Devious Followers - Continued

[Hex Bolt]

21 minutes ago, Buridan said:

When the follower equips pony mittens on you and when confronted says "head to the nearest stables and I'll take these off for you", what counts as "stables" in this context?

Lozeak once said, "...is really hard to detect a multiple different locations in Skyrim so that quest looks for a town keyword then when you trigger the yes it looks for an NPC named 'Horse".  Unless that has changed, you must be on the road just to the NE of Katla's Farm to be in an area with a city keyword.  Try it on that road between the carriage driver and the farm.

[SacredDatura]

10 minutes ago, HexBolt8 said:

Lozeak once said, "...is really hard to detect a multiple different locations in Skyrim so that quest looks for a town keyword then when you trigger the yes it looks for an NPC named 'Horse".  Unless that has changed, you must be on the road just to the NE of Katla's Farm to be in an area with a city keyword.  Try it on that road between the carriage driver and the farm.

That's it, thank you!

[Corsayr]

1 hour ago, Buridan said:

When the follower equips pony mittens on you and when confronted says "head to the nearest stables and I'll take these off for you", what counts as "stables" in this context? I'm around Solitude so I assumed that was Katla's Farm outside the town (it has a horseshoe map icon). I've tried being in the horse stall beside the horse itself as well as being in the interior called "Solitude Stables" before speaking to my follower, nothing seems to advance this mini-quest.

 

Are there any requirements I'm missing? I can't seem to find any information about this.

 

edit: okay, solved it. coc'd over to a couple of other holds' stables (Whiterun Stables, Riften Stables etc) and the quest proceeds. Seems like Katla's Farm specifically is not included.

 

2nd edit: for future people coming in from google, Hexbolt8 below has the right solution. Also, the carriage horse doesn't count as a horse for the purpose of this quest.

The stable in solitude has always been a no go. I think cuz as hexbolt says it needs to be closer to a town. I would expect that Windhelm is also problematic... 

 

 

[Guest]

Rather than relying on locations, wouldn't setting up a trigger zone over the stables work more reliably?

[Hex Bolt]

A trigger zone would work but it's a bit intrusive, modifying a vanilla cell, and it wouldn't catch stables added by other mods.  I haven't looked at the code, but it might be enough to extend the match criteria to include KatlasFarmLocation (and the location of any other problem areas).

[Monoman1]

Maybe just add a couple of horses in strategic positions?

Might have to make em essential to avoid accidents. 

[Lupine00]

5 hours ago, Darkwing241 said:

If you are looking for a way out of all that work, it's my opinion that modular deals aren't worth it.  They are vastly less interesting than the other deals.  The "DF story" just doesn't work as well when things occur in a random order. 

I don't think I could reasonably take that feature away without providing something else instead.

I guess there's also a certain desire to respect Lozeak's efforts as much as possible. Modular deals were the core feature of 2.X

 

If it had been my mod, I wouldn't have added them like that, but then again, I wouldn't have implemented the classic deals the way they are either.

 

And the problem here now, is how the classic deals are implemented - which makes them very laborious to work with. If you touch a single deal stage, you have to keep six or more dialogs in synch. Anything that impacts all deals impacts large number of dialogs.

 

Classic deals don't detect deal conflicts through code (as modular deals do) but through design - and that approach basically blocked adding any variety in how they were delivered. The modular deal approach is a lot easier to maintain. In fact, re-implementing the classic deals using an extension to the modular deal system might be a win - in some respects.

 

I've put a bit of effort into cleaning up some of the issues in modular deals. If they'd been coded to use an array to track states rather than arbitrary-named properties, they would a lot more efficient to interrogate. As it is, they aren't scaleable, but that could be fixed. The obstacle there is that to do it sensibly, it would likely require a new game - there wouldn't be an upgrade path for games in-play. 

 

If we set aside classic deals behaving badly, and stomping on modular deals - which they do - the main problems with modular deals now are:

• you aren't making a deal, because you can't negotiate, and,
• the in-game deal listing doesn't work for them.

 

On the flip-side. Classic deals still need implementing into the MCM status display. The two ways to learn about your deals is a pain.

In practice, the MCM display is more useful than the in-game approach because you can quickly look at the deal you care about.

The in-game approach is not very nice to use, with its sequence of pop-ups. If the goal was to be immersive, it isn't.

Clearly, if it exists, it should use dialog, and that's quite possible. I just don't feel like adding it just now  

 

So, a serious question:

• should the in-game deal inquiry mechanism be removed altogether?
• should the in-game deal inquiry mechanism be updated to support modular deals?
• should the in-game deal inquiry mechanism be replaced with a dialog system, where you have a topic for each deal in progress?

Before answering, assume I will fix the MCM stat display to support classic deals, as I feel that's actually useful. So, if the in-game mechanism were removed, you'll still have the info somewhere.

 

 

Addressing the other problem - modular deals don't let you refuse them - is something else again.

I have an idea that could be used for modular, or possibly for all deals, that would fix this.

 

 

Retrospective annulment:

 

Within a time period shortly after agreeing the deal (say five minutes real time), you can say:

 

"This <Wolf|Bear|Dragon|Skeever|Cabbage|Butt-Monkey> deal is ridiculous. I never agreed to this!"

 

And then based on your willpower, the follower responds...

 

"OK. I'll cancel that last change, but it will cost you a <amount> gold penalty."

  PC can choose Yes/No.

or

"Quiet now pet. Be honest. You did agree. It's a good thing one of us has a reliable memory.

No more trying to cheat me now, or I'll have to punish you."

 

This allows you to see what you get given as the modular deal, and get the same mechanic you would have done to refuse a regular deal: agree or take debt.

If the deal is cancelled, the debt relief for it is revoked, plus a penalty is added.

 

The only downside is that such a change is likely to push the PC into "We need to talk..." territory, and there needs to be mechanism to block giving the same deal right back to the player again when that happens. That's already an issue with classic deals. You can pay to refuse a deal, and then be offered it again, immediately, which feels like a scam.

 

 

I terms of implementation, it has some advantages over the classic deal negotiation, because it's easier to maintain.

However, the negotiation has an immersive aspect it would be a pity to lose.

[Lupine00]

2 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

Maybe just add a couple of horses in strategic positions?

Might have to make em essential to avoid accidents. 

I'm not even going to touch this horse issue until deals are sorted out.

 

For now, players just need to be aware it could be a long walk to a suitable stable.

That's part of the "fun".

 

The implementation of this mechanic is quite poor. Why should it only work at stables, for example?

Horses are detected by name, and it fails in other languages (I believe).

 

Horses should be detected by base object or faction. Name detection is just not reliable.

Trigger zones or cell edits appear completely unnecessary just to detect a horse.

 

I believe this can be made considerably more robust. Ignoring the wrong kind of horse is the niggling detail part.

We don't want the player messing with horses that are hitched up to wagons or carriages.

 

Spawning horses shouldn't be necessary and would probably make things excessively easy.

 

 

It's a low priority issue though, because most players will eventually find a horse that works, unless they're playing in German, in which case they never will?

[SacredDatura]

55 minutes ago, Lupine00 said:

So, a serious question:

• should the in-game deal inquiry mechanism be removed altogether?
• should the in-game deal inquiry mechanism be updated to support modular deals?
• should the in-game deal inquiry mechanism be replaced with a dialog system, where you have a topic for each deal in progress?

Before answering, assume I will fix the MCM stat display to support classic deals, as I feel that's actually useful. So, if the in-game mechanism were removed, you'll still have the info somewhere.

My personal preference is #3 (assuming by dialog system you mean having a conversation with the follower). At the very least, I don't think it should be removed to the MCM. Going into the MCM always feels like a break in gameplay so I tend to prefer... not doing that whenever possible.

 

48 minutes ago, Lupine00 said:

The implementation of this mechanic is quite poor. Why should it only work at stables, for example?

I actually loved this little detail, to be honest. It suggests what the follower has planned but doesn't spell it out, which in my case imbued the slow run to the stables with a kind of horrible anticipatory tension. If it works in most holds, why not just block the quest from triggering in holds where the stable is too far away (i.e. Solitude, maybe Windhelm)? (Assuming that's possible I mean.)

 

I would actually like more things like that where the follower is demanding you go to a certain mid-distance location. It inverts the usual dynamic where you're the one deciding where to go - one of the few freedoms a Devious Follower still allows the player by the late-game.

[Hex Bolt]

In regard to the deal inquiry, I'm kind of the opposite of Buridan.  I like to see everything laid out in the MCM.  I agree that it's a step out of the gameplay; it just doesn't bother me.  The dialog system would work too, though.  To please most people you'd probably need both systems.  The pop-ups though are in a middle ground that manages to fail to be convenient and fails to be immersive. 

 

I like the negotiation aspect of the classic deals.  Classic deals just seem overall better.  I understand the point though that the modular deals were the key feature of 2.x, as well as the desire to respect the original author's intent.  That said, how about a poll to see what players want?  If a large majority prefer just the classic deals, that could justify cutting the modular ones and simplifying.  And if not, you'd have good validation for fixing up and maintaining the modular deals. 

[slonez1]

Hello. I'm having a bit of an issue with this mod, hopefully someone can point me in the correct direction.  I've decided not to use a follower this playthrough, but i keep this mod in my load incase I change my mind, but most importantly, I enjoy the resistance and willpower losses.  Is this mod associated with the inn-sleeping cages? 

 

That's besides the point, actually.  My real problem is that when I'm low on Willpower/Resistance, a guard will stop me ask me where my master is and then cuff me with these Slave Cuffs, and follow me around.   I can't console remove them, and no other method I have tried will remove them.  I don't know how to get them off, can any one assist?

 

[Lupine00]

1 hour ago, HexBolt8 said:

If a large majority prefer just the classic deals, that could justify cutting the modular ones and simplifying.

I don't think that there's a huge win from stripping them completely.

More likely, modular deals could be set to all off by default and produce a warning when enabled.

 

 

But though fixing them will be a bit of pain, I'm no longer convinced it's best just to remove them.

I've already done a chunk of the work, so I think it is probably worth finishing it off.

Not in 2.11 though. I want to give people the fixes they can have ASAP.

 

 

I've held off adding new deals for a while now because I wanted to fix the main bugs first.

It's not that adding new content doesn't interest me. I really want to do it.

With a bit more work, modular deals can be made to interact properly with classic deals and have a valid willpower mechanic.

I think it will be useful.

 

It opens up a lot of possibilities when new deals are being created.

 

Modular deals don't have to be completely random and isolated. They can do quite a bit of processing during the selection process.

They could replicate classic deal-like deal chains, but with variations, or add enhancements to a classic deal you have.

 

e.g.

Spoiler

 

T1 modular deal: nipple piercings

+ alternatives - you can only get one of these

 |  T2 modular deal: nipple piercings upgraded to extreme shock edging version  

 |  T2 modular deal: nipple piercings upgraded to highly arousing version             

 |  T2 modular deal: nipple piercings sealed under chastity bra 

+ alternatives - get one

 |  T3 with every orgasm, nipple piercings cause breast growth (up to a defined limit) - only with arousing version

 |  T3 with every denied orgasm, nipple piercings cause breast growth (up to a defined limit) - only with edging version

 

It looks like a classic deal, but it has alternatives in the T2 stage and matching T3 variants. Classic deals cannot work like that. Not without a complete rewrite.

The only way a classic deal can do that is a completely different deal that excludes another.

 

Or...

 

T1 modular deal: vaginal piercings

 + alternatives - you can only get one of these

 |  T2 modular deal: vaginal piercings - requires you to have T2 extreme shock edging nipple piercings - adds extreme shock edging vaginal piercings

 |  T2 modular deal: vaginal plug with extreme shock edging

T3 modular deal: upgraded belt - only if you have classic belt deal (at level 2+), locks in classic belt deal for an extra month

 

Or...

T1 modular deal: better boots - only possible if you have boots from classic or modular deal - slave boots replaced with high-heeled kinky outfit boots

    Kinky boots count as regular slave boots, but look fancy, and give NPCs dialogs to comment on them. Comments damage willpower.

    Linked boot deal cannot be bought ought until you have bought out this deal.

 

T1 modular deal: better gloves - similar to above, but for gloves

 

T2 modular deal: better collar - similar to above, but replaces collar with one that obviously marks you as a slave. NPC behaviors adjust a little. Comments damage willpower, speech is impaired. Traders will only talk if you first ask DF for permission to trade in front of them, this also impairs willpower.

 

T3 modular deal: upgraded slut deal - only for those with the classic slut deal at level 3 and cum-pouring - you must now obtain horse cum for the follower on a regular basis

 

T3 modular deal: only available while minimum contract remaining, stops minimum contract from counting down

 

Or...

T1/2 modular deal: sleepy follower - follower must sleep 2 extra hours to refresh. There are three unique copies of this deal, potentially pushing follower sleep time up to 12 hours.

 

T1/2 modular deal: dirty talk - your follower insists you say filthy things about yourself before they will have any other conversation with you.

 

 

The above are in no way, proper/real deal designs or plans, it just shows what can be done if you don't have to write all the deal logic into dialog conditions.

 

Adding this sort of thing as classic deals would be impossible, and if altered to work in a classic way, labor intensive.

WIth the modular deals, you can focus on implementing the actual deal mechanics.

 

There are things I will definitely add as classics, and those are the things already planned, and they will be added before any other major deal extension project:

• introductory deal-set
• spanking-beating deal
• milk deal
• prostitution deal

Details already in the blog post for 2020 road map.

[Lupine00]

25 minutes ago, slonez1 said:

Is this mod associated with the inn-sleeping cages? 

No.

If you have inn sleeping cages, I want to know what mod they are from so I can get them!

Latest SD Cages maybe?

 

25 minutes ago, slonez1 said:

My real problem is that when I'm low on Willpower/Resistance, a guard will stop me ask me where my master is and then cuff me with these Slave Cuffs, and follow me around.   I can't console remove them, and no other method I have tried will remove them.  I don't know how to get them off, can any one assist?

Haha. You're living the life!

Awesome... working as intended  

 

You need to go to a potential follower, suitable to become a DF, and ask them to pretend to be your master.

Don't ditch the guard. You need him to unlock you.

If the follower plays along, there will be a scene and you will be released from the shackles, and have a nice new DF.

I suggest you save before talking to the follower so you can re-try, as sometimes the scene sticks and you don't get released properly.

 

You get rid of the DF by waiting out the minimum contract and then paying off all your debt, as usual.

There will not be anything odd about the DF. But as you're starting with almost no willpower, they're probably going to have fun with you.

 

 

If you don't like this happening, set your resistance to something huge, or disable all the mechanics you purposefully installed to take away your willpower.

You didn't think there wouldn't be any consequences for that, did you?  

 

But seriously, the thing I most want right now in my game are more consequences for low willpower, not necessarily from DF, but generally.

[slonez1]

Ok awesome. DF doesn't usually start up naturally for me. If I want to use it I have to recruit a follower, than use the debug to flip them to a DF.  I think maybe the scripts take a while to kick in, since they do sometimes flip to a DF after a day or two.  My worry is that since I'm not seeing this dialog option on my potential followers, it may be having the same issue.  Thank you for the suggestions, I will make sure to boost up my res and try more vanilla followers.

 

As for the cages, it could also be SL Survival.  Once, I went to Whiterun inn and Hulda wanted to charge 500g or i could sleep in the cage outside.  Unfortunately, that cage didn't exist and it kind of messed up the experience.  Since then, I've updated the mod (whatever one it is) and I see them at all the inns (except for WhIterun weirdly - but that may be related to JK's skyrim I use as well).  Anyhow, I haven't been able to recreate that scenario since.  

 

 

[Lupine00]

1 hour ago, slonez1 said:

DF doesn't usually start up naturally for me. If I want to use it I have to recruit a follower, than use the debug to flip them to a DF.

Failure to start is likely related to the sort of issue that was being talked about with SLS: prevention of Hello.

 

If you have a mod that interferes with Hello distance or angle, then it can block DF.

The mod To Your Face was hilighted as interfering - though for me, DF still worked OK with it in.

 

Normally, in the worst case you will get a Hello after leaving an interior and reapproaching the follower.

What that means in real terms is, you recruit a follower and they should give you the:

"I hope you don't try to cheat me..." hello next time you approach them.

 

You may or may not get straight into DF after that.

If not, you will still have a [Click me] dialog on the follower.

 

If you aren't getting that, and you haven't got something stopping the Hellos, your DF is probably broken.

A bad install, or a bad start could be responsible. It really isn't normal, and I'd consider it a warning sign.

 

DF will not work well if it can't Hello you.

 

 

To start the forced follower quest requires a Guard to Hello you, so you got at least one hello there.

 

1 hour ago, slonez1 said:

As for the cages, it could also be SL Survival.  Once, I went to Whiterun inn and Hulda wanted to charge 500g or i could sleep in the cage outside. 

I don't think that is SLS either.

I've never seen anything like that.

 

There was an old companion mod for DF called Devious World.

It increased the inn price and charged 25 to sleep in a cage, and the cages were sort of lethal to all your equipment, in a completely silly way.

Devious World was abandoned by Lozeak without ever getting out of alpha. I don't know if you can even download it now.

 

I have a copy, but I don't use it, and have no plans to revive it.

 

You're not running some old copy of DW are you?

I recommend you don't do that  

 

If you want to find out what mod it is, use the console to select the cage. Read the first two hex digits off the base object ID. That is the index of the owning mod. Look it up in your LO.

[Lupine00]

2.11 now released, replacing this beta.

 

Here's a new beta. 

 

 

 

Major fixing for modular deal / classic deal interaction.

It should be more or less sensible now.

The worst that happens is sometimes you get no deal.

 

I didn't update the languages files for this beta, so only use it in English.

I have one thing to test, and if no fresh reports, I'll fix the languages and release before the weekend.

 

Taking deals now costs a little resistance.

Getting a freebie deal costs more resistance, to compensate for the freebie a little.

 

Gold mode now requires > 0 willpower to ask for more gold and > 1 willpower to ask to leave gold control.

 

The deal display in the MCM is now complete for classic deals.

 

The optimize deals tickbox is removed, as they are now always "optimal" - which is some kind of code for "not crazy broken".

 

Some dialogue words were changed.

How the follower speaks to you depends more on willpower and less on deal count.

 

There *should* now be a way to get unbound without paying, if your follower bound you in town due to the slut deal.

 

Modular deal configuration is now a little more flexible. You can increase the number of deals if you already have deals, just can't decrease them - previously it was just completely locked.

 

All the old stuff from previous beta also applies:

 

• problem excluding ex-followers - should now be able to exclude ex-followers
• could not pay priests to reduce resistance fatigue unless they were also your DF - should be able to pay priests as intended
• added additional dialog if you don't have enough money to impress the priest
• tape-gag and regular-gag conflict - you shouldn't get these deals together now
• weird potion breaks scenes - weird potion weakness should not kick in mid-scene, or while on a horse, or in other silly places
• corruption of modular deal state - several fixes here
• modular deals - should not give crawl and bound in towns deal together
• failure to process the add-follower mod-event - should work now?

 

Also adds a button to restore player controls in the Debug menu.

 

 

There were several issues in modular deals:

1) attempting to enable/disable deals in the MCM with any deals in progress could corrupt the deal state

2) when there are no applicable deals, you could get no deal, but it would show as nothing in the MCM

3) when there were no valid deals, you could get a nonsensical deal

4) bound and crawling deal could be given together, creating an animation conflict

5) deal allocation and checking was unnecessarily slow

6) classic deals didn't check modular deal allocations for a clash - they now do

 

You can still run out of valid modular deals and be allocated nothing - a freebie basically - but at least you'll be able to tell now.

The fix for this is to add more deals that aren't easily invalidated by conflicts, which I will get to eventually.

The workaround for this is to avoid enabling too many modular deals, and avoiding disabling candidate modular deals.

Alternatively, do not mix modular and classic deals - because they can easily jam each other up.

If you go modular, go all modular and disable the classic deals, or most of them if there's one you really love.

If you prefer using classic deals, I suggest using only one modular deal. Two at most, and zero is better.

 

The add follower mod event should be fixed. Probably still broken. 

[slonez1]

Devious World, yes, that was something I ran with in my last install.  Good thinking!

[Hex Bolt]

Feature Idea:  Compulsory Training

 

Purpose:  Make paying off all debt and deals very difficult by purchasing skill training for the PC and charging it as debt.  Details below.

Spoiler

The DF approaches you and says, "Your Kung Fu is weak.  You're an embarrassment to the clan.  I have paid sensei to come down off the mountain to teach you the ancient ways."  Oops, wrong genre.  "Your ineptitude is going to get me killed.  So I have good news!  I've hired a trainer.  There were private tutoring costs but don't worry, you don't have to pay now.  I've added the entire expense to your debt."  Fade to black and you gain some skill training (no trainer actually appears).

 

If Training Control is toggled on (because escaping the DF will be hard with this feature) and the PC is not enslaved, the DF will buy a training session for you from time to time.  That will occur when you're eligible for training at your level, and close to paying off debt and all deals (taking into account deals near expiration).  The intent is to add debt to keep the PC from escaping, not to add a crushing burden when the PC is already struggling.

 

Compulsory training can be a real benefit to the PC, just as gold control relieves the player of having to remember to pay on time.  Since virtual trainers are conjured up as needed, this could actually save a lot of traveling to reach the one trainer who can teach that skill.  This is balanced by the "private tutoring" expenses (preferably configurable, but could be a flat percentage), and that all costs will be subject to interest. 

 

Ideally, the player should be able to select a small number of skills for compulsory training rather than have the mod try to choose (highest skill might not be such a good choice), and the DF will select a skill from that short list to maintain a little bit of surprise. 

 

The PC must have free training slots for the current level, and training should not exceed master level (90).  The DF should purchase multiple skill levels for a session when eligible and when the cost won't push the PC close to enslavement.  Keep pushing the PC down, but don't force her to fail.

 

The player might voluntarily request training if debt is not too high, rather than wait for the conditions to trigger.  That could be a good way to get training even at positive gold under gold control, when the DF won't grant enough gold for you to pay a trainer.  It could also be desirable if the trainers you need are too far away or quest locked -- assuming that the DF chooses the skill that you wanted. 

 

The DF wants you to be capable, and wants your gold.  Isn't it better to let the DF help you?  Of course it is.  

 

[Hex Bolt]

Alas, I think there's a technical hurdle with my training feature idea.  The "times trained this level" value doesn't seem to be available to scripts.  Not that I can find, anyway (I would like to be wrong about this).  If that's true, there's no way to check whether the PC is eligible for more training.  Of course this is special tutoring and it's bypassing the training menu anyway, but the feature would have to be careful about not unbalancing the game.  The total times trained in the game is available (Game.QueryStat("Training Sessions")), so DFC might track that and note when the PC levels up to figure out how many times the PC trained that level, but that doesn't sound fun to implement.  Easier to remember how much special tutoring you got this level and limit that.

[Darkwing241]

21 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

So, a serious question:

• should the in-game deal inquiry mechanism be removed altogether?
• should the in-game deal inquiry mechanism be updated to support modular deals?
• should the in-game deal inquiry mechanism be replaced with a dialog system, where you have a topic for each deal in progress?

 

 

I think a multi pronged attack is best, with "in game" being the most important

 

Talking about the rules is part of the kink.  I don't want to be clicking through dialogue all the time when I'm troubleshooting, but striking up a conversation with the DF is enjoyable.  Clicking an NPC in skyrim is supposed to give stuff to talk about and when you click the DF and they have nothing DF related to say... well it's disappointing.

 

An MCM menu definitely also has a place, it the easiest way to quickly look at informaton and has the advantage of feeling "out of character" and thus is a good place for "out of character" options like breaking deals for free, rerolling deals ect.  On occasion you get a deal you don't like or don't understand and you just want to get rid of it without tanking your game.  

 

I've pitch the idea before, but I still think the best way to give information on deals is to give a contract.  Have an in game "book" item.

-page 1 a general follower contract with some vague flavor dialogue, names, how pay works ect.  This page updates as things progress, maybe willpower changes cause an event that changes the wording of the contract to be more demeaning ect.

-page 2+ a page dedicated to each deal giving giving a thematic description of the deal as well as what you were given in exchange and then underneath in italics a more literal description of the gameplay effect.

-Additional pages to give reminded about more complicated games and events if needed

 

This would give the option to be much more verbose in your description of the deals.  It also is much faster than navigating dialogue and doesn't clutter the dialogue menu.  It's also a great opportunity for some small details, things like the name change in slaverun and SLS are super hot even if the only gameplay impact is a few letters changing on a piece of paper.

 

 

 

[Lupine00]

1 hour ago, HexBolt8 said:

The "times trained this level" value doesn't seem to be available to scripts.

You could lock real training to zero and then all training would have to go through DF.

 

As a concept, it doesn't sound as exciting as new deals, or follower driven quests, or follower personality types though.

 

I'm not even 100% sure about the immersive rationale for it.

 

People who use training as their main progression mechanism are a bit of a niche audience, and for everyone else, training is kind of unimportant.

 

It's an interesting idea for a slavery mod in general, but I'm not even sure it's 100% a DF appropriate. It seems like an idea that either wants its own mod, or fits into a general cash sinking/gameplay mod, like SLS.

 

The actual proposal, as a narrative, sounds great, but I think so much more needs to be done before there's a good place for it. 

I like the sound of a DF who appoints themselves as your "master" in a traditional trainer sense, or who you have to persuade to be your master, and having that character provide training in a skill area in return for ridiculous demands. But it might work better without so many devices and with more tasks ... i.e. a completely different mod with a completely different, non devious, focus. Or, it could lead to the idea of a "devious teacher" who sets challenges that are supposed to be about improving combat or magic, but which always seem to be about binding the PC in devious devices and having a lot of sex. Some of these things sort of exist in Slaverun, or ToH, or the old DD built-in quests, or Arngrim's Apprentice, etc, etc. so there's a pattern for them.

 

So, it sounds like there's plenty of possibility there, but DF is largely mapped out in terms of general direction for now: more deals, more impression of the follower taking charge, basic follower personality types / archetypes. improving the slavery experience, and boss-follower type scenarios. There's enough to keep me busy indefinitely there I should imagine.

 

Having addressed modular deals to the extent that 2.11 manages, I think the primary area of bugginess remaining in DF is around the scanner and sex-scene management. The latter is quite diffused throughout the code-base and will likely be an ongoing issue. The scanner is a specific thing that needs replacing at some point. It should be ... OK ... now, but I suspect the future is to get all that kind of scanning done to a high standard in SLAX, and then DF can simply use the SLAX results, avoiding any additional scans altogether.

[Lupine00]

22 minutes ago, Darkwing241 said:

This would give the option to be much more verbose in your description of the deals.  It also is much faster than navigating dialogue and doesn't clutter the dialogue menu.  It's also a great opportunity for some small details, things like the name change in slaverun and SLS are super hot even if the only gameplay impact is a few letters changing on a piece of paper.

Slaverun really was the champion of book generation.

 

I think it pushes the limits of the possible there. The obstacle is that you can't put much in the way of dynamic content into a book.

To handle different deals, without telegraphing the entire contents of the mod to the player, there would need to be quite a few books.

Slaverun produced a lot of books. Some players like them. Some never read them.

 

It's work to make them, and sort of annoying for the player to have them clogging their inventory. And then you get robbed and they're all gone anyway.

 

I could imagine creating a deal / scenario / game that was built around a book/contract letter, but as a general mechanism for informing the player I don't know how to make it work.

For that to progress, more detailed technical help is required  

Also, making those books is work...

 

I spent some time yesterday on fixing the MCM so it covers classic deals as well as modular ones, and if you play the 2.11 beta I think you'll be tempted to agree that few players are ever going to use the dialogue mechanism with the pop-up boxes once they have that MCM - even if they feel that deep-down the dialogue method would be better if only it was just ... real dialogue.

 

Making the follower explain the rules in real dialogue is ... just a chunk of work in a dialogue tree ... which is totally straightforward CK drudgery.

I'd like to have that feature, but I can live without it, and I suspect most players can too. It might make sense to revisit it when follower archetypes are a thing.

Right now, even that probably isn't valuable enough to give it a priority where it has any hope of getting done before TeS6 comes out  

It's nice, but not needed, and adds no gameplay if it's purely informative.

 

The issue of wanting more interesting chats with the follower is broader, but I think that ends up coming around to the archetype idea, follower quests, follower whims, and so on. Informing the PC of the deal rules is just a small part of that, and not the most exciting part.

[valcon767]

On 4/20/2020 at 9:57 AM, Buridan said:

3. Any suggestions for custom whore armor? The default ones don't fit on CBBE bodies.

 

as i have this mod in a merged mod (over 50 mods merged into 1) it took a bit to find the original.

 

[Lupine00]

8 hours ago, slonez1 said:

Devious World, yes, that was something I ran with in my last install.  Good thinking!

Devious World would be sort of useful, if the cages didn't have that crazy "destroy all your worn gear" mechanic that Lozeak cut-and-pasted off his dwarven gauntlets of annoyance - which did the exact same thing, and caused a certain amount of player rage, when a comedy trap item destroyed a set of armor that had taken two real days to craft or was the result of a week-long quest chain.

 

Really wants a system like PP for playing scenes while you're stuck in the cage though.

 

There might be scope to update it and use it as part of an optional deal-set or something. Just bluesky thinking now though.

[Lupine00]

17 minutes ago, valcon767 said:

as i have this mod in a merged mod (over 50 mods merged into 1) it took a bit to find the original.

I saw this posted somewhere else recently. As a general note, it's an old CBBE only mod.

 

I'm not sure what's in there. If there are no body models, and it has Bodyslide for CBBE, it might Bodyslide to UNP shapes too.

 

Armor is only specific to CBBE or UNP if it has a naked body in it, with exposed breasts, or it has no Bodyslide data and is only for a specific shape.

 

That's the cause of limitations with the UNP outfits in DF: they have bodies in, and while they can Bodyslide to CBBE shape, the mapping on the bodies is UNP  

 

DF includes the Bodyslide data, because you need to Bodyslide no matter your body shape, but those armors contains body-replacers.

 

The quality of Bodyslide setups varies wildly of course. Many supposed UUNP items work very poorly in practice on UUNP Special, or on any other body without the specific shape the original converter set up and tested.

 

The whore armor items in DF probably could have been made without bodies in. But they aren't. Deleting the bodies and changing the slots is possible, but they would not then be slot-32 items.

 

I can't recall if there's a trick to make them block slot-32 without rendering slot 32, but... I think there is...

 

If you make the Armor item use slot-32 plus the actual required slot, and you make the AA use only the actual required slot, I think it works.

Your normal 'naked' body is rendered, but the equipped item blocks any clothes or armor.

I think a lot of "fixed" bikini armor works like this?

 

Can anyone who does this all the time remember if that's right?