Devious Followers - Continued

[Lupine00]

1 hour ago, Rapin' Born said:

I am having trouble with the gold donations to priests, the dialogue option never shows up. Except once, but I was talking to my follower, so that was odd.

It's a known bug. It will be fixed in 2.12 - and actually tested this time.

[HexBolt8]

Feature Idea:  An option to add punishment debt whenever the DF enters bleedout, even if there are lives remaining.  If lives are zero, you get double punishment debt.

 

A separate but similar idea (if it's practical) is to charge several lives (and some sort of debt punishment) if the DF gets raped.  Regardless of the circumstances, it's your fault.

[HexBolt8]

19 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

I'm still pondering the idea of moving the high-level point to level 101, rather than 100, so you can easily calculate exact per-level values in your head.

Good idea.  So many level-based calculations are awkward because the starting level is 1, not 0.  99% of players probably won't do a manual calculation, but it's still beneficial.

 

19 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Or you can set a custom value.

Yes please.  I wasn't sure if setting a custom value was already in your plans, but it would be useful for players who love to tweak things.

 

In regard to gambling, etc., linking those to level scaling makes sense to me.  Gambling is special though (maybe you want to play for high stakes even at low levels) so you might have a configurable factor.  For example, the base values are scaled by level, then multiplied by the player's factor setting.  Set it once, then you can forget it.  To me, gold control credit to leave and the amount of extra gold you can ask for also make sense to scale by level, BUT at lower levels I often need to buy more things.  Therefore, level scaling for asking for more gold could be a fixed base amount plus a scaled amount, so it can start at a decent value and gradually increase.

[Lupine00]

8 hours ago, HexBolt8 said:

Therefore, level scaling for asking for more gold could be a fixed base amount plus a scaled amount, so it can start at a decent value and gradually increase.

I think the point of gold control is... OK two points:

1) it limits the amount you can spend, taking away your ability to buy expensive things you might like.

2) it limits the amount you can lose to theft.

 

The amount of money you "need" to carry doesn't change by level. It's always just a bit more than the price of a room.

 

I guess the fancy solution would be to have a percentage slider for it that blends between the fixed price and a scaled price, but it's just getting to be sliders for the sake of it.

Setting the fixed amount for gold control is sufficient, based on what I think it's used for. You can always change that, but I never find myself changing it.

 

Or does it serve some other purpose?

 

 

The gambling amount, I do tend to increase sometimes, to make it a bit more exciting. I suspect that at low levels gambling is important, because you don't have cash and consumables are expensive: you might desperately need to buy food, a book, some lockpicks, a license, a cure disease potion, or get your arms healed back.

 

The key game is probably a more persistent issue, and I think I haven't done anything to fix that. Probably needs attention. It should be level scaled, obviously.

 

At higher levels you are more likely to have player homes and stored gold and other luxuries, and the more cash you deal with day-to-day, the less gambling matters for anything. At those levels, licenses, healing amputations and consumables start to become small-change stuff. I've never considered gambling to buy a house or some other major item, but I suppose you could... There's no pressing need though, you'd be doing it simply because you like gambling.

[HexBolt8]

1 hour ago, Lupine00 said:

I think the point of gold control is... OK two points:

1) it limits the amount you can spend, taking away your ability to buy expensive things you might like.

2) it limits the amount you can lose to theft.

I suppose I'm not using gold control in the intended way, then.  Short answer:  as you said, I can just manually set the amount I want and I'm okay with that.  The longer answer is that I don't see gold control as something to be escaped from.  Once in, I tend to stay in even with a large credit.  It does limit theft, a major benefit, but I like that the DF is exerting control and being arbitrary with my "allowance", just as SLS quartermasters sometimes are contrary or don't have the desired license.  It's too interesting a feature not to use.  So I'll set it manually, not a big deal.

 

Good point on gambling.  I was trying to keep it relevant at high levels, but gambling itself is fairly pointless at that level, so yeah, no need to level-scale it. 

[Lupine00]

2 hours ago, HexBolt8 said:

I don't see gold control as something to be escaped from.

I don't necessarily see that either. (2) makes is somewhat advantageous, and it also optimizes your interest payments automatically for you, in that you always pay off as much debt as you can in time.

 

I'm still not fully understanding how you are using it, or rather why you want it to scale.

 

Do you frequently set gold control to quite large values and operate in gold control, even when you are buying expensive (1500 or 3500 gold) spells or impulse buying 2500 circlets just so you can disenchant them?

 

How is gold control impacting you, apart from the sense of the follower controlling the purse-strings?

[HexBolt8]

Once I get into gold control, I typically stay there, mainly for the sense that the follower is controlling the purse strings, and secondarily for theft protection.  If I want to buy training or a pricey item on a vendor, I need access to my credit.  I've acknowledged that I can just set the gold control settings manually.  My thought for scaling is that spending is generally higher as level increases, even for incidentals like ingredients, arrows, and crafting materials, and while the DF wants to exert control it's also in line with the DF's goals to let me spend my credit and risk falling into debt again (that point ventures into the murky waters of the DF's ultimate goal).  I tend to spend more on day to day expenses than just room cost as level increases, and opportunity purchases also become more expensive.  If that approach is unusual, I'm fine with manually adjusting the settings periodically.

[Lupine00]

1 hour ago, HexBolt8 said:

My thought for scaling is that spending is generally higher as level increases, even for incidentals like ingredients, arrows, and crafting materials, and while the DF wants to exert control it's also in line with the DF's goals to let me spend my credit and risk falling into debt again (that point ventures into the murky waters of the DF's ultimate goal).

Maybe what makes sense is for the "Ask for more gold" feature to work a bit differently?

 

Maybe the amount given if that is agreed should be scaled?

 

So normally, you are restricted to some fixed amount (e.g. 150 gold) but if you ask for more gold, you get some amount based off the daily rate and your current credit, possibly varying with willpower?

[Lupine00]

I made the "cost explorer" page, so now you can experiment with price values and see what they will be for all levels (in steps of 5).

If you don't want to know what your prices are going to be, you can not go to that page.

 

Just a bit of testing to do before an alpha (without any spanking) now.

[HexBolt8]

5 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Maybe the amount given if that is agreed should be scaled?

 

So normally, you are restricted to some fixed amount (e.g. 150 gold) but if you ask for more gold, you get some amount based off the daily rate and your current credit, possibly varying with willpower?

Yes, that would do it.  I don't remember how follower Lives factors into that (maybe it already does), but the amount given perhaps should be related to lives and not so much willpower since it's the follower's decision. 

[Lupine00]

Here's an alpha version to try:  .

If there are bugs in DF that bother you, now is the time to raise them!

This version doesn't have everything that I want in 2.12, I'm going to work on the spanking, boredom removal options, and additional tweaks to Expensive Deal, but I do not plan to do more at the things I think are done already unless somebody brings up an issue.

 

File deleted, as new alpha released.

[Guest]

On 12/13/2019 at 7:55 PM, Lupine00 said:

In terms of the "boss follower" fantasy ... my wish list for the vaguely possible ...

 

First, I see more than just one extra stage. I think the DF stages would be like this:

 

• PC leader
• Equal partners
• DF leader
• Indentured service
• Hardcore enslavement

 

 

Hey, I saw this and I was wondering if this is something that you are working on or is it more like, maybe someday if I get motivated and there is enough interest? This is exactly the kind of mod I am looking for. (Assuming it's a framework that works for a M player / F follower). I love the idea of DF, but since I run as a male, I tend to avoid DD mods and DF is clearly written for a F player. I've been looking for a decent option for a dominant / domineering / bossy female follower. Sadly there are none.

 

 

[Lupine00]

1 hour ago, bishlapped said:

DF is clearly written for a F player

DF has some nods to a male player. Not all the dialog is properly customized, but some is.

 

The real problem is that DD for Him is an unknown quantity.

 

1 hour ago, bishlapped said:

 I've been looking for a decent option for a dominant / domineering / bossy female follower. Sadly there are none.

Sasha in DCL has some elements of that, but you have to ask her. Also, DD ...

 

 

I'm not really working on dominant follower progression. Immediate plans are spanking, then SLD bug fix, then SLAX bug fix, then SLAX features, then SLD features then ... DF roadmap as planned. OK, those aren't even immediate plans, they're a vague direction. Immediate plan is spanking.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Lupine00 said:

DF has some nods to a male player. Not all the dialog is properly customized, but some is.

 

The real problem is that DD for Him is an unknown quantity.

 

Sasha in DCL has some elements of that, but you have to ask her. Also, DD ...

 

 

I'm not really working on dominant follower progression. Immediate plans are spanking, then SLD bug fix, then SLAX bug fix, then SLAX features, then SLD features then ... DF roadmap as planned. OK, those aren't even immediate plans, they're a vague direction. Immediate plan is spanking.

I tried it. I agreed to go into debt for Jenassa. Then I asked her about reducing debt and agreed to a "wolf" deal. She gave me armor that doesn't mesh with Males. I tried putting in something else but it didn't change. It looks like Iron armor with no feet.

[HexBolt8]

Thank you Lupine for the very nice work you did on chaos mode.  I never wanted to use it before, but now I think I might.

[Zaflis]

Few things i noticed in the previous (current release) version:

- Bound in cities deal didn't do anything. Is it supposed to add yoke or armbinder? There was "naked in cities" deal active as well same time, unsure if that's the conflict. She does remove clothes in cities as expected.

 

- After max deals is active at the time and refusing to wear something in the deals, she just keeps adding debt in a repeat. No new deals can be added either. Why would that matter to me if i can just remove all devices and keep playing as usual? Only thing is that gold may be low.

 

I'm almost sure that many of those current deals i had were not "level 3". Isn't she supposed to be able to upgrade them all to max levels at least?

It's odd that there's no concrete punishments for disobedience, other than the enslavement mode which i sometimes disable. Follower could:

- Forcefully put restraint on. If she has to go as far as that, these could be custom made heavy duty devices that only get removed once the deal is paid. They cannot be struggled out of or removed by npcs or keys. This shouldn't happen on first warning, but maybe on third.

- Or of course DD-Contraptions integration, but that's a bit bigger thing. I think it's stable mod to use at the moment, and future patches shouldn't mean any work for you unless you want to support more kinds of furnitures.

[Aldid]

3 hours ago, bishlapped said:

I tried it. I agreed to go into debt for Jenassa. Then I asked her about reducing debt and agreed to a "wolf" deal. She gave me armor that doesn't mesh with Males. I tried putting in something else but it didn't change. It looks like Iron armor with no feet.

That's the case for most people, since it's a UNP armour. To fix that you can find an armour you like, install it, and then follow the steps on the front page of the mod under "How to Install Custom Whore Armor".

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, Aldid said:

That's the case for most people, since it's a UNP armour. To fix that you can find an armour you like, install it, and then follow the steps on the front page of the mod under "How to Install Custom Whore Armor".

Alright, I will follow that and see if I can work with this mod. 

Thank you.

 

I just assumed that like every other DD mod, they are meant for Female only.

 

[Lupine00]

5 hours ago, bishlapped said:

tried it. I agreed to go into debt for Jenassa. Then I asked her about reducing debt and agreed to a "wolf" deal. She gave me armor that doesn't mesh with Males. I tried putting in something else but it didn't change. It looks like Iron armor with no feet.

If she gives you "whore armor" you would need to put in custom armor for males.

The instructions are on the front-page of the mod, and you need to tick the box to use custom armor.

 

I'm sure there's something lovely on Vector Plexus  

 

I think the biggest weak spot for males is the sex scene gender selection - there is no control there - it's something that bothers people with female characters too.

[Lupine00]

6 hours ago, Zaflis said:

- Bound in cities deal didn't do anything. Is it supposed to add yoke or armbinder? There was "naked in cities" deal active as well same time, unsure if that's the conflict. She does remove clothes in cities as expected.

Those deals are not conflicting. You can be bound and naked.

 

When I tested, those actions worked, but they were uneven timing-wise. Sometimes the follower would do it immediately you neared the city, other times it took them a long while to realize you were in town. On repeat testing it seemed to behave well and respond, so I couldn't diagnose a concrete problem. They aren't a recent change, but they are a long-standing piece of uneven behavior. I had hoped quest priorities were to blame. It seems not.

 

 

6 hours ago, Zaflis said:

- After max deals is active at the time and refusing to wear something in the deals, she just keeps adding debt in a repeat. No new deals can be added either. Why would that matter to me if i can just remove all devices and keep playing as usual? Only thing is that gold may be low.

I'm not sure I'm following the scenario here at all.

Can you explain in more detail?

 

If you run up massive debt.

If you're in endless mode, you should get forced into the heavy chains.

If you're not, you should be enslaved.

 

Were you in excess of enslavement debt?

Perhaps enslavement and abandon values are not being calculated (or set) correctly internally?

I'll test enslavement myself when I get time.

Another explanation is simply that enslavement or endless-mode punishment (and I don't know which mode you were in) was not enforced for some reason.

Clearly, it is supposed to be enforced.

 

 

6 hours ago, Zaflis said:

- Forcefully put restraint on. If she has to go as far as that, these could be custom made heavy duty devices that only get removed once the deal is paid. They cannot be struggled out of or removed by npcs or keys. This shouldn't happen on first warning, but maybe on third.

This is exactly how endless mode is designed to work.

 

Beyond that, you get dumped in the pit, in a collar, with no gear, and debts added in four major holds.

 

 

6 hours ago, Zaflis said:

- Or of course DD-Contraptions integration, but that's a bit bigger thing. I think it's stable mod to use at the moment, and future patches shouldn't mean any work for you unless you want to support more kinds of furnitures.

Probably not going anywhere near another Kimy endeavor in a million years. You know this already. What are you thinking?

[Guest]

33 minutes ago, Lupine00 said:

If she gives you "whore armor" you would need to put in custom armor for males.

The instructions are on the front-page of the mod, and you need to tick the box to use custom armor.

 

I'm sure there's something lovely on Vector Plexus  

 

I think the biggest weak spot for males is the sex scene gender selection - there is no control there - it's something that bothers people with female characters too.

Yeah, thanks to @Aldid, I created a chest piece in Outfit Studio using the Male SOS body mesh and the Shoulder Cape from Fur Armor set. I got past that. But I can already see it. Why I never use DD(FH). Coming out of Helgen on my way to Riverwood, I get CTD on crossing into the cell. I already know what this means. Once my save gets to a certain size, loads can take up to a minute, sometimes more. I can forget about Solsteim since I'll never be able to leave or enter Raven Rock without COC. It may very well be the DDFH. I don't know. But it's unfortunate, I'll have to find a different alternative.

[Lupine00]

1 hour ago, bishlapped said:

Why I never use DD(FH).

In theory - and TBH I have not looked - DDFH should just be an edited asset set that actually has the male models set to something other than junk. The scripts should all be whatever is in the DDi core.

 

However, due to the way DD4 was (re)architected, there's a problem with updating assets to use newer scripts - an issue that killed CD - it's just extremely bothersome to do. Inte proposed a better way to do it, but that was received about as well as a suggestion to revoke the second amendment. Probably the best way to solve CDs problem was to write some really clever Tes5Edit Pascal script, but I don't imagine that was how it was approached, and I don't imagine DDFH went down that path either. That may mean there are some old scripts on DDFH items.

 

Either way, I can't see how DDFH would be causing save bloat. CTD on cell transition yes, but save bloat, not so much. I suspect that issue is from another mod. 

But it's not impossible. If DDFH has a broken script that spins up limitless ObjRefs, each with a script, it's going to cause save bloat for sure.

 

The other issue with how DD is set up now is that DD rights say you cannot patch it - yet the most sensible way to do DDFH is to overwrite the existing AA objects so they have male models in. A pure AA based approach could not possibly have an scripting mismatches or old scripts because it would not be adding any scripts or code at all. I don't know if DDFH was permitted an exception in patching, or whether it had to avoid that route.

 

As I said, I haven't looked at how DDFH is trying to work now, so I can only guess.

 

Regardless of all that, I cannot fix issues in DD; I cannot even raise issues about DD with anyone that might fix them; but I would guess the chances of getting them to give serious support to male items is low and they have not done it in the past (except in so far as Veladarius was part of the process).

 

 

Unfortunately, even if I improve dialogs and such in DF so that they work better for males, and add some control over sex-partner gender (which I think any gender of PC benefits from), DF will always have problems with its deep reliance on DD.

 

While the focus for most planned new deals and functionality is not DD oriented, it's not a mod called Zappy Followers and there's no escaping that DF leans heavily on DD, with all the issues that brings.

 

 

On the topic of male dialog, the existing approach is for the follower to call the PC a sissy and describe them as weak, effeminate, or ineffectual.

Is that what most male PC users are looking for there?

 

If their follower is also male, might they be looking for something a bit different. I'm not sure what exactly, but I don't think there's any point going down the "sissy" path, if most male PC users aren't really interested in that. DF is not trying to do SL Hormones type sex-changes, and probably never will. So, what should it be doing for males?

[Guest]

I don't run with an over the top number of mods, but it's not small either. Usually around 100 or so. So you are probably right, it could be something else where one or the other is fine, but put them together......

 

But long before DF was put out there, I wasn't a fan of DD. Plus, I have to be honest. I had tried DF when it was still under Loezeak. And the one thing I could never get past was ....why? Why would I agree to such things? I'm not a lore monger, but something has to be believable, and this "relationship" really isn't. When this was brought up by multiple people, Loezeak's answer was basically... There is no answer, it just is what it is, the player just has to want this experience. And that's as good an explanation as any, but for me, I kinda want to see some reason for this to happen. 

 

That's why when I saw your idea for the other kind of follower, I thought that would be great.......but I can understand how full your plate must be. 

 

 

[Lupine00]

52 minutes ago, bishlapped said:

There is no answer, it just is what it is, the player just has to want this experience. And that's as good an explanation as any, but for me, I kinda want to see some reason for this to happen.

DF is doing two things:

a) acting as a cash sink

b) providing a way to have enslavement and DD items in your game and still play Skyrim.

 

It can never do either perfectly. Perfection is not something that's achievable in any context.

 

What would be the perfect amount of cash sunk? We don't know, and two players with identical games wouldn't even agree.

 

How much DD or enslavement do you want in your game? Again, it varies.

 

 

I like it when there is a game mechanic. DF sort of has one: pay the follower to avoid devices.

If you get too many devices you get enslaved, which lets you get rid of a lot of devices, and maybe gives you a chance to get to a point where your income is better.

Sometimes it doesn't.

And sometimes you just get bored and want to play some regular Skyrim, or some other new mod (or old mod).

 

DF deals are like sexism in SLS. Nonsensical. Not even internally consistent. But fun, and sometimes funny.

On rare occasions, even a bit sexy.

 

I'd like more range in the gameplay, but doing that requires a lot of work. Most people just want to discover more experiences, and that's basically "new deal content" or "new games".

 

DF is not a sturdy enough scaffold - certainly not code-wise - to hang more complex gameplay off.

 

At ... some ... point, it will be time to seriously look at a successor, assuming we're all still playing Skyrim then.

 

 

I'd like a mod with DF-like aspects that lets you have a chance to "win" against the follower, and a different experience with different followers. I'd like more sophisticated enslavement, but also more back-and-forth about who is in charge - a feeling that it's not just set up to do one thing. Maybe different followers could form a sort of difficulty progression?

 

But I don't want to spend all my time modding. I want to play Skyrim, not mod it.

To invert GLaDOS's inversion, I do what I can because I must  

So any development of future-dominant-follower-mod, remains speculative for now.

There are things I want to finish in SLD and SLAX.

And I think those mods can be finished, in that there's a sensible point to say anything else is overdoing it.

There are some things I want to see in DF.

There is stuff I want to see in the defeat and prostitution space.

Maybe even quest content.

There's a lot of things I wish I had in my game.

[HexBolt8]

1 hour ago, Lupine00 said:

I'm not sure what exactly, but I don't think there's any point going down the "sissy" path, if most male PC users aren't really interested in that.

I can only speak for myself, but the sissy/effeminate thing feels like a specific fetish that's not the best fit for this mod.  For me, if I played a male character the point would be being duped a smaller weaker female.  That's handy, because the derogatory terms would be similar to those for female player characters (minus gender-specific terms):  weak-willed (not physically weak), dumb, foolish, ineffective, loser, failure. 

 

1 hour ago, bishlapped said:

the one thing I could never get past was ....why? Why would I agree to such things?

Every player has to come to terms with suspension of disbelief in ways that work for that player.  My own longish answer below:

Spoiler

If it helps, for me, I assume that there are no free followers.  This follower lets me pay as I go rather than wanting a large up front payment.  That sounds okay, especially at low level.  I assume that the contract itself is fairly simple, but the details are hidden.  Perhaps it refers to the Standard Agreement document on file with a hard-to-find bureaucrat.  The follower assures that it's nothing to be concerned about.  So I plausibly get duped into the relationship. 

 

The tricky part is agreeing to the deals.  Fortunately, if you use classic deals they start out deceptively easy and are not that humiliating.  As time goes on, the DF has been undermining my character's confidence, and it's harder to say no to that next step. 

 

I assume that the DF is well connected with governing officials and the guards, and maybe has dabbled in slave trading in the past.  If I balk, the DF threatens to use those connections.  The authorities will side with the DF, who promises that my life will be miserable if I go to prison.  I might never get out.  Records could be lost.  Or I might end up at the slave market with false papers.  "Every slave claims to be a free man.  Stop telling such lies."

 

My personal sticking point was, why doesn't my character leave when debt & deals are paid off?  Contract terms and the new expensive deals help make sure that doesn't happen.  While waiting for 2.12, I was playing around with loans.  That's not in the mod, but it's easy to add a loan amount to the current debt, and the DF only asks that that the PC agree to a contract extension, just a week or two to allow enough time to pay back the loan (role playing that last part, manually extending the remaining time).  By the time the deals get intense, the contract term is long enough that I probably won't be able to go that long before falling back into debt.  I might also manually apply term extensions to obtaining extra gold under gold control to work that angle too.

 

That's my own answer to why.  Maybe there are ideas in there that you can use for your own rationalization.