Licenses - Player Oppression

[Gudulba]

15 hours ago, DonQuiWho said:

 

Hi

 

Managed to test out (only) the license renewal changes and I'm glad to say that it seems to work OK

 

Can I maybe make a suggestion, though?  

 

The probelm of losing the licenses in the first place arises where you have mods in play that can

 

1 - steal ALL the PC's belongings (like happened to me with Skyrim Chainbeasts - where I had inavertently set up the theft parameters to allow that)

2 - steal items, even if set on chance basis, of >0 value as, after their repurchase, they all have 0 value

 

The first one is fixable, insofar as the chance than a licence may be taken, by the player setting an item numerical value that will be less than the total number of items in the inventory

 

The second is more problematic, as if everything with a value>0 is taken, all the licences get removed.  And it then can get VERY difficult to pursue the game if, having fallen on hard times and been robbed blind, the PC now has much much less cash than that needed to get them all renewed - and setting the initial price of them all at 1 septim defeats the object of having them in game in the first place, doesn't it? 

 

So why not make this a bit easier - in a future update - by providing for a gameplay that allows players to set a renewal cost that is a reduced % of the primary cost?  I know that they don't have centralised electronic asset management in the 'real Skyrim', 😛, BUT, if licenses are valid from hold to hold, their postal system must have some means of delivering new licence issue notices to neighbouring holds, incidentally making much better use of all these couriers who seem to hang around doing nothing most of the time, with the guards maintaining their local records etc.  This would not only allow the guards to spot fakes, but also reissue genuine ones at a reduced cost - after of course, first having tortured the loser to the point that they are certain that they are telling the truth 😆

 

Leaving aside the inanities, 😉

 

1 - Lost/Missing Licenses renewal seems to work OK

2 - There would be merit in reducing the renewal cost in some way

 

Hope that helps

 

DQW

 

 

 

 

I see your points. Happened to me, too (all items robbed by Naked Defeat...) 🙂  What I now do is: I store a good amount of my money in a player's home chest. Once I manage to get here, there's enough money to cover the basic needs until I get back my stuff...

 

As for loosing/damaging licenses by swimming: maybe even add an option to increase the renewal cost as kind of punishment for carelessly handling the licenses could be an idea.

[DonQuiWho]

1 hour ago, Gudulba said:

I see your points. Happened to me, too (all items robbed by Naked Defeat...) 🙂  What I now do is: I store a good amount of my money in a player's home chest. Once I manage to get here, there's enough money to cover the basic needs until I get back my stuff...

 

As for loosing/damaging licenses by swimming: maybe even add an option to increase the renewal cost as kind of punishment for carelessly handling the licenses could be an idea.

 

Yep.  Whilst I don't do the 'Swimming Damage Loss' thing, I use convenient horses and keep a load of cash in the horse's saddle.  Normally that's OK, as you can get the horse to come to you.  Only problem would be if for any reason the theft included the horse call horn and also 'disabled' the HorseCall Shout

[Nuascura]

I'm pushing 1.15.3 out of beta some time between tomorrow and week's end if the version doesn't introduce any new issues.

 

Edit: I'm also aware of a location check issue, which is most obvious when Travel Permit feature is enabled. It causes the guards to constantly approach the player. Unfortunately, after my first time running into the issue, I couldn't replicate it anymore. There was one person on NexusMods who experienced it as well. But I cannot fix this bug unless I have the resources I usually request of bug reporters.

 

lmk if any of you can replicate the issue and pass the following stuff:

1. Repeatable step-by-step process from game start + new character

2. Papyrus Log file w/ Licenses Log Traces enabled

3. Exported Licenses settings.json

Edited June 16, 2024 by Nuascura

[Nuascura]

Uploaded beta.7.

 

 

[Nuascura]

Rejoice: This mod's acronym is now LPO, like what it should be as displayed on my topic listings. I understand that some people associated BMLE strictly with older versions, and it was confusing to know what BMLE meant unless you looked at my documentation. I've purged all references to BMLE internally, though "BM" can still be used to conveniently isolate trace and script mentions. Specifically, log traces are tagged by [BM-LPO] while scripts are always prefixed with "BM_".

[Talesien]

First of, thanks for your continued work on this. I greatly appreciate the time and work you pour into that.
That's said I've a request for you to put in some extra time if you find it worth including.
Sexy Adventures has an option that enforces skimpy clothing (based on either some keywords like 'EroticArmor') or a list of clothing items added via the MCM (alternately might a soft dependency of Advance Nudity Detection might work just as well). I would love to see this included here. Basically a variation of the Clothing License that requires wearing skimpy clothing (as opposed to be naked) unless you have a clothing license that allows you to dress properly.

 

Edited June 19, 2024 by Talesien

[edinburg]

Every time this mod updates I end up copying over the same set of script changes I've made. Perhaps making these configurable options would assist other users who desire the same changes.

 

I use a mod (this one: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/1882) that hides equipped ammo when I don't have a bow equipped. So I remove the ammo check from BM_Licenses_ViolationCheck_Weapon.psc. It would be nice if 'Check Ammo' was an option under Weapon License.

 

I prefer enforcers to only complain about my magic use when they can see that I have a spell in my hand. So I add " && playerActor.IsWeaponDrawn()" to the left and right hand spell checks in BM_Licenses_ViolationCheck_Magic.psc. I'm not sure if you'd want to make this configurable, make it always work that way, or leave it be. If that check is added, it might also be nice to have the dialog conditionally refer to seeing the magic for a spell violation versus using a detect magic scroll for an enchanted equipment violation.

 

I don't want to be required to wear a cursed collar anytime I don't have a magic license, so I leave Active Curse Enforcement off. However, I do want to be punished with a collar if I'm seen casting an unlicensed spell. So I remove bmlmcm.NullifyMagickaEnforce from the condition in the ApplyPunishment function of BM_Licenses.psc so it just reads "ApplyNullifyMagicka(isMagicViolation || force)". This feels like a bugfix to me, as users who have chosen a curse source probably want to have some way to be cursed even with Active Curse Enforcement off.

 

Finally (and this is a pure vanity preference), I prefer collar enforcement to use a standardized collar instead of picking randomly. So I change the collar equip functions (RenewCollar and equipCollar) in BM_API_DD.psc to always select libs.cuffsPaddedCollar. Maybe the chosen collar or list of collars could be made configurable somehow?

Edited June 19, 2024 by edinburg

[Nuascura]

13 minutes ago, edinburg said:

Every time this mod updates I end up copying over the same set of script changes I've made. Perhaps making these configurable options would assist other users who desire the same changes.

Making the violationcheck scripts modular has the secondary benefit so y'all could make your own changes . In some cases, I'd even encourage uploading your own scripts for other people to use if I don't agree on implementing (if only for the near future).

 

15 minutes ago, edinburg said:

I use a mod (this one: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/1882) that hides equipped ammo when I don't have a bow equipped. So I remove the ammo check from BM_Licenses_ViolationCheck_Weapon.psc. It would be nice if 'Check Ammo' was an option under Weapon License.

I can certainly make this an option. But you might also want to know that Pyramid Utils currently has a bug that doesn't filter for ammo, so your change isn't necessary unless ponzi fixes this bug on their end.

 

18 minutes ago, edinburg said:

So I add " && playerActor.IsWeaponDrawn()" to the left and right hand spell checks in BM_Licenses_ViolationCheck_Magic.psc.

I'll implement it as is if it's been working for you.

 

19 minutes ago, edinburg said:

I don't want to be required to wear a cursed collar anytime I don't have a magic license, so I leave Active Curse Enforcement off. However, I do want to be punished with a collar if I'm seen casting an unlicensed spell. So I remove bmlmcm.NullifyMagickaEnforce from the condition in the ApplyPunishment function of BM_Licenses.psc so it just reads "ApplyNullifyMagicka(isMagicViolation || force)". This feels like a bugfix to me, as users who have chosen a curse source probably want to have some way to be cursed even with Active Curse Enforcement off.

You probably want to revert your change here. This feature was bugged, which brdc reported to me on Discord. I fixed this issue and noted it under the changelog. For your desired effect: set Cursed Collar as curse source and disable ACE. The intended effect is supposed to be as you described.

 

26 minutes ago, edinburg said:

Finally (and this is a pure vanity preference), I prefer collar enforcement to use a standardized collar instead of picking randomly. So I change the collar equip functions (RenewCollar and equipCollar) in BM_API_DD.psc to always select libs.cuffsPaddedCollar. Maybe the chosen collar or list of collars could be made configurable somehow?

I'll see about it.

[Nuascura]

4 hours ago, Talesien said:

First of, thanks for your continued work on this. I greatly appreciate the time and work you pour into that.
That's said I've a request for you to put in some extra time if you find it worth including.
Sexy Adventures has an option that enforces skimpy clothing (based on either some keywords like 'EroticArmor') or a list of clothing items added via the MCM (alternately might a soft dependency of Advance Nudity Detection might work just as well). I would love to see this included here. Basically a variation of the Clothing License that requires wearing skimpy clothing (as opposed to be naked) unless you have a clothing license that allows you to dress properly.

This is basically our Bikini License + Clothing License when both are enabled at the same time. Unless you mean something else?

 

If the player doesn't have both licenses, they'll have to be naked. If they get a Bikini License, they'll have to wear EroticArmor-tagged items until they get a Clothing License.

[qualcheduna]

Hello, the mod is great, very well done.

I just wanted to ask a question on how exactly some licenses interact with each other because I am dumbdumb.

 

On 3/24/2024 at 10:17 PM, Nuascura said:

Right, this is the logic with 1.15.1 (which we've changed compared to 1.15.0):

 

If Clothing License feature is enabled, you need a license to wear anything with the keyword VendorItemClothing.

If Bikini License feature is enabled, you need a license to wear anything properly tagged that ALSO has either of the keywords VendorItemClothing and VendorItemArmor.

If Armor License feature is enabled, you need a license to wear anything with the keyword VendorItemArmor.

 

Each one only restricts equipping any items under its own category. If Armor License is enabled in isolation (as in, Clothing and Bikini are disabled), it'll only check for VendorItemArmor. You can still wear VendorItemClothing without issue. The Armor License is the only one that is special in that purchasing it will allow you to wear Clothing and Bikini even if you don't have the latter two licenses on-hand.

 

License restrictions: Bikini License overlaps with Clothing and Armor. License privileges: Armor License overlaps with the other two equipment licenses.

 

I started my a new game and I have enabled armor license and bikini license but not the clothing license.

Armor license is expensive while bikini is cheaper, cause I wanted bikini armor to be a cheaper version of armor, to encourage its usage, while I wanted clothing to be free.

 

However, I keep getting violations when I wear normal clothing, I double checked and it has VendoritemClothing tag and it does not have any of the bikini tags I have put in.

I don't know, I think I have misunderstood how the licenses work, but then I don't understand what is wrong.

 

 

[Nuascura]

42 minutes ago, qualcheduna said:

I started my a new game and I have enabled armor license and bikini license but not the clothing license.

Armor license is expensive while bikini is cheaper, cause I wanted bikini armor to be a cheaper version of armor, to encourage its usage, while I wanted clothing to be free.

You keep getting a violation flagged because the Bikini License disallows VendorItemClothing. The feature necessarily needs to blacklist all clothing for player without a Bikini License because otherwise, if we have a scenario where the feature is enabled while Armor and Clothing Licenses are disabled, the Bikini License will functionally be useless.

 

In 1.16.0, because you only have Armor and Bikini licenses enabled, the player default state will be nude. You won't ever be able to wear clothing (vendoritemclothing), legally.

 

Your desired effects probably means it'd be appropriate to add an additional option under Bikini License:

- Always allow Clothing (vendoritemclothing)

 

The alternative for now is to add VendorItemClothing as a whitelisted keyword under Bikini License so that you can wear normal clothes IF you buy said license. It really depends on how you imagine your Skyrim to operate.

Edited June 19, 2024 by Nuascura

[Talesien]

3 hours ago, Nuascura said:

This is basically our Bikini License + Clothing License when both are enabled at the same time. Unless you mean something else?

 

If the player doesn't have both licenses, they'll have to be naked. If they get a Bikini License, they'll have to wear EroticArmor-tagged items until they get a Clothing License.

Hmm, ok thanks, need to test that I was under the impression Bikini License (from testing a couple months back) did nothing if the item in question isn't light or heavy armor (i.e. ignores clothing).

 

Quote

Your desired effects probably means it'd be appropriate to add an additional option under Bikini License:

- Always allow Clothing (vendoritemclothing)

Should've continued reading the thread before answering, hehe. That's basically what I asked too, except if you could add an option that allows only skimpy clothing (as well as the allow clothing option you already mentioned) that would be great. ^^

Edited June 19, 2024 by Talesien

[qualcheduna]

1 hour ago, Nuascura said:

You keep getting a violation flagged because the Bikini License disallows VendorItemClothing. The feature necessarily needs to blacklist all clothing for player without a Bikini License because otherwise, if we have a scenario where the feature is enabled while Armor and Clothing Licenses are disabled, the Bikini License will functionally be useless.

 

Aaaaah ok, now I understand. Thank you lots.

 

1 hour ago, Nuascura said:

Your desired effects probably means it'd be appropriate to add an additional option under Bikini License:

- Always allow Clothing (vendoritemclothing)

 

The alternative for now is to add VendorItemClothing as a whitelisted keyword under Bikini License so that you can wear normal clothes IF you buy said license. It really depends on how you imagine your Skyrim to operate.

 

YES, that would be splendid.

For now I will just enable the clothing license and make it inexpensive and with long duration.

I don't want to add VendorItemClothing to the bikini tags, cause what I want to achieve is that armor protection is expensive (with a discount for bikini armor), while non-armored clothing is free.

 

 

Thank you very much.

[Nuascura]

8 hours ago, Talesien said:

Hmm, ok thanks, need to test that I was under the impression Bikini License (from testing a couple months back) did nothing if the item in question isn't light or heavy armor (i.e. ignores clothing).

Yeah you aren’t dreaming cuz that was the case a couple months back. But someone made a comment here on LL and made me realize how functionally broken the feature is in the back-end because of how dependent it is on Armor and Clothing License features to operate.

 

8 hours ago, Talesien said:

Should've continued reading the thread before answering, hehe. That's basically what I asked too, except if you could add an option that allows only skimpy clothing (as well as the allow clothing option you already mentioned) that would be great. ^^

Can you clarify the purpose of this skimpy clothing option? I’m under the impression that leaving the “Always Allow Clothing” option disabled would provide that effect (e.g. Bikini Licenses in its current state).

[Nuascura]

@qualcheduna @Talesien @edinburg

 

This is almost if not already a release candidate. I just need to make sure I didn't introduce any new issues with 1.16.1. I'm also playing around with my option names.

 

Things to test:

1. Does Magic Violation on wield state work fine?
2. Do the new options allow Bikini License to whitelist normal clothing or armor?

 

Primary
- Added skip condition to spell checks if player is not in weapon drawn state.
- Added option to disable ammo checks under Weapon License section.
- Added options to separately restrict Armor and Clothing under Bikini License.
- Added additional PurchaseLicense() and ExpireLicense() API calls.
- Simplified some option names.
- Fixed sub-license item settings not promptly updating confiscation keyword arrays.
- Updated dialogue patch.
- Updated localization files.

 

Edited June 24, 2024 by Nuascura
Removed Attachment

[Talesien]

22 hours ago, Nuascura said:

@qualcheduna @Talesien @edinburg

 

This is almost if not already a release candidate. I just need to make sure I didn't introduce any new issues with 1.16.1. I'm also playing around with my option names.

 

Things to test:

1. Does Magic Violation on wield state work fine?
2. Do the new options allow Bikini License to whitelist normal clothing or armor?

 

Primary
- Added skip condition to spell checks if player is not in weapon drawn state.
- Added option to disable ammo checks under Weapon License section.
- Added options to separately restrict Armor and Clothing under Bikini License.
- Added additional PurchaseLicense() and ExpireLicense() API calls.
- Simplified some option names.
- Fixed sub-license item settings not promptly updating confiscation keyword arrays.
- Updated dialogue patch.
- Updated localization files.

Licenses - 1.16.1-beta.2 - LL.7z 2.03 MB · 1 download

As for the Bikini License. Seems to work fine in the sense that clothing with the keyword does not trigger a violation and clothing without the keyword does. Not 100% sure that's what you aimed at, but sure works perfectly for what I've been looking for, so thanks. ^^
 

[Nuascura]

1 hour ago, Talesien said:

As for the Bikini License. Seems to work fine in the sense that clothing with the keyword does not trigger a violation and clothing without the keyword does. Not 100% sure that's what you aimed at, but sure works perfectly for what I've been looking for, so thanks. ^^

When the Bikini License is enabled in isolation (with Clothing and Armor Licenses disabled), the sub-settings should allow you to change normal clothing and/or armor immunity. If both of the new options are disabled in this same scenario, Bikini License would functionally be useless. That immunity was specifically what I was testing for, but glad you've got your setup sorted out!

 

Tangentially, as a note to myself, I don't think the current wield-state condition for magic violation checking works. It is at best sporadic since violation checks go by interval and/or LOS, so won't be in sync with the 'unsheathing' of spells. I need to either move back to my prior implementation or introduce violation checks that trigger based on the unsheathing state change.

[LilHel]

I love your changes to SLS, however I do have a question in regards to your combination of SLS and your mod where you sstate to disable everything but propety and freedom. I can't seem to figure out how to diable armor and weapons I believe...those two only have costs listed and not option to disable, so how would I disable those while keeping propety and freedom active?

[lovalter]

Is there a way to buy all licenses at once? Also, what mod do you use to make your MCM look like that?

[Nuascura]

58 minutes ago, LilHel said:

I love your changes to SLS, however I do have a question in regards to your combination of SLS and your mod where you sstate to disable everything but propety and freedom. I can't seem to figure out how to diable armor and weapons I believe...those two only have costs listed and not option to disable, so how would I disable those while keeping propety and freedom active?

It's been a good minute since I've used SLS. I remember there being an option to disable those two licenses. But, if my memory is incorrect, that would be unfortunate on SLS's part, though there should still be users on the SLS threads to help you out. At worst, if you disable all of SLS's enforcing guards and randomly-generated NPCs (by setting the two values to 0), most of the glaring issues should be gone.

 

30 minutes ago, lovalter said:

Is there a way to buy all licenses at once? Also, what mod do you use to make your MCM look like that?

Unfortunately no, to your first question.

I use Untarnished UI.

[LilHel]

23 minutes ago, Nuascura said:

It's been a good minute since I've used SLS. I remember there being an option to disable those two licenses. But, if my memory is incorrect, that would be unfortunate on SLS's part, though there should still be users on the SLS threads to help you out. At worst, if you disable all of SLS's enforcing guards and randomly-generated NPCs (by setting the two values to 0), most of the glaring issues should be gone.

tbf with how painful it can be to play with SLS active and other debuffs existing I should consider parting ways with it XD but maybe I'm using a wrong version or smthin? bc iirc those 2 only have costs attached to them

[moddingnoob]

I had a problem where the guards stopped me for wearing enchanted armor when none of it was. I then put the armor back on and they stopped me again for not wearing bikini armor, when it all was and I had already used the button to make sure the mod flagged it as such. What gives?

[Nuascura]

5 hours ago, moddingnoob said:

I had a problem where the guards stopped me for wearing enchanted armor when none of it was. I then put the armor back on and they stopped me again for not wearing bikini armor, when it all was and I had already used the button to make sure the mod flagged it as such. What gives?

Can you replicate the issue for certainty? If so, pass your steps and an exported settings.json.

[moddingnoob]

10 hours ago, Nuascura said:

Can you replicate the issue for certainty? If so, pass your steps and an exported settings.json.

Alright, I tried replicating it, and the magicka stop didn't happen, but the armor one still did. I made sure to check the box that what I was wearing was bikini armor both times. My character is wearing

steel abs v

steel bikini top vi

steel gauntlets

steel greaves

steel pauldron 1 l

steel pauldron 2 r

steel tasset 1 a

steel thigh 3

steel collar

ring of minor stamina

anal plug

necklace of minor squire

circlet of triumph

 

The only things I see that might cause the issue are the gauntlets and greaves (the greaves are imperial greaves renamed by another mod) but using the button should fix this, right?  Also, everything except the bikini top gets stripped.

 

Also, while I have your attention, might I suggest that the travel permit scale with the number of female followers you have, if they are turned off for permit exemption, to disincentivize having so many followers you are never in danger?

Settings.json

[Nuascura]

14 hours ago, moddingnoob said:

The only things I see that might cause the issue are the gauntlets and greaves (the greaves are imperial greaves renamed by another mod) but using the button should fix this, right?  Also, everything except the bikini top gets stripped.

The LPO Bikini flag option is only capable of modifying keywords on your chest piece. If LPO is scanning your gauntlet/glove slot and finds an item tagged with VendorItemArmor or VendorItemClothing, you’ll get flagged for violation.

 

As for the issue with bikini top not getting stripped, check if LPO has permission to scan this slot in the first place. Remove all equipped items but the bikini top and see if it can flag other violations.