Jump to content

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, stas2503 said:

Please update archive with the translation.

It's done.

 

You can easily check you really have 2.13.4 if it has the correct version number on the MCM stats page.

It should also have the version in the ESP if you check with Tes5Edit and look at the header.

 

Now I have fixed the script I hadn't updated since the days of my old dev-machine, that I used in releasing, and which for historical reasons required the source directory to be set in three places - one of which I forgot to update - causing it to re-release 2.12.3.

Link to post
13 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Also, I love the https://www.loverslab.com/files/file/13653-kziitd-feitsh-set-bdsm-maid-for-dd-enru/ - makes perfect sense. Alas DD5 though...

I like the idea of the other kziitd clean-up you did, but like the original, there is a confusing mass of files and I just look at it and think it will take too long to sort it all out.

 

 

I have concerns with using that for the maid idea (Assuming that's what it's in relation to). Namely that there doesn't appear to be a CBBE SE conversion for the outfit, and there's a good number of us I think that do play SE. :(

Obviously, there's always the chance someone will convert it by the time you even reach that point, but in the mean time, it's my opinion that it would alienate less mod users if an alternative was considered.

Link to post

It'd be a nice luxury feature to let the player define the maid outfit in the MCM - something like "register current outfit as maid outfit". Different people have different tastes, and different playthroughs can go for different flavours as well. It also means there's no "maintain dependencies" headache for @Lupine00. If I want (for example) a 3BA HDT-SMP sexy Santa-Claus outfit for my maid outfit (I don't, but say I did), it's up to me find it, include it in my load order and register it. No need to bother anyone else about it.

 

Personally I'm not super interested in anime-style maid sex-uniforms (while acknowledging that they're great for some people), but I can see myself enjoying this feature immensely - especially if I can fine tune the uniform to suit my interests at any given moment (which mostly would tend towards "lore friendly" outfits whether highly sexualized or not).

Link to post
2 minutes ago, Anunya said:

It'd be a nice luxury feature to let the player define the maid outfit in the MCM - something like "register current outfit as maid outfit". Different people have different tastes, and different playthroughs can go for different flavours as well. It also means there's no "maintain dependencies" headache for @Lupine00. If I want (for example) a 3BA HDT-SMP sexy Santa-Claus outfit for my maid outfit (I don't, but say I did), it's up to me find it, include it in my load order and register it. No need to bother anyone else about it.

 

Personally I'm not super interested in anime-style maid sex-uniforms (while acknowledging that they're great for some people), but I can see myself enjoying this feature immensely - especially if I can fine tune the uniform to suit my interests at any given moment (which mostly would tend towards "lore friendly" outfits whether highly sexualized or not).

100% this. I can probably find a suitable outfit for my tastes if I have to register it myself in the MCM, but if it's a predefined outfit, then that means that entire part of DF hinges on another creator's work, and if they don't play SE for example, or there are genuine incompatibilities due to changes in other mods, then that has the potential to lock players out of otherwise amazing content.

Link to post
11 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Given that the only responses to this have been DO NOT LIKE,

 

OK - well just to buck the trend: "LIKE" (although can see why no like folks would want a toggle)

Link to post
7 minutes ago, Bane Master said:

 

OK - well just to buck the trend: "LIKE" (although can see why no like folks would want a toggle)

I do like the idea of the dismissal restriction as an optional feature. I would add that I feel it should be something tied to willpower. If you're out in the wild, or in a dungeon, it makes sense the follower wouldn't want to leave the player character all on his/her own. Why pass up the chance for more money or for more control over the player character? If he/she dies, then there go both options.

Link to post

Hi,

 

Can you please tell me if there is a way to reduce the number of times our PC says I am a slut?

 

I had to talk to an NPC more than 15 times before I could talk to him with the standard functions. (Deal Slut part 1)

 

Thank you

Link to post
3 hours ago, lcewolf said:

Can you please tell me if there is a way to reduce the number of times our PC says I am a slut?

Is this with the "real" 2.13.4 ?

 

If so, what was the exact dialog your character used, and what was the dialog that NPCs responded to you with?

 

But even with older (recent) versions, there are mechanics to prevent this scenario, and I went over them again yesterday and saw no sign of them being broken except in the one case where you could get a lot of sex events.

Link to post
5 hours ago, keitsoru said:

I have concerns with using that for the maid idea (Assuming that's what it's in relation to).

Might have jumped the gun a bit on that one. I was simply commenting that he did a great job making something that is analogous to the Aradia rogue set, in that it adds DD features to a non-DD outfit in a way that makes sense. It's also very non-standard in its approach, and designed to fill a specific need of not triggering or clashing with any "real" clothes slots.

 

I didn't mean to suggest it was intended for use in the (still a future plan) maid deal.

 

If I like a mod, it doesn't mean it will be a DF feature. I like Pama's crucifixes, but I'm not going to implement a system for you to execute followers, or for them to execute you... Or even install the mod in my game unless some other mod makes use of it for something other than revenge on NPCs. (That said, if I could use it to murderize every one of those pirates from Devious Cidhna...)

 

People raise a good point about maid outfits though. I can't see that feature making sense if it's bound to one specific maid outfit.

There are lots of maid outfits and everyone has their preferred versions.

Nor do I want to spend months chasing creators for permission to bundle 27 different outfits.

I rather like the one that is used in CD myself. There are newer and higher polygon alternatives, but a remake of that with SMP would be nice... for something.

 

The maid deal would definitely need a way for a player to set whatever maid outfit they like. By that point, the ability to define (and keyword) an outfit spread across arbitrary slots might be a generic feature of SLAX. But it's also logical that it could be like custom whore armor, that you set up prior to running Skyrim.

 

But the maid deal concept is only partially about the outfit anyway, it's more about the tasks you perform - about performing mundane chores for the follower, having certain dialogs, and behaving as a servant.

Link to post
5 hours ago, keitsoru said:

I do like the idea of the dismissal restriction as an optional feature. I would add that I feel it should be something tied to willpower. If you're out in the wild, or in a dungeon, it makes sense the follower wouldn't want to leave the player character all on his/her own. Why pass up the chance for more money or for more control over the player character? If he/she dies, then there go both options.

Discussing how to make this feature add more value is way more helpful than twenty paragraphs on why it needs more player control - which believe it or not - is a function I want it to have.

 

I lost a day to ESP corruption, delaying bug fixes I wanted to get out quickly.

Then I had a limited window of time yesterday to release the new update.

And time pressures lead to compromises ... or mistakes ...

 

That feature was already "in" but without MCM support. I could choose to delay the release another day and put out the more complete version, or I could release what seemed to me to be a perfectly good and functional version and get out the bug fixes ASAP - it would give people a chance to try that feature for real and see how it impacted their game. I wanted something in the release beyond pure bug fixes, so there would be some tiny piece of novelty to experience.

 

I didn't want people to have to wait longer for those bug fixes. Not being able to leave slavery seemed ... important.

Spoiler

 

Possibly, I could have removed the incomplete dismissal feature before release, but it didn't seem that important.

I don't really agree that there are stability requirements that mean you must release followers in empty cells or their home location.

If you have an issue with lost followers (and I've lost plenty) you would likely already know how to deal with that when it occurs - which it will whether you dismiss them or not.

 

And if your game is so brittle that running any scripts is a fraught undertaking, I have little confidence that many other things DF does are safe for you to use.

If you have genuine concerns about script-load breaking follower dismissals, then you need to rethink what you're doing with your game. It's not a sustainable scenario. If you can't reliably run scripts in your city exteriors, your game is already broken, and dragging me into the anger phase of your grieving process isn't helping get better features in DF.

 

 

 

Here's what I want to do with that feature so far:

Spoiler

 

1) add a list of extra locations within the city that are dismiss-OK: the inns, and similar locations (Drunken Huntsman) where followers commonly hang out to be recruited, and vanilla player homes.

2) add some dialog that explains why you can't dismiss the follower.

3) add an MCM control for the feature of some kind.

 

Rather than simply on/off, it might be nice to have the option of linking it to willpower/follower-lives/boredom, so options would be OFF/ALWAYS/CONDITIONAL.

 

 

Being able to "drop a follower at their home" would be nice. But I'm not sure how to determine a follower's current home reliably.

It's easy enough to make them want to be in a location, but I don't think there's any way to know about other packages they might have that could make them do stuff. Some followers have built-in wander mechanics of their own and a quest tracker you can use to find them.

 

Nightgate Inn and Riverwood are two places you often find followers. I'd like to allow dismissal there with some kind of limitation. (See below).

 

There are other features that are related, but different, that might be interesting alternatives.

For example, what if there were an option where paying a toll (one way, or another) set at least a day of remaining contract?

It would have an even stronger impact, but wouldn't limit dismissal location at all in any strict sense.

It would make dismissal restriction based on location unnecessary.

 

 

As I'm about to look at license mechanics for SLS, that might be a way to solve some problems.

If the follower manages your licenses, then dismissing them likely leaves you devoid of licenses.

If the way a new follower obtains licenses for you is restricted in some way it might make dismissing your escort a really dumb and costly move.

 

In that case, the dismissal restriction feature might not make any sense, except for immersion, in which case it might not be worth keeping in at all?

I think this is simpler to implement than the toll-minimum-contract mechanic too.

 

 

This circles back to the issue of dumping and re-hiring followers to reset boredom.

Spoiler

 

Even if I make boredom a persistent follower property - so you would need to change follower to reset boredom - it's still rather easy to dodge boredom that way.

I have maybe ten followers available in Riverwood, just cycling through them would make boredom irrelevant for most of a game without even visiting any of the other locations followers hang out.

 

Though, in my games, I almost never manage to dismiss a DF. It's something I can't really do anyway, and I imagined most people have a similar situation.

Boromir: "One does not simply pay-off a Devious Follower."

When you have the cash to pay them, you usually want them around, and when you don't have the cash, you can't get rid of them anyway.

Apparently not. It seems some people change DFs like they change their underwear.

But boredom does give an incentive to cycle them when you can afford it, and I'm not entirely happy with something so artificial.

 

 

Maybe some kind of familiarity stat is required, so that it's (potentially) better to stick with a follower if you can keep the boredom under control?

 

Some random thoughts on that - what could familiarity do?

 

Spoiler

 

  • sometimes reduce or skip a punishment debt (more chance if more familiar)
  • sometimes allow daily deal chores to roll over to the next day
  • let you sometimes refuse a specific deal offering for free, or more cheaply
  • let you volunteer for modular deals of your choice - typically easier ones
  • enable the time-off feature that is way down the track right now
  • get bonus follower lives
  • cheaper device removal
  • bigger/better gambling outcomes
  • better key-game terms
  • less obstructive gold control
  • increase resistance losses when the follower is near (because you're used to submitting to them) - or maybe just harder to lose resistance fatigue?
  • unlock unique games/content

 

Familiarity is way down the track too, so having a design that connects it to time-off isn't completely ridiculous.

 

 

Link to post
46 minutes ago, Lupine00 said:

Maybe some kind of familiarity stat is required, so that it's (potentially) better to stick with a follower if you can keep the boredom under control?

 

Some random thoughts on that - what could familiarity do?

I like the idea of a familiarity stat.  In general I enjoy when the PC is baited along rather than being straight forced.  I'm not sure the perks of familiarity should be related to making the DF easier to manage though.  It seems like it would make for a bit of a MCM balancing hell where it is difficult to find that perfect DF is helpful>DF is enslaving transition.  Boredom does a great job of making it so you can set a modest pay scale for the DF and then no matter what they eventually overwhelm you.  

 

What about buffs for the follower?  It could be as simple as boosts to the followers combat strength (maybe even let the player pick the perks?).  As the PC weakens due to deals the follower gets stronger and makes up for the deficit.  The PC becomes more and more reliant on the DF the more familiar they are. 

Link to post
47 minutes ago, Darkwing241 said:

What about buffs for the follower?  It could be as simple as boosts to the followers combat strength (maybe even let the player pick the perks?).  As the PC weakens due to deals the follower gets stronger and makes up for the deficit.  The PC becomes more and more reliant on the DF the more familiar they are. 

This might be a bit hard to balance.

In theory it's a good idea, but the starting point for different followers is so disparate.

A character like Yuriana makes any encounter into easy mode, and that's if you turn off half her (over-)powers, while followers I use a lot, like Bora, are ... relatively pathetic.

Buffing the former does nothing meaningful, while the latter would make a difference, but not as much difference as simply getting a different follower.

 

It's not to say it invalidates the idea, but it certainly works better when you can control all the pieces, and you never can in modded Skyrim.

 

 

As the benefits (as I see them) of familiarity should and could be relatively modest, so I doubt you'd needs more than a selector with three levels of impact in the MCM.

Adding a couple of extra lives (for example) changes comparatively little, except for people that tuned their lives super-low to start with (which rarely works well, because followers are so stupid).

Or being able to evade a percentage of a punishment debt once a day simply partially mitigates that one time you forgot to offer sex or something.

Those are (I think) plausible examples of modest benefits that wouldn't change a lot, but you'd still want them.

 

Being able to gamble for more is a double-edged sword.

Gold controls draining less limit on location change depends a lot on other factors, but ultimately you're still in gold control.

And so on.

 

It's hard to be sure something won't have unintended consequences, but what are the obvious pitfalls? Those can be avoided.

Link to post
12 minutes ago, Lupine00 said:

This might be a bit hard to balance.

In theory it's a good idea, but the starting point for different followers is so disparate.

A character like Yuriana makes any encounter into easy mode, and that's if you turn off half her (over-)powers, while followers I use a lot, like Bora, are ... relatively pathetic.

Buffing the former does nothing meaningful, while the latter would make a difference, but not as much difference as simply getting a different follower.

 

It's not to say it invalidates the idea, but it certainly works better when you can control all the pieces, and you never can in modded Skyrim.

 

 

As the benefits (as I see them) of familiarity should and could be relatively modest, so I doubt you'd needs more than a selector with three levels of impact in the MCM.

Adding a couple of extra lives (for example) changes comparatively little, except for people that tuned their lives super-low to start with (which rarely works well, because followers are so stupid).

Or being able to evade a percentage of a punishment debt once a day simply partially mitigates that one time you forgot to offer sex or something.

Those are (I think) plausible examples of modest benefits that wouldn't change a lot, but you'd still want them.

 

Being able to gamble for more is a double-edged sword.

Gold controls draining less limit on location change depends a lot on other factors, but ultimately you're still in gold control.

And so on.

 

It's hard to be sure something won't have unintended consequences, but what are the obvious pitfalls? Those can be avoided.

I think honestly, it's good to come back to a point you've made in the past when discussing the different BDSM/slavery mods out there. That being rewarding/punishing the player, versus rewarding/punishing the player character. Why do people use Devious Followers?

Obviously, the answer to that question will vary from player to player. However, I think the overwhelming consensus is going to be they use Devious Followers to gradually put their character in BDSM scenarios. The ultimate destination for a lot of people is making the PC in to a debt slave, beholden to their follower's whims. Rewarding or punishing the PC in this context is irrelevant obviously, as it's not the PC choosing to switch followers. It's the player.

As for ways to reward the player for sticking with an individual follower... honestly any way I can think of runs in to the same problem. You can't account for every player's tastes, and you can't account for the specifics of every follower.

Another way to go about it might be to trade the carrot for the rod. Maybe as the PC goes along his/her journey, a reputation builds. If the PC has regularly had to enter in to deals, or has had long lapses in payment, maybe a completely different follower won't want to just go along with the PC without any payment up front first? Whether that be in gold or in deals. If gold, it means the player has to set aside funds to switch followers. Followers with familiarity, meanwhile, will allow you to come back to them with no cost upfront, at least for a time. (That would depend if you even want to bother with the effort of coding in a decay system for familiarity.) On the other hand, if it's deals, there could potentially be narrative context given around the deal chosen. "I don't want you trying to run off without paying me, so you get to wear this hobble dress". Or it could be shackles, or anything really to inhibit the PC's movement for a time. This punishes the player for a time (likely a duration configurable in the MCM), and then the Devious Follower lets the PC out of the initial deal free of charge, and business resumes as normal.

Of course, then you run in to the quandary of players not enjoying being penalized for playing musical followers. So, you'd still want it to be togglable, even if the whole point is to mitigate the player's ability to game the system.

Link to post
46 minutes ago, keitsoru said:

Why do people use Devious Followers? Obviously, the answer to that question will vary from player to player. However, I think the overwhelming consensus is going to be they use Devious Followers to gradually put their character in BDSM scenarios.

 

I am probably in the minority, but I use a devious follower very similarly to how I use a SubLola master.

 

I deliberately choose a follower to be devious, meaning that I always exclude a follower from being devious before recruiting them unless I want that particular follower to be devious.

 

Then immediately after recruiting the devious follower, I spend about 30 minutes or so on dialogue agreeing to all the specific deals that I want to experience with that follower.

 

That is why I have asked @Lupine00 to consider a new MCM mechanism to make all the deal activities separately available in non-deal format, simply as actions or events that the devious follower would do, just like how SubLola works.

Link to post
20 minutes ago, Herowynne said:

 

I am probably in the minority, but I use a devious follower very similarly to how I use a SubLola master.

 

I deliberately choose a follower to be devious, meaning that I always exclude a follower from being devious before recruiting them unless I want that particular follower to be devious.

 

Then immediately after recruiting the devious follower, I spend about 30 minutes or so on dialogue agreeing to all the specific deals that I want to experience with that follower.

 

That is why I have asked @Lupine00 to consider a new MCM mechanism to make all the deal activities separately available in non-deal format, simply as actions or events that the devious follower would do, just like how SubLola works.

Oh, believe me, I wasn't trying to invalidate anyone else's way of utilizing the mod, I'm just going off of the general purpose of it for users, based on what I've seen.

I agree it would be good to have at least some of the deals available as games, though then that brings with it the question of how to truly differentiate the game versions, and the deals. Yes, giving the ability to toggle each modular deal to one or the other allows you to pick and choose, but I think personally what I'd love to see are less extreme versions of some deals handled as games, until the actual deal finally comes up. Example: The "I'm a Slut" deal could come in to play in a variant where the follower walks up and implies something about the PC, and at high willpower, maybe there's the option to say what the Devious Follower is saying is a blatant lie. On the other hand, at lower willpower, all you can really do is agree and let it go.

That's just an idea off the top of my head, but I think the idea of sprinkling in a few more less intrusive games at low debt, and high willpower, could be a very good one.

Link to post

I tend to play Devious Followers rather "monogamously", that is I try to stick with one follower for the long haul - I don't use the minimum contract option (just in case I need to terminate the follower for meta reasons) but I play as if it's on, because that's where DFC truly shines - the sensation of slowly sinking in quicksand over the course of many, many hours.

 

When I think about which follower to run with for a particular playthrough I think about the arc I'd like to experience. Is it a lovestruck girl falling under the spell of a handsome bard? An orphan latching on to a father figure? A proud fugitive being semi-blackmailed by a local with connections? It's always about the very particular relationship these two characters have with one another.

 

So I have to say I've never thought much about the mechanical advantage of swapping out followers regularly, because swapping DFs mid-game almost feels like "lost progress" in a way.

 

I do like Darkwing241's idea of buffing long-term DFs in combat as a carrot. Playing as a pure support (ie healing and buffing only), I find that followers that scale with the player have a tendency to fall off in combat effectiveness because as you level, the game's combat balance assumes you're not only more powerful but also fight smarter with a larger arsenal of skills. But of course the follower AI at level 40 will fight as idiotically as it did at level 5. Certainly modded followers can have power levels that are all over the place, but balancing with vanilla and vanilla-adjacent followers in mind seems like a reasonable lodestar.

 

Plus I like the idea of a DF becoming more powerful from a thematic POV as it mirrors their growing psychological dominance over you.

Link to post
4 hours ago, keitsoru said:

If the PC has regularly had to enter in to deals, or has had long lapses in payment, maybe a completely different follower won't want to just go along with the PC without any payment up front first?

That's a good idea, and it could tie in to a compulsory minimum contract too.

As familiarity is probably a good way off, I'll put some notes in the roadmap.

 

 

3 hours ago, Herowynne said:

That is why I have asked @Lupine00 to consider a new MCM mechanism to make all the deal activities separately available in non-deal format, simply as actions or events that the devious follower would do, just like how SubLola works.

Now you've explained what you do, I "get" it.

 

It's still the case that DF was written to do deals a certain way, and though I have made some changes in how you get them, the function of the deals is done the same way it always was. They're still enforced by dialogs that are checking a lot of hard-wired-in conditions, and a majority of the dialogs are written in terms of deals and compliance. It's often awkward to see how they'd work without debt, because DF only enforces compliance via debt.

 

SLTR enforces compliance with added slavery days, or beatings, or forcing devices onto you, or taking your stuff, or lost submission (that can potentially block you from leaving slavery).

If you enable keep forever in SLTR, it loses some of its teeth, because adding days is not an option any longer, and low submission merely excludes you from events in most cases. It wasn't designed for keeping an unwilling PC in indefinite slavery (we can safely assume the player is always somewhat willing). SL was originally all about voluntary submission and wanting to pursue that life. There's a little bit of a split personality going on there now, though nothing you can't ignore if you're willing.

 

Moving DF away from a deal-driven mentality would be quite a large task. Just like the idea of willing submission being in all the old SL dialogs, the idea of deal compliance and debt as punishment is central to the DF dialogs.

 

I can add a debug feature that would give a faster way to do what you do though... but maybe I have a better idea?

 

 

Some kind of hybrid approach could work, where if you meet the criteria, DFC gives out deals much more aggressively than normal forced deals.

 

e.g. If you have more debt than the value of a single deal, you're automatically given a deal to pay it off - without having to ask for that deal, or cross the enslavement debt threshold.

 

That could be tied to willpower.

 

I'm thinking you set a "Forced debt-reduction willpower" ...

 

Set it to -1 and you never get an auto deal.

Set it to 6, and as soon as you have willpower <= 6, the follower shifts into auto-deal mode.

Set it to 10, and you can get them as soon as you have enough debt - with a mercenary, that could be right away.

 

If you meet the willpower condition, if you have debt >= value of a deal, you are simply given a deal.

Then, if you set your deal value low, you will easily get a lot of deals.

 

What other conditions might play into this?

Maybe if you're wearing a collar, or heavy bondage, that's enough to enable it too?

Maybe add a 'naked adjustment' that raises the required threshold willpower by one.

Other ideas?

 

 

It really is pretty easy to do. There is some busy work to make the dialogs announce your deal, but I might be able to re-use the forced device deals branch. (Looked at this, I can, but it is certainly a bit of a hack, not sure if it's better just to make new dialogs).

 

I'm also thinking that it would use blocking dialog to trigger the deal assignment instead of a forcegreet, so you can easily avoid it at critical moments in dungeons, but that might not be a great idea. A forcegreet is probably fine, maybe with a condition that it doesn't happen in dungeons.

 

 

And in terms of toggles? Yes, this, and behaviors associated with familiarity would need MCM controls.

I hate it when some mod adds a feature that can't be disabled that easily could have been made optional.

 

I already wrote the MCM option for the follower dismissal - it's not as if I was ever not going to do that unless I simply removed the feature.

I think the dismissal restriction feature is worth keeping, as with the optional willpower mode it's still immersive even if you don't use SLS, and is still worth having for those people who don't use licenses in SLS, or SLS at all.

 

I like this enough that it could go in after license support... But for me, license support is the most important thing to make the follower relationship make sense immersively.

My poor poverty stricken characters cannot afford licenses without borrowing off the follower anyway.

The existing way to do this is just so tedious and doesn't feel "right" either.

Link to post

e.g. If you have more debt than the value of a single deal, you're automatically given a deal to pay it off - without having to ask for that deal, or cross the enslavement debt threshold.

 

I like this idea, though I think it would make sense to somehow tie it in to boredom. Boredom is made out to be this driving mechanic, but in the end, as long as you keep things under control (e.g. paying your debts, regularly sleeping, paying priests), it's hardly an issue. I did notice with a collar equipped to comply with the lack of Freedom License in SLS, that caused the DF to act as if the Slut Deal was active and tell NPCs to "fuck her slave". Though, that seemed to be a bug with the previous version, that judging by previous posts, you've since addressed.

It never did make sense to me that if boredom is this thing to be mindful of, you still have to go and ask the follower to give you a deal. I feel like at a certain threshold (combined with debt and willpower), they would just insist on forcing a deal on you.

Link to post

Thanks again for the great mod. Just a few ideas to make followers more devious when using them to kill enemies: 1) a follower can refuse to go into a dangerous dungeon / place without additional payment; 2) a follower can suddenly stop fighting enemies and offer them PC's body to "rest" a bit; 3) some mechanic to share profit from looted enemies with a follower, because it feels too "easy" to just loot everyone and get all the gold.

 

Also a random question (sorry if it's too off-topic): is there a way/mod to replace default female followers in Skyrim? I'm also using SL Survival and only male followers make much more sense to me. I had to hire a female follower to get out of Whiterun and she wasn't very useful.

Link to post
1 hour ago, Vigor said:

Also a random question (sorry if it's too off-topic): is there a way/mod to replace default female followers in Skyrim? I'm also using SL Survival and only male followers make much more sense to me. I had to hire a female follower to get out of Whiterun and she wasn't very useful.

Male followers are in short supply.

For every one I think there are fifty females.

 

There's this: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/17163/

Replacing Jenassa seems sort of plausible, but I don't know of a mod to make her male. Even VectorPlexus doesn't seem to have one.

 

I guess you could do it yourself. A follower mod is an easy place to start.

 

 

  

1 hour ago, Vigor said:

1) a follower can refuse to go into a dangerous dungeon / place without additional payment; 2) a follower can suddenly stop fighting enemies and offer them PC's body to "rest" a bit; 3) some mechanic to share profit from looted enemies with a follower, because it feels too "easy" to just loot everyone and get all the gold.

1) Would be nice, but I don't really know how I would do it. How do I even know you're about to go in? I could know you have gone, so maybe that part can be solved. Some players would see the follower waiting at the entrance a convenience feature though - no stupid follower in the way. Not all of course.

I don't rule this out. it could work.

 

2) That requires doing something correctly that defeat and other combat rape mods all struggle with. If I could do that, I'd make a defeat mod first - then add it to DF - I don't really want to do it right now. Maybe eventually.

 

3) NFF will do cash splitting for you, but it's not that great really.

I thought this is a redundant feature, because you aren't getting all the gold, the follower charges you for their help, and if you want them to charge more, or more randomly, DFC already has those features.

 

But on reflection, it's really just a loot divider. So, for people who don't use a scarcity mod, it might be useful. For me, getting any loot is hard, splitting it would make the game silly, but as a lightweight scarcity alternative, it could be useful for people who don't have a bunch of factors sabotaging their income I guess.

Link to post

3) NFF will do cash splitting for you, but it's not that great really.



I thought this is a redundant feature, because you aren't getting all the gold, the follower charges you for their help, and if you want them to charge more, or more randomly, DFC already has those features.

 

I feel as though while this may seem redundant at lower debt, at higher debt and lower willpower, it would make sense. My understanding is the Devious Follower is already set to steal items from you on occasion, but it makes sense they'd cut to the chase and demand a share. "Hey, you owe me a lot of money, and I'm putting my life on the line, so I'd like a share of what we find in here."

Link to post

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...