Legraf Tweaks - ABANDONED

[Lupine00]

On 12/18/2019 at 7:44 PM, legraf said:

Or should items have all the keywords that are appropriate (all three of Revealing, and Slooty, and Whorish, for instance?).

The latter. Another mod can then examine whatever keywords it feels are appropriate. SLD supports one set, STA a different set. In practice the difference is only that SLD doesn't handle bikini and STA/SLS do. SLD will handle bikini when I next update it. I had designed the keywords when I did the worn item support, but decided to not support bikinis in SLD, which I now regret.

 

There's some detail on the keywords in the SLAX forum and front page.

[legraf]

16 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

The latter. Another mod can then examine whatever keywords it feels are appropriate. SLD supports one set, STA a different set. In practice the difference is only that SLD doesn't handle bikini and STA/SLS do. SLD will handle bikini when I next update it. I had designed the keywords when I did the worn item support, but decided to not support bikinis in SLD, which I now regret.

 

There's some detail on the keywords in the SLAX forum and front page.

Thank you, I've been reading up on keywords (and on StorageUtil) in the various pages and within the scripts as well.  To some extent, it's all making me long for the days of Oblivion, where (as I recall, it's been a while) the slot system was a bit more consistently-used and understood (and trusted).  Items were interpreted based on occupied slots, which makes sense to me.  And some of these keywords seem like they should only apply when an item is occupying the "cuirass" slot 32 (like half-naked), whereas in another slot they are simply providing the normal coverage expected for that slot.

 

But I haven't seen good discussion, here, of what these keywords should really be taken to mean.  In particular, do these flag an item as making the whole outfit racier for instance, and do they denote an item which is MORE (whatever keyword) than is typical for other items that occupies that slot?  For keywords to be used generally, their meaning needs to be defined.

 

To use the relevant example here, panties.  These Osare panties are "standard" (they could use the "SLA_PantyNormal" keyword, and maybe BikiniArmor though not armor).  If worn ALONE, they would also qualify for many other keywords (Revealing, Sexy, etc.).  But not necessarily as part of an outfit, and especially not when concealed by the rest of an outfit.

 

Practically speaking, I might put BikiniArmor keywords on them so they don't trigger SLS's bikini curse, but beyond that I'm not sure if anything is appropriate.  They provide "full" coverage of slot 49, not being transparent or cut-away or anything else.  I don't know if the SLA_PantyNormal keyword is actually used for anything or if it's just hidden in the .esp for possible future use, so not sure if it's worth propagating.  So what keywords should they carry?

 

[Hex Bolt]

59 minutes ago, legraf said:

These Osare panties are "standard" (they could use the "SLA_PantyNormal" keyword, and maybe BikiniArmor though not armor).  If worn ALONE, they would also qualify for many other keywords (Revealing, Sexy, etc.).  But not necessarily as part of an outfit, and especially not when concealed by the rest of an outfit.

My view is that panties are a modesty item.  They make the wearer "more dressed", and should never carry sexy or revealing keywords.  Body clothing (slot 32) might be sexy or revealing, but panties in themselves are not.  They provide coverage, especially when wearing something skimpy.  Without body clothing, panties at least cover "the naughty bits".  Most mods are going to treat this as "naked" anyway, but wearing panties should help if a mod also checks for that.  If you're parading around in bra and panties, the problem is the lack of body clothing, not the panties.

[legraf]

11 minutes ago, HexBolt8 said:

My view is that panties are a modesty item.  They make the wearer "more dressed", and should never carry sexy or revealing keywords.  Body clothing (slot 32) might be sexy or revealing, but panties in themselves are not.  They provide coverage, especially when wearing something skimpy.  Without body clothing, panties at least cover "the naughty bits".  Most mods are going to treat this as "naked" anyway, but wearing panties should help if a mod also checks for that.  If you're parading around in bra and panties, the problem is the lack of body clothing, not the panties.

That's helpful, and meshes really well with my gut feeling on this, though I'm very open to other ideas.

 

Although I was just looking through SLDisparity's addiction mechanic and I could think of one very nice use for a "panty" (and possibly a corresponding "bra") keyword: tracking a "withdrawal" stat so a PC accustomed to wearing such an item suffers debuffs when it's missing.  I'm not sure what of the usual debuffs would make sense, but one that would be quite nice (but not available through SLD) is a Resistance or Willpower penalty.  Something to consider for the Skyrim Underwear DLC megamod!  Oh, heck, now I really like that idea, and have to go suggest it in the SLD thread.

[Lupine00]

4 hours ago, HexBolt8 said:

My view is that panties are a modesty item.  They make the wearer "more dressed", and should never carry sexy or revealing keywords. 

Sometimes the keyword mechanic just isn't sufficient. That's where DF has problems, and DCL too. When NPCs make judgements based on a keyword, sometimes they are way off.

 

When setting keywords, remember that there are two ways they may be inspected.

 

1) WornHasKeyword ... any slot will trigger.

2) Explicit slot checks as done by SLD.

 

In this case, setting naked on panties would be wrong. Slooty might be wrong too, depending on the panty. But sexy might be right... Because weirdo upskirt peepers! Bikini would be fine, female fit only seems ... reasonable. Maybe we need a Panty keyword so that NPCs can react if you don't have it?

It's anachronistic, but Skyrim is silly anyway.

[legraf]

Yes, that WornHasKeyword is an issue; terribly useful, but when mods are "checking out" an actor's outfit, they really should try to be a bit more considerate, I think.

 

The "sexy" keyword  could apply as you say (and for the very fine example you give), but indeed I think it's preferable to flag an item as a particular "type" (either a single "underwear" flag used by both bras and panties indicating something that is normally worn other things), or separate bra & panty keywords so a mod can see them and decide what to do that makes most sense for that mod.

 

SLA(R) and SLAX do have the SLA_Brabikini and SLA_PantyNormal keywords which as far as I know are completely unused (maybe not in Babo's paywalled dialogue system).  Plus 3 additional keywords for types of panties that aren't "normal" I guess, but that seems too much complexity for such a small (ha!) thing.  It's easy enough for me to slap the "SLA_PantyNormal" keyword on everything, or to create a new more generic "SEUSTCCST_Panty" keyword.  (That's Skyrim Enhanced Undergarment System with Theft, Collecting, Construction, and Strategic Tears, or simply Skyrim UE for short.)

 

I think there's no harm using those two bra/panty keywords, though it puts me in the situation of adding a feature that nobody actually uses.  My main concern is adding "sexy" or anything like that if standard, existing mods are using the WornHasKeyword method indiscriminately.  Does anyone happen to know of any that do so, before I start digging through the code of a dozen mods most of which I've never installed?

 

Oh, and I'm planning on changing the name of these tweaks, as I put my name up there just because I couldn't think of anything else that encompassed them, and it's increasingly annoying me.  "Trivial Tweaks", I think has the right spirit - these are all meant to be very light touches on the original mods, even if one or two are getting carried away.

[Hex Bolt]

7 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Maybe we need a Panty keyword so that NPCs can react if you don't have it?

I think it's useful for exactly that purpose.  I added SLA_PantyNormal to the panties my PC normally wears, and tweaked the dialog in DEC and SL Approach slightly depending on whether it's found, treating lack of panties as being more vulnerable, or the PC being perceived as a flirt or whore.   WornHasKeyword works perfectly for this and it gets around checking a specific panty slot (clothing mods are inconsistent).

 

1 hour ago, legraf said:

My main concern is adding "sexy" or anything like that if standard, existing mods are using the WornHasKeyword method indiscriminately.  Does anyone happen to know of any that do so, before I start digging through the code of a dozen mods most of which I've never installed?

SL Approach looks for those keywords with a simple WornHasKeyword check.  I'm not picking on that mod, but if there's one there are probably others.  That's why I'm thinking that "sexy" type keywords can't go on panties.  If someone can see the panties to know they're being worn, that's because of skimpy/sexy clothing (which should be tagged as such) or the wearer is naked (no body slot clothing) which is plenty arousing in itself.  A lingerie ensemble with panties can be very sexy, but it's safest to leave sexy off the panties so mods don't treat them wrongly.  Those same panties could be worn under full neck-to-toe plate armor.

[Lupine00]

7 hours ago, HexBolt8 said:

Those same panties could be worn under full neck-to-toe plate armor.

To sum up, I agree with that entire post. Thanks for thinking it through for us!

 

Having SLD able to handle panties worn or not would be extremely useful. You could tie anything to them then.

 

e.g. Wear panties and get +10 speech and +60 magicka due to the magic of panties. Not wearing panties? Lose 50 magicka, 50 speech and gain -1 rape possibility.

 

SLD rapes need to be a lot better though. I'm not happy with the inability to resist - but I really only added it as a research into SexLab.

 

For panties, I'll add a keyword in SLAX, and in SLD handle the SLA keyword as well.

[legraf]

Nice discussion and nice thinking, here, thanks.

 

I'll add both the current SLA_PantyNormal keyword and whatever new generic keyword you're creating, Lupine00, to the panties in this mod, and hopefully others will follow suit.

[legraf]

So, while waiting for SLAX to add panty keywords, I've gone on a keyword kick, and I'd appreciate some advice.

 

My goal: since WornHasKeyword is such a useful tool, I'd like to make universal "blocking" keywords - that is, a set of LL-appropriate keywords that let all mods know what areas are currently unavailable due to clothing/armour.  I see this as useful for choosing SL animations, for permitting (or not) certain types of molestation (spanks, gropes), for allowing stripping routines to remove just what is needed to gain access to a desired body part, and for providing a more reliable, slot-independent way of recognizing when someone is really indecently exposed (for laws and commentary).  It probably has other applications I haven't considered.

 

DD uses "allowed" keywords on items that would otherwise tend to block access, but that seems backwards to me, and can't be generalized to non-DD items without the dependency.  ZAP and ZEP both have keywords to indicate an area is blocked, but those keywords are only available if one has those dependencies installed, and of course are only found on items made in those frameworks.

What I'd like to do is carve out a small FormID space in update.esm for keywords which can be declared by any number of mods - I have a tiny .esp doing so, but it can be harmlessly duplicated in others, which is the reason for using the update.esm FormIDs.  These keywords would be added, eventually, to everything appropriate.  What I have so far is this:

 

Keywords:

01010800: BlocksOral    (masks and most gags by default)
01010801: BlocksVaginal    (clothing/armour/belts/plugs?) (also presumed to block access to external genitalia, i.e. pussy & penis, though not true for plugs)
01010802: BlocksAnal    (clothing/armour/belts/plugs?)
01010803: BlocksBreast    (any coverage)
01010804: BlocksGrope    (breasts, rigid covering only)
01010805: BlocksSpank    (rigid armor over the "spank zone", not panties or short skirts, broader than BlocksAnal)

 

I've added the first three to all appropriate vanilla & DLC items for Legendary Edition, and was about to go back and add the other three (looking at ZEP keywords made me add the 4th, and that got me thinking about others).  But  I'm at a point (actually past the point) where I should really be asking:

• Does this actually make sense as an approach?
• Would it be used?  (The point is to provide a framework to improve the efficiency of other mods, but that only works if modders can give up slot-based checks, which means a critical mass of adoption)
  • I do have a "StripWhatYouMust" esp written which takes "what you want to reach" as an input and removes only those items needed to grant that access.  It could be used as a utility for other mods, or be a starting-off point for improvement by others.
• Are these the appropriate keywords?  Should there be others, or should some of these be omitted?
• Any other advice at all?

I may not get permission to add these keywords to DDx items, although I think if this system takes off, I might.  DDa is more permissive, as is ZEP, though I haven't approached t.ara yet about ZAP.  Even if those aren't forthcoming, one can "make do" with checking for 3 keywords at a time instead of 1 (actually more like 4 due to DD's system).

 

edit: I see ZEP is essentially obsolete with ZAP 8+ & 9 on the way, but in any event the relevant ZEP keywords were duplicates of the ZAP ones.

 

[Hex Bolt]

It seems like a comprehensive list.  BlocksGrope seemed vague at first but I see how it works with BlockSpank.  If an actor has both, then no groping of breasts, crotch, or bottom would be possible without removing the item(s). 

[Corsayr]

Does anyone know if the "limited stripping" feature in sexlab actually works? I don't think i have ever run into an animation that had the proper tag so I don't know off hand. But if it did that might be a way to work in your strip what you must concept. 

[Hex Bolt]

18 minutes ago, Corsayr said:

Does anyone know if the "limited stripping" feature in sexlab actually works?

It seems to work okay for blowjob animations, but it can get confused on blowjob vs. "oral", since female on female oral has to include more stripping. 

[legraf]

 

19 minutes ago, HexBolt8 said:

It seems like a comprehensive list.  BlocksGrope seemed vague at first but I see how it works with BlockSpank.  If an actor has both, then no groping of breasts, crotch, or bottom would be possible without removing the item(s). 

 

Yes, I'm wondering about that.  I may have suffered from lack of imagination, since the original "BlocksVaginal" was meant to cover anything in that area, male or female, but there' s a big difference between blocking penetration and blocking something external.  BlocksGrope I intended to be chest-only (inspired by Spank that Ass's groping), while BlocksSpank would also block grabbing/pinching a buttock, I thought.  But then it probably needs something else for "in front".  Blocks...umm... LowerGrope?  Lovely name, rolls off the tongue.

 

13 minutes ago, Corsayr said:

Does anyone know if the "limited stripping" feature in sexlab actually works? I don't think i have ever run into an animation that had the proper tag so I don't know off hand. But if it did that might be a way to work in your strip what you must concept. 

Unfortunately, as it is described, it doesn't even try to do this sort of "intelligent" stripping ... SL's Limited Strip just uses the Foreplay strip options if all planned animations in a sequence are just foreplay or oral - which would definitely be a start, but in practice it seems to be a little less limited than that.  Still, it is something.  One does need to set strip options by slot, which unfortunately is complicated by sometimes inconsistent slot use from set to set.  For example, if the same character sometimes wears bikini armour, and sometimes full armour.  But it's better than nothing!

 

Thank you, both, for the quick thoughts!

 

[Corsayr]

2 hours ago, legraf said:

Unfortunately, as it is described, it doesn't even try to do this sort of "intelligent" stripping

true, but if it is performing an action like seeing the keyword and changing to a different strip configuration, can't that action be intercepted? 

 

Just a thought

[legraf]

11 hours ago, Corsayr said:

true, but if it is performing an action like seeing the keyword and changing to a different strip configuration, can't that action be intercepted? 

Oh, a good thought.  I'm not (currently) permitted to distribute edited SL scripts, but others would be, and this is the logical place to intervene.  Nice!

[legraf]

So, since DF now has an event to increase resistance, I'm splitting off the Panty Theft idea into its own mod which will (a) permit theft of items when the player is a victim in sex scenes and (b) allow the player to retrieve the item for a (partial) regain of lost resistance.  For the moment I'm confining this to the most-recently-stolen item... anything from earlier, and the player can't be expected to regain resistance, the most recent theft is uppermost in their mind (or some such rationalization).

 

But what I would like to do is permit recovery by any means, not just pickpocketing.  Violence is an option, but I'd like to have a possibility of bargaining and possibly intimidation as well (unlikely to be good options if the player lost the item through Defeat or similar, but an interesting possibility with the Sleep Creep route).  I'm thinking the thief, particular a sleep-creep sort, might have interesting dialogue while they're in the quest alias.  I'd also, in keeping with preferring unpredictable outcomes, like any approach to come with risk - there'd be a small chance that an attempt to talk a thief out of their prize could result in something bad - trouble with the guard, or the thief taking more, or simply an awkward conversation that causes even further resistance loss.

 

Does anyone have any suggestions for any of this?  I would also welcome snippets of dialogue, because my own writing is painfully stiff, stuffy and cold.

[Hex Bolt]

16 hours ago, legraf said:

Does anyone have any suggestions for any of this?

Splitting out panty theft would make it more clear what that mod does, so that's good.  Some thoughts:

 

Any option should have risk or consequence.  If it can't hurt to try, there's no reason not to run through the "free" options each time before having to make a real decision.  A failed persuasion attempt might make the thief want more gold if you later offer to buy the panties back.  Persuasion ideally would be more nuanced than in the base game, and high speechcraft should not be an automatic win (a die roll based on a formula rather than Skyrim's simplistic speech threshold check). 

 

Likewise for intimidation.  And if you haven't equipped replacement panties you're not going to be very intimidating standing there like that.  Intimidation might succeed, but failure could cause resistance loss and a higher sale price.

 

Violence is okay (attacking the thief if you think you can get away with it) but brawling has problems.  Brawling in the base game is generally a consensual dual with fists for a wager, but punching a thief and starting a fight is an assault.  Unless the thief is very confident of winning, why agree to brawl?  The thief can just hold out for you to offer something worthwhile.  Also, brawling gets easy to win after the PC has a few levels, since townsfolk are generally low level and unarmored.  The player might be using a disparity mod to put the PC at a disadvantage, but you can't assume that.  However, some form of naked brawling could cancel the armor advantage.  Isn't naked brawling a Nord tradition?  Likely still unbalanced but at least more interesting.

 

Reporting the theft to a guard probably shouldn't work.  You can't prove the panties are yours.  Even if you could (monogrammed?), the thief could claim you gave them as a lover's gift and then changed your mind after he dumped you. 

 

Buying the panties back would be a reliable solution, but the thief might not sell them cheaply.  Gold is fine, but as a game mechanic offering sex for payment is far too easy.  I'd suggest that for sex you get the panties back but the loss of dignity cancels out the resistance regain, and maybe also removes another point. 

 

The thief might have already sold the panties to an "admirer".  You'd have to pay, persuade, whatever to get the identity of the buyer, then bargain with that buyer.  Hmm, probably not worth the effort & complexity to have to deal with two NPCs though. 

 

Gambling.  Get the panties if you win, have sex with the thief (and forfeit resistance) if you lose.

 

Bondage?  Thief returns the panties but gets to lock something on you.  (You know the type.  He probably has Devious Skyrim, The Board Game at home.)  There's a chance that the thief decides to keep the panties anyway.

[legraf]

On 1/13/2020 at 5:55 PM, HexBolt8 said:

Bondage?  Thief returns the panties but gets to lock something on you.  (You know the type.  He probably has Devious Skyrim, The Board Game at home.)  There's a chance that the thief decides to keep the panties anyway.

Ha!  Nice.

 

Thanks, HexBolt8, I appreciate the thoughts.  I've become busy RL, so there will be a delay, but it shouldn't be too long before I have at least a basic "recover item to recover (some) lost resistance) setup.  I'm leaning towards a straightforward "resistance recovered = half of resistance lost" model, since it's simple, and full regain doesn't reflect the embarrassment of the loss.  Is that sufficient?  If not, I'll simply make loss & regain separately configurable, probably a global or two so I can avoid another MCM.

 

I agree there should be a risk in any action (and also that the standard Skyrim speechcraft-based checks are badly implemented), so I'll keep those concepts in mind.

 

For "Violence" I meant actually killing the thief and looting the corpse - not the standard method in a "sleep creep" situation, but since I'll be hooking into general sex acts where PC is flagged as victim, in those cases we might see the player looting a fallen bandit.  But there's nothing special for me to implement there, from the mod's point of view it's the same as pickpocketing.  But brawling is potentially interesting, so long as it's properly balanced.  I don't see this as winding up in the mod, however.

 

I hadn't even considered reporting the theft... I agree it should generally not work.  But putting in some dialogue to let the player try and (almost certainly) fail could be interesting.

 

Very nice thoughts on things like "buying back with sex" ... indeed it's "too easy", so taking that option must surely give no resistance recovery, and have a risk of losing more.

 

Having the thief sell the item is interesting ... I could, very simply, make them unrecoverable in that situation, dock the player another resistance point, and end the recovery quest at that point, since that news would be quite ... undermining.

[Mez558]

Hi

 

What coughing effect should it be using for swallow?

As the mod came with the file lgf_cough_f I thought it would use this, which I changed to larger wav file (taken from another game) that was coughing cursing then more coughing but it seems to be using the fthirsty files from food and sleep?

 

[Corsayr]

Greetings

 

I am experiencing an odd bug

 

For some reason Legraf Tweaks and Panty Thiefs MCM menus have disappeared...

 

Just those two as far as i can tell. MO2 doesn't show any conflicts, and both mods appear to still be functioning. I do not know when they went missing as I set them at start up of the new game, and didn't notice they were gone till I needed to make an adjustment and couldn't find them...

 

I have tried the setstage SKI_configmanagerinstance 1 command, and reinstalled both mods nothing...

 

 

[Hex Bolt]

9 minutes ago, Corsayr said:

For some reason Legraf Tweaks and Panty Thiefs MCM menus have disappeared.

For Legraf Tweaks, do "sqv lgTweaksMcm".  If it's stopped, start it again with StartQuest.  If it's running, try stopping and starting it.  Turning stuff off and on often solves the problem, in games and in real life.

[Corsayr]

17 minutes ago, HexBolt8 said:

For Legraf Tweaks, do "sqv lgTweaksMcm".  If it's stopped, start it again with StartQuest.  If it's running, try stopping and starting it.  Turning stuff off and on often solves the problem, in games and in real life.

I tried that, and it does appear to be running. Doing the stop and start quest though did not yield any results.

 

Spoiler

 

[legraf]

On 1/22/2020 at 3:13 AM, Mez558 said:

Hi

 

What coughing effect should it be using for swallow?

As the mod came with the file lgf_cough_f I thought it would use this, which I changed to larger wav file (taken from another game) that was coughing cursing then more coughing but it seems to be using the fthirsty files from food and sleep?

 

Sorry for the slow reply Mez558, didn't see a notification - and then I went away for a bit.

 

That file shouldn't have been included, sorry, it's from an older implementation.  Swallow now just uses generic events - there's a "cough cough" dialogue topic from skyrim.esm, and an uncontrolled coughing animation likewise.  One or the other of these plays the sound, I can't remember which, it's been ages.

 

 

 

7 hours ago, Corsayr said:

Greetings

 

I am experiencing an odd bug

 

For some reason Legraf Tweaks and Panty Thiefs MCM menus have disappeared...

 

Just those two as far as i can tell. MO2 doesn't show any conflicts, and both mods appear to still be functioning. I do not know when they went missing as I set them at start up of the new game, and didn't notice they were gone till I needed to make an adjustment and couldn't find them...

 

I have tried the setstage SKI_configmanagerinstance 1 command, and reinstalled both mods nothing...

 

 

 

Huh... clearly I've done something wrong, Corsayr, though I've never experienced that problem myself.  You (and HexBolt8) know more about getting those quest scripts to work than I do, so I'm not sure what I can suggest.  MCMs after those two in order still work normally?  I've had issues where other MCMs became unresponsive, but not one where they disappeared.

 

I should really move all the PT stuff (including the SL Adv interaction) to the PT MCM anyway, but I'm afraid I haven't touched Skyrim in a while now.  Oh, but there was one odd thing, just before I bailed: are you running both SL Adventures and SL Approach Redux?  I was just noticing a problem with script loading error causing a fight between those two (Tweaks tries to modify script from each of them, but this causes problems with load order because the Tweaks versions of their scripts get loaded out of order).  I haven't found a solution other than splitting Tweaks into multiple patches (boo), and then I became a hermit.

 

However, I don't see how that would affect the display of the MCM menus.  It didn't for me.  But just in case, you could try removing the .psc and .pex for slapproachbasequestscript from the Tweaks folder and see if that helps (it only does one minor thing, anyway).  Cleaning may then be necessary.

 

[Hex Bolt]

On SL Adventures and SL Approach Redux, I'm running both and I haven't noticed a problem.  However, as I think about it, when I last loaded an update for SL Approach that would have overwritten this mod's patch, so I might not have that patch anymore.

11 hours ago, legraf said:

I should really move all the PT stuff (including the SL Adv interaction) to the PT MCM anyway, but I'm afraid I haven't touched Skyrim in a while now.

I think that would be better, whenever you get back into modding.  The panty content would be in one mod. 

 

Unless I'm missing something, Panty Theft doesn't have an MCM screen, though it would if you move the panty content there from Tweaks (maybe that's what you meant).

 

You actually could make the SL Approach patch a separate download file here.  Since it's not tied in to the Tweaks MCM, it should be as simple as removing it from the main file and making that script a separate download.  Plenty of mods let players pick and choose like that, so it wouldn't be unusual.  Another point is that if you're patching SL Approach, you'll have to stay current on that mod's updates, or if someone installs Approach and then installs Legraf Tweaks, that player will get an outdated script.  If you've split it out, then people can check the dates and install Tweaks but hold off on the script update until you return from hermitude.