DD_Restrained.rar

[darkfender666]

If u add a no ngagged dialogue would be good if it was an optional dialogue or can be disabled via mcm.

 

Otherwise would conflict with lot of stuff.

 

There is already a mod to ask npcs to remove the armbinder. for example.

[irquih]

If u add a no ngagged dialogue would be good if it was an optional dialogue or can be disabled via mcm.

 

Otherwise would conflict with lot of stuff.

 

There is already a mod to ask npcs to remove the armbinder. for example.

 

'Conflict with a lot of stuff' is rather vague.  Afaik the only other dialogue based removal is Master, from Captured Dreams Shop.

 

The NPC armbinder removal you refer to is actually part of Devious Devices - Integration.  I'm aware of it.

[Zydar]

Just had a funny experienced. Was running around, trying stupid things with a new follower mod. Had both of us running around with a full set of DD items including the gags. For some reason I could still initiate the DD - Restrained dialog talking to her despite both of us being gagged. 

[irquih]

Just had a funny experienced. Was running around, trying stupid things with a new follower mod. Had both of us running around with a full set of DD items including the gags. For some reason I could still initiate the DD - Restrained dialog talking to her despite both of us being gagged. 

 

Yeah, I haven't implemented the NPC-is-gagged dialogue yet.  So your gagged and armbindered NPC can currently still help you.

It's on my todo list.

[Kimy]

 

If u add a no ngagged dialogue would be good if it was an optional dialogue or can be disabled via mcm.

 

Otherwise would conflict with lot of stuff.

 

There is already a mod to ask npcs to remove the armbinder. for example.

 

'Conflict with a lot of stuff' is rather vague.  Afaik the only other dialogue based removal is Master, from Captured Dreams Shop.

 

The NPC armbinder removal you refer to is actually part of Devious Devices - Integration.  I'm aware of it.

 

 

There is one other mod around I am aware of being able to remove devices - addlHQ. I have no idea if it's dialogue based removal though. I have yet to try it.

[irquih]

 

 

If u add a no ngagged dialogue would be good if it was an optional dialogue or can be disabled via mcm.

 

Otherwise would conflict with lot of stuff.

 

There is already a mod to ask npcs to remove the armbinder. for example.

 

'Conflict with a lot of stuff' is rather vague.  Afaik the only other dialogue based removal is Master, from Captured Dreams Shop.

 

The NPC armbinder removal you refer to is actually part of Devious Devices - Integration.  I'm aware of it.

 

 

There is one other mod around I am aware of being able to remove devices - addlHQ. I have no idea if it's dialogue based removal though. I have yet to try it.

 

Good point. I was actually doing the quests for that, but then I started poking around with mods (again). So I haven't had the pleasure of them ever removing a device for me. No idea how they handle gags.

 

 

Anyway...

Turned out I had a couple of bugs, not just 1. (In my dev tree, don't worry.) So fixing all that took a bit more time than anticipated. Unfortunately, that means no release today, but everything works correctly now.

 

Turns out I've crossed that invisible wall that limit the Creation Kit capabilities, so I'm now switching between Creation Kit and Tes5Edit all the time. With the downside that each time I switch tools, I have to wait (agonizing wait time, make it go away!). On the upside, I now have 1 script controlling the help dialogue, instead of tons of copies of the same script. Yay!

 

It's not something you'll notice much of, that refactoring (that's a good thing). But it makes me happy to have proper code. And a happy modder is a productive modder.

 

Anyway, just finished the arm cuff removal dialogue. Tomorrow the dialogues for:

int property devcat_armcuffs = 3 autoreadonly
int property devcat_legcuffs = 4 autoreadonly
int property devcat_collar = 5 autoreadonly
int property devcat_belt = 6 autoreadonly
int property devcat_bra = 7 autoreadonly
int property devcat_harness = 8 autoreadonly

bringing the total number of device categories that can be removed to 9.  After that I'll roll out a new release.

 

For those who are paying attention: yes, I did not add the slave boots.  I'm couldn't be bothered yet.

 

Each dialogue consists of 5 lines:

- let's see if we can get device X off you

- [player no]  I'll leave it on then

- [player yes]  let me try... [attempt to remove device]

- [remove succes]  yay, I helped you

- [remove fail]  bah, can't get it off

I'm afraid I might get a bit repetitive doing these: 30 lines of dialogue is not easy to come up with.  Oh well, I hope nobody minds; I can always alter them afterwards.

 

One thing I want to do for those lines, is to have multiple variations on them.  That way the dialogues will vary each time, making it less repetitive (and make the NPCs seem less like the cute little robots they are).

[xboronx]

Each dialogue consists of 5 lines:

- let's see if we can get device X off you

- [player no]  I'll leave it on then

- [player yes]  let me try... [attempt to remove device]

- [remove succes]  yay, I helped you

- [remove fail]  bah, can't get it off

I'm afraid I might get a bit repetitive doing these: 30 lines of dialogue is not easy to come up with.  Oh well, I hope nobody minds; I can always alter them afterwards.

 

One thing I want to do for those lines, is to have multiple variations on them.  That way the dialogues will vary each time, making it less repetitive (and make the NPCs seem less like the cute little robots they are).

 

 

Might get too complicated, but i think some possible dialogue branches where the evil NPCs first play nice guy and then abuse the player would be great. So instead of only saying something like they couldn't remove the device they instead become mean in the end.

 

Example:

-Player has an armbinder and asks for help. NPC agrees to help, but demands sex or gold before. If you agree when he is finished or got the gold he laughs and says something like "Did you really think i will help you? Poor little baby, thanks for the fuck/money". If you refuse the NPC might go away or rape you anyways.

 

This would add even more variety. So there would be four NPC types: The good knight who tries to help you for free (should be rare), the  neutral NPC who helps you but requests some payback, the coward mean NPC who wants to abuse you but plays neutral NPC in disguise (same starting dialogue, you only notice his intention after you paid already) and finally the bastard NPC who immediately abuses you (should also be rare).

 

Let's say the good and bad one get about 10% frequency and the other two 40%, then it would be quite varied imho. Averagely every fifths attempt (the good and evil ones) you would immediately guess the route, and in the other 4/5 attempts it would always be 50/50 if you are lucky or not, but you only know after you had to pay something in advance.

[circ]

On the above note: another scenario where person decides to help you but says the tools are in his/her house - followed by the above (if person has no spouse and has a house, sorry beggars - unless you live in Markarth. Or maybe the spouse wants to get in on it?). I even went as far as thinking the following - guardsman invites you over to the guardhouse followed by gangbang, but that's just too bloaty for this mod.

[irquih]

 

Each dialogue consists of 5 lines:

- let's see if we can get device X off you

- [player no]  I'll leave it on then

- [player yes]  let me try... [attempt to remove device]

- [remove succes]  yay, I helped you

- [remove fail]  bah, can't get it off

I'm afraid I might get a bit repetitive doing these: 30 lines of dialogue is not easy to come up with.  Oh well, I hope nobody minds; I can always alter them afterwards.

 

One thing I want to do for those lines, is to have multiple variations on them.  That way the dialogues will vary each time, making it less repetitive (and make the NPCs seem less like the cute little robots they are).

 

 

Might get too complicated, but i think some possible dialogue branches where the evil NPCs first play nice guy and then abuse the player would be great. So instead of only saying something like they couldn't remove the device they instead become mean in the end.

 

Example:

-Player has an armbinder and asks for help. NPC agrees to help, but demands sex or gold before. If you agree when he is finished or got the gold he laughs and says something like "Did you really think i will help you? Poor little baby, thanks for the fuck/money". If you refuse the NPC might go away or rape you anyways.

 

This would add even more variety. So there would be four NPC types: The good knight who tries to help you for free (should be rare), the  neutral NPC who helps you but requests some payback, the coward mean NPC who wants to abuse you but plays neutral NPC in disguise (same starting dialogue, you only notice his intention after you paid already) and finally the bastard NPC who immediately abuses you (should also be rare).

 

Let's say the good and bad one get about 10% frequency and the other two 40%, then it would be quite varied imho. Averagely every fifths attempt (the good and evil ones) you would immediately guess the route, and in the other 4/5 attempts it would always be 50/50 if you are lucky or not, but you only know after you had to pay something in advance.

 

 

Hmm, my innocent mind hadn't even contemplated the possibility of an NPC pulling out of the deal after getting their part.  I like the suggestion, thanks.

 

On the above note: another scenario where person decides to help you but says the tools are in his/her house - followed by the above (if person has no spouse and has a house, sorry beggars - unless you live in Markarth. Or maybe the spouse wants to get in on it?). I even went as far as thinking the following - guardsman invites you over to the guardhouse followed by gangbang, but that's just too bloaty for this mod.

 

I'm not going to risk myself on figuring out where an NPC lives, if they're close enough to make that bluff (i.e. don't want to ask you to follow me all across Tamriel) and such.  Will keep it in mind for later, though.  Thanks.

 

 

Anyway...

I had too much to do yesterday and afterwards I couldn't keep my eyes open at the computer.  So dialogs where done today instead.  New version is up!

[irquih]

Oh, the importance of reading documentation:

In the Condition List, consecutive ORs are treated like a single block when evaluating and have order precedence over AND.

 
Good thing I read that, since that's contrary to every other language.  Language design, how hard can it be?  (Very hard, apparently.)

[xaz]

Oh, the importance of reading documentation:

In the Condition List, consecutive ORs are treated like a single block when evaluating and have order precedence over AND.

 

Good thing I read that, since that's contrary to every other language.  Language design, how hard can it be?  (Very hard, apparently.)

 

I'm expecting Beth at some point to reveal that Papyrus (and the CK, in this case) was all just a big joke.

 

It's likely the most primitive environment you'll ever develop code for. See it as a challenge ....

[irquih]

 

Oh, the importance of reading documentation:

In the Condition List, consecutive ORs are treated like a single block when evaluating and have order precedence over AND.

 

Good thing I read that, since that's contrary to every other language.  Language design, how hard can it be?  (Very hard, apparently.)

 

I'm expecting Beth at some point to reveal that Papyrus (and the CK, in this case) was all just a big joke.

 

It's likely the most primitive environment you'll ever develop code for. See it as a challenge ....

 

 

Yeah, it is rather primitive.  Although I do wonder how their low level language is implemented.  If it resembles a sane form of assembler and has real array manipulation, I might at some point get fed up enough with the language to write a backend for clang targeting their bytecode instead.

 

[edit: clarify which language I would target]

[Kimy]

 

Oh, the importance of reading documentation:

In the Condition List, consecutive ORs are treated like a single block when evaluating and have order precedence over AND.

 

Good thing I read that, since that's contrary to every other language.  Language design, how hard can it be?  (Very hard, apparently.)

 

I'm expecting Beth at some point to reveal that Papyrus (and the CK, in this case) was all just a big joke.

 

It's likely the most primitive environment you'll ever develop code for. See it as a challenge ....

 

 

It's also confusing. Papyrus seems to have a very odd interpretation of object oriented programming. Some things you expect to work...just...don't.

 

[irquih]

 

 

Oh, the importance of reading documentation:

In the Condition List, consecutive ORs are treated like a single block when evaluating and have order precedence over AND.

 

Good thing I read that, since that's contrary to every other language.  Language design, how hard can it be?  (Very hard, apparently.)

 

I'm expecting Beth at some point to reveal that Papyrus (and the CK, in this case) was all just a big joke.

 

It's likely the most primitive environment you'll ever develop code for. See it as a challenge ....

 

 

It's also confusing. Papyrus seems to have a very odd interpretation of object oriented programming. Some things you expect to work...just...don't.

 

 

 

Yeah.  I kinda treat it like C with properties and some form of inheritance.

 

Btw, does anyone recognize the language it's based on?  Each time I'm coding in it, I get this nagging feeling I should recognize it somehow.  It's weird, it has C style logical operators (but no bitwise equivalents), it has Java's misconception that there are no pointers, by making everything a pointer...  But the verbosity of the language reminds me of pascal (except the keywords don't match).

[xaz]

 

 

 

Oh, the importance of reading documentation:

In the Condition List, consecutive ORs are treated like a single block when evaluating and have order precedence over AND.

 

Good thing I read that, since that's contrary to every other language.  Language design, how hard can it be?  (Very hard, apparently.)

 

I'm expecting Beth at some point to reveal that Papyrus (and the CK, in this case) was all just a big joke.

 

It's likely the most primitive environment you'll ever develop code for. See it as a challenge ....

 

 

It's also confusing. Papyrus seems to have a very odd interpretation of object oriented programming. Some things you expect to work...just...don't.

 

 

Yeah.  I kinda treat it like C with properties and some form of inheritance.

 

Btw, does anyone recognize the language it's based on?  Each time I'm coding in it, I get this nagging feeling I should recognize it somehow.  It's weird, it has C style logical operators (but no bitwise equivalents), it has Java's misconception that there are no pointers, by making everything a pointer...  But the verbosity of the language reminds me of pascal (except the keywords don't match).

 

It also has Java string pooling, which has annoyed me quite a bit since string comparisons may be case sensitive (like translations in SkyUI), but the pooling is not (wtf!).

 

I don't know for sure. I think it's intended to be more complete but they axed features due to time constraints. Though I can't really wrap my head around it. Designing a language is kind of easy. There are so many examples of suitable scripting languages, and it's not like they're trying to do anything unique. (And certainly didn't accomplish anything...)

 

To be honest, I think they just evolved it as they needed to.

"Hey, how about a for-statement?" ... "No time, do it with a while until we get there."

"Structs on the stack?" ... "Nah, who needs it? Let me know if you really need it for a quest, and I'll reason you down."

"Ok, we really need those structs." .... "Sorry, we're less than four years from release, and in crunch mode. No can do."

 

Let me quote the public api:

OnPlayerBowShot(Weapon akWeapon, Ammo akAmmo, Float afPower, Bool abSunGazing)

To me, this design sounds more like "aawww, fuck it. just add the parameter and be done with it." ... Not the kind of designers you want working on your modding framework.

[Kimy]

 

Let me quote the public api:

OnPlayerBowShot(Weapon akWeapon, Ammo akAmmo, Float afPower, Bool abSunGazing)

To me, this design sounds more like "aawww, fuck it. just add the parameter and be done with it." ... Not the kind of designers you want working on your modding framework.

 

 

They forgot Bool GrowlingStomach, Bool IsIntoxicatedAndCantShootStraight and Bool IsGettingTickledFromBehind, though

[irquih]

 

 

 

 

Oh, the importance of reading documentation:

In the Condition List, consecutive ORs are treated like a single block when evaluating and have order precedence over AND.

 

Good thing I read that, since that's contrary to every other language.  Language design, how hard can it be?  (Very hard, apparently.)

 

I'm expecting Beth at some point to reveal that Papyrus (and the CK, in this case) was all just a big joke.

 

It's likely the most primitive environment you'll ever develop code for. See it as a challenge ....

 

 

It's also confusing. Papyrus seems to have a very odd interpretation of object oriented programming. Some things you expect to work...just...don't.

 

 

Yeah.  I kinda treat it like C with properties and some form of inheritance.

 

Btw, does anyone recognize the language it's based on?  Each time I'm coding in it, I get this nagging feeling I should recognize it somehow.  It's weird, it has C style logical operators (but no bitwise equivalents), it has Java's misconception that there are no pointers, by making everything a pointer...  But the verbosity of the language reminds me of pascal (except the keywords don't match).

 

It also has Java string pooling, which has annoyed me quite a bit since string comparisons may be case sensitive (like translations in SkyUI), but the pooling is not (wtf!).

 

I don't know for sure. I think it's intended to be more complete but they axed features due to time constraints. Though I can't really wrap my head around it. Designing a language is kind of easy. There are so many examples of suitable scripting languages, and it's not like they're trying to do anything unique. (And certainly didn't accomplish anything...)

 

To be honest, I think they just evolved it as they needed to.

"Hey, how about a for-statement?" ... "No time, do it with a while until we get there."

"Structs on the stack?" ... "Nah, who needs it? Let me know if you really need it for a quest, and I'll reason you down."

"Ok, we really need those structs." .... "Sorry, we're less than four years from release, and in crunch mode. No can do."

 

Let me quote the public api:

OnPlayerBowShot(Weapon akWeapon, Ammo akAmmo, Float afPower, Bool abSunGazing)

To me, this design sounds more like "aawww, fuck it. just add the parameter and be done with it." ... Not the kind of designers you want working on your modding framework.

 

 

Ew, bah, gross!  I'm gonna need a shower.

 

 

 

Let me quote the public api:

OnPlayerBowShot(Weapon akWeapon, Ammo akAmmo, Float afPower, Bool abSunGazing)

To me, this design sounds more like "aawww, fuck it. just add the parameter and be done with it." ... Not the kind of designers you want working on your modding framework.

 

 

They forgot Bool GrowlingStomach, Bool IsIntoxicatedAndCantShootStraight and Bool IsGettingTickledFromBehind, though

 

 

Haha!

Hmm, I do want a tickling animation...  Would be a nice one for the dialogs.

 

 

Anyway...  lots of labor intensive work today.  I refactored most of the remaining dialogs to use a shared script (apparently, I missed 3 topics, Tes5Edit will help me out with that).  And... *drumroll* I implemented a much requested feature. *drumroll* At least, it appeared requested alot. *more drumro... "Eep, no, get away with the armbinder, I can't type with that on!"*

Mmmmmmmmph!

Ehm, yeah, that.  I implemented mmph sounds in the dialogs.  With many thanks to xaz, who supplied me with the one-liner to make that sound (and the library that handles all these sounds, really guys, ZAZ Animation Framework is awesome).

 

Speaking of ZAZ Animation Framework: there's all kinds of bondage gear there (have a bag over your head, or a gag that keeps your tongue sticking out, or rope (hmm, sweet sweet rope )).  Next release will have you capable of asking other people to remove them and will have the Mmph! dialogs trigger on the gags in that library!

Since that'll be the first time that the ZBF gags (that's how they're called internally) will prevent you from speaking, there may be mods that don't deal well with that.  So I added a toggle to turn it off.  I haven't decided yet whether it will be on or off by default.

[Zyxxas]

Great work on the mod <3

 

Is there any way to set the chance of intercourse higher? I can decrease the probability that NPCs remove equipment, but that seems to make them just play the "I'll let you get on with your adventure" dialogue.

 

If the answer is "because I haven't finished coding the config menu yet", that's ok - I understand you've put in a lot of work already

[irquih]

Great work on the mod <3

 

Is there any way to set the chance of intercourse higher? I can decrease the probability that NPCs remove equipment, but that seems to make them just play the "I'll let you get on with your adventure" dialogue.

 

If the answer is "because I haven't finished coding the config menu yet", that's ok - I understand you've put in a lot of work already

 

Actually, that's almost the answer.  The real issue is that I haven't balanced the rape chance yet.  Since that and the consensual sex are related I haven't put any configuration options in.

 

The probability that NPCs remove equipment (i.e. the success value per item category) is just how often they'll fail removing it.  I.e. they try to remove it, but don't succeed.

[Zydar]

Just wondering if the dialog only trigger if my character is gagged? Mine was not gagged but blindfolded and the dialog did not pop up. Not sure if the same thing would happen if my character only has the armbinder on her.

 

Aside from that, you are making good progress. Looking forward to the next update.

[irquih]

Just wondering if the dialog only trigger if my character is gagged? Mine was not gagged but blindfolded and the dialog did not pop up. Not sure if the same thing would happen if my character only has the armbinder on her.

 

Aside from that, you are making good progress. Looking forward to the next update.

 

Currently the dialog only triggers if you are gagged.

 

I have plans to include a non-gagged dialog tree as well.  But first I want to have all the non-gag dialogue working right.

[Kimy]

 

Just wondering if the dialog only trigger if my character is gagged? Mine was not gagged but blindfolded and the dialog did not pop up. Not sure if the same thing would happen if my character only has the armbinder on her.

 

Aside from that, you are making good progress. Looking forward to the next update.

 

Currently the dialog only triggers if you are gagged.

 

I have plans to include a non-gagged dialog tree as well.  But first I want to have all the non-gag dialogue working right.

 

 

That would be awesome! Right now you have to tell them to leave the gag on if you want them to remove other devices, which means you will have to take your chances with Skyrim's so-called decent citizens again. Who seem to be much more keen on raping you than helping you. I got taken advantage of like a dozen times in some tavern while trying to get all my devices off. I think one of the people abusing her was a priest... oO

[irquih]

 

 

Just wondering if the dialog only trigger if my character is gagged? Mine was not gagged but blindfolded and the dialog did not pop up. Not sure if the same thing would happen if my character only has the armbinder on her.

 

Aside from that, you are making good progress. Looking forward to the next update.

 

Currently the dialog only triggers if you are gagged.

 

I have plans to include a non-gagged dialog tree as well.  But first I want to have all the non-gag dialogue working right.

 

 

That would be awesome! Right now you have to tell them to leave the gag on if you want them to remove other devices, which means you will have to take your chances with Skyrim's so-called decent citizens again. Who seem to be much more keen on raping you than helping you. I got taken advantage of like a dozen times in some tavern while trying to get all my devices off. I think one of the people abusing her was a priest... oO

 

 

Oh, priests, they might be a bit celibate, no wonder they go wild when they finally can't hold back.

 

 

Anyway... new version (0.9) is up, yay!  (See the changelog on the download page.)

 

Dialog refactoring is done, all dialog is now modular and interface-able and pretty and shiny and sparkly and tasty and...

All I have to do is implement the "I don't want to remove your gag." style dialogue (i.e. enable that part of the configuration that's all teasingly staring you in the face and doesn't do anything but conjure up a pretty slider).  It will add a fifth branch to the help dialogues, but it's also the last bit I need before I can add non-gagged dialogue.

 

Oh, I also implemented a way other mods can tell mine to shut up.  And since it's an uncommon way to do it, it'll either work great or I'll be burned on the stake by people using it.   Seriously, I don't expect problems, but if you do have any, let me know (I love squashing bugs).

[Nightmyste]

just a heads up, I' ve just started with the latest version (0.9) and now you can use the "mph" dialogue without being gagged

[Slorm]

just a heads up, I' ve just started with the latest version (0.9) and now you can use the "mph" dialogue without being gagged

 

Same here but it only seems to appear the once on install. After you "mphh" at someone it seems to disappear after that so no big deal