it would, like a DD replacement, need to sit side by side with Sexlab which will be needed forever. Come to think of it, I could just patch Sexlab instead which is permitted. But how is that patch different than one that only gives CHOICE to turn the intrusive DD Filter on and off? Currently such patch would get banned. 

SD+ started with its own system for a death alternative, a device/slot management system and an animation library for sex. In many ways, a simple alternative to SexLab, DD and DA.

And guess what? It was a huge pain to maintain in its own right, plus sort out conflicts with SexLab, with DD and with DA. 

In the end, it was still better to use these frameworks than keep maintaining my own simple version.

 

There is one thing I would do better and that would be to make these soft dependences with mod events instead of hard ones.

 

I managed to decouple SD+ and DA, but it would be harder to do with SexLab and DD (not impossible... just a lot of work).

[Meiton_88]

okay, i got the mod to work somehow (mostly), but i still can't figure out why i still don't have a collar and an arm binding at the start of the enslavement, also i start at mostly submissive, is it because i surrendered ?

[YojimboRatchet]

10 hours ago, VirginMarie said:

Yes but during a transition period, most will still have DD installed due to no choice. And DD will linger in people's load orders for eons. One of the keys to a good DD replacement, is that it be "DD aware" without having a dependency, otherwise your mod can't play nice with other mods with DD devices equipped. 

Well yes a replacement sexlab is a bit nuts. If I did it, it would be super simplified, just enough for what SLaV needs and hopefully a few other mods that are looking to join the party, and it would, like a DD replacement, need to sit side by side with Sexlab which will be needed forever. Come to think of it, I could just patch Sexlab instead which is permitted. But how is that patch different than one that only gives CHOICE to turn the intrusive DD Filter on and off? Currently such patch would get banned. 

if someone created a mod that was considered a "tweak" (since there are so many mod tweaks on LL already for various mods), and the tweak was simply to add an MCM toggle to turn on or off the DD animation toggle. would that even be possible to do ?

 

otherwise it's just a DD monopoly isn't it ?

 

after reading your notes, and given my own assessment from the beta, i think i'll stick with 4.3, might be the safer way for now.

[Mister X]

@DeepBlueFrog do you still work on Alicia Painslut or is this mod on hiatus? That would be a shame, because I really like her twisted mind, she's not just another pretty generic face running behind you.

[Meiton_88]

is there a way to start as not "mostly submissive" ?

[VirginMarie]

12 hours ago, DeepBlueFrog said:

And guess what? It was a huge pain to maintain in its own right, plus sort out conflicts with SexLab, with DD and with DA. 

In the end, it was still better to use these frameworks than keep maintaining my own simple version.

Well yes, I can imagine!

But currently, I can't use Sexlab due to DD, if LL staff won't let me turn the filter off. I think you are going to find out why with some of your mods.

 

3 hours ago, YojimboRatchet said:

if someone created a mod that was considered a "tweak" (since there are so many mod tweaks on LL already for various mods), and the tweak was simply to add an MCM toggle to turn on or off the DD animation toggle. would that even be possible to do ?

Very easy to do, once I realized the approach in a dream ? Devious Daedra does exactly that, but using a hotkey instead of MCM.

[VirginMarie]

12 hours ago, DeepBlueFrog said:

There is one thing I would do better and that would be to make these soft dependences with mod events instead of hard ones.

Yes soft dependency is what I have in mind if I do a Light Weight DD Replacement called Virgin Devices or something. Virgin Devices would need to check for devices if DD is installed, so you can "play nice" with other mods.

 

I know I can change/read a variable that is defined as a property with soft dependency. But do you know if it's possible to call a function with a soft dependency? There's no mod events to use.

 

Also I've once heard someone claim that soft dependencies are what causes corrupt saves if the load order is changed... that mods not using soft dependencies will not cause the corruption. I think this is not true with one exception. There is ONE soft dependency related function that warns on the creation kit wiki, of this. But it's one you don't need to use.

[stas2503]

20 minutes ago, VirginMarie said:

Also I've once heard someone claim that soft dependencies are what causes corrupt saves if the load order is changed... that mods not using soft dependencies will not cause the corruption. I think this is not true with one exception. There is ONE soft dependency related function that warns on the creation kit wiki, of this. But it's one you don't need to use.

The mod I'm making has a soft requirements on XXXToolset and BDSM Maid. If the code from my mod detects these mods in the loadorder, then it uses the Devices from those mods, and I have never had a save issue with this.
So I think soft addiction is a good solution.

[VirginMarie]

4 minutes ago, stas2503 said:

So I think soft addiction is a good solution.

SLaV has a soft dependency on Branding Device of Doom.

It's a must have if I did a " Virgin Devices". Many mods do it so even if it does make your mod more vulnerable to save corruption, I'd have to use it.

[stas2503]

13 minutes ago, VirginMarie said:

Many mods do it so even if it does make your mod more vulnerable to save corruption

Soft requirements do not hurt save. I realized this when I was doing several mods for Fallout 4. and here on LL there are many examples.

Just look at the AAF Violate mod - this mod has soft requirements for more than a dozen mods, including those from Devious Devices. I will repeat the soft requirements.
So you don't have to worry that your mod in this way may damage the user's saving.

[VirginMarie]

26 minutes ago, stas2503 said:

Soft requirements do not hurt save.

I think you are correct, so long as you don't use IsPluginInstalled  <--- this one screws up saves. The alternative is GetModByName

 

And GetFormFromFile is safe, but possibly vulnerable to save corruption. I don't mean its causing the corruption, just vulnerable to it.

[axz2]

1 hour ago, VirginMarie said:

But currently, I can't use Sexlab due to DD, if LL staff won't let me turn the filter off. I think you are going to find out why with some of your mods.

But can't you just play without DD installed?

[VirginMarie]

13 minutes ago, axz2 said:

But can't you just play without DD installed?

Realistically, the majority of players wont uninstall DD because they have their old favorite mod(s) and have no choice but to keep DD. It's a given that a new "replace DD" framework would need to work side by side with DD, otherwise it would never get much adoption. Thus DD's forced tampering of sexlab scenes needs a solution first.

[Emrek]

On 12/2/2020 at 4:14 AM, StillNobody2 said:

Hi, I installed Devious Parasites recently and got infected with the living armor.

I was also wondering if it was possible to change the living armor in a way, so that it actually can be hidden beneath clothes - I can understand why wearing armor together with it shouldn't be possible, but I'd prefer having clothes on, if only to reduce the "nude" comments from the citizens. Having a naughty surprise below the clothes sounds also more appealing to me than running around butt naked all the time.

The visibility is closely tied to the reputation (speech) debuff. Without it, there isn't much reason to get rid of the living armor once you have it as it has some pretty nice positive buffs to compensate.

 

I believe that the way it works is simply that it occupies the body slot and requires a special method of removal. This means that no other body armor or clothing can be worn over it just like how you cannot wear a mage's robe over your leather armor. If you could wear armor over it then it would be an even greater bonus because the outer armor could have its own enchantment. That said, there are mods that allow you to wear what pieces and parts that you want. Don't know if that would solve the problem, but it is worth looking into.

 

I do agree that immersively the Living Armor could be covered in some way. However, determining what could and couldn't go over it would be a nightmare. Maybe only clothing??

 

The problem I have with the Living Armor (tentacle or parasite) is that they count as nude. This means that any perks you have from the skill trees that require Light Armor (or Heavy Armor) to be worn on hands, feet, head and body cannot be accomplished. [Note, there might be a similar perk in the alteration tree for Clothing, but I don't recall.] It also cuts into the Frostfall mod's perks that require anything - heavy, light or clothing - to be worn in all 4 slots in order to stay warm.

 

This could be fixed with a relatively simple MCM option (ala Immersive Armors) to select if the Living Armor counts as nude, clothing, light or heavy armor while still maintaining the appearance, removal difficulty and negative reputation. This likely might interfere with other mods' (eg. SL Arousal) ability to detect nudity.

[DeepBlueFrog]

10 hours ago, Emrek said:

The visibility is closely tied to the reputation (speech) debuff. Without it, there isn't much reason to get rid of the living armor once you have it as it has some pretty nice positive buffs to compensate.

 

I believe that the way it works is simply that it occupies the body slot and requires a special method of removal. This means that no other body armor or clothing can be worn over it just like how you cannot wear a mage's robe over your leather armor. If you could wear armor over it then it would be an even greater bonus because the outer armor could have its own enchantment. That said, there are mods that allow you to wear what pieces and parts that you want. Don't know if that would solve the problem, but it is worth looking into.

 

I do agree that immersively the Living Armor could be covered in some way. However, determining what could and couldn't go over it would be a nightmare. Maybe only clothing??

 

The problem I have with the Living Armor (tentacle or parasite) is that they count as nude. This means that any perks you have from the skill trees that require Light Armor (or Heavy Armor) to be worn on hands, feet, head and body cannot be accomplished. [Note, there might be a similar perk in the alteration tree for Clothing, but I don't recall.] It also cuts into the Frostfall mod's perks that require anything - heavy, light or clothing - to be worn in all 4 slots in order to stay warm.

 

This could be fixed with a relatively simple MCM option (ala Immersive Armors) to select if the Living Armor counts as nude, clothing, light or heavy armor while still maintaining the appearance, removal difficulty and negative reputation. This likely might interfere with other mods' (eg. SL Arousal) ability to detect nudity.

If you can find out how to make them count as armor instead of nude, I am happy to change that setting in Parasites. 

 

As to make them work with proper clothes or armor, I am planning a structure for multi stages parasites, which will allow me to do things like have the tentacle monster retreat inside the womb, make the belly larger, and allow you to wear clothing (and force undress you when they expand again).