Deviously Cursed Loot LE 9.0 (2021-03-09)

[thesecretspyer]

so this maybe a stupid question and it may already be answered but the chloe quest seems to be stuck at the bandit chest as there isn't anything in the bandit chest it points me to, am i just dumb?

[atheus]

10 minutes ago, thesecretspyer said:

so this maybe a stupid question and it may already be answered but the chloe quest seems to be stuck at the bandit chest as there isn't anything in the bandit chest it points me to, am i just dumb?

There should have been a note or.. receipt or something in there for you to read. I don't recall exactly what it's called. Once you read it you'll be ready to proceed.

[Lupine00]

15 hours ago, Kimy said:

Its author needs to fix that, then. That's seriously breaking expected SexLab behaviour. Quite a few mods rely on these events getting properly fired.

Alas, being Skyrim modding, it's not that simple. If my memory serves me, you can't have separate orgasms if you fire that event.

 

It should be evident that if you fire it, then mod X is going to think that all participants had an orgasm - because that is the convention with that event, pre-SLSO if there was an orgasm, all participants were included.

 

But in SLSO, it might be just one participant of several, who gets an orgasm. Quite often, the PC does not get the orgasm, but the vanilla SexLab event is interpreted loosely by many mods, including SexLab itself, to mean the PC had an orgasm.

 

So in regular SexLab, the PC can be brutally gang raped, and she will always be considered to have had an orgasm. In SLSO, it may not be the case.

 

If you're handling inflation, you might want to know which participants are males that orgasmed, if you want to correctly calculate imaginary gigantic jizz output.

You might also want to know if the other participants are horses or females, or whatever, and handle the orgasm of each as it relates to what the PC received and how they received it: oral, anal, vaginal, or some combination of them  - I believe FHU attempts this, most likely Pearl Juice does too.

 

 

It's understood that some mods have problems with SLSO. Some problem mods have patches. FHU, has a patch, I think.

 

From what's been said, DCL doesn't have serious problems with SLSO.

I guess some people don't get inflated when they should. As Skyrim problems go, fairly benign.

 

 

Caveat to this, I may have remembered it all wrong. So should probably check with Ed.

[twsnider1138]

Ok, I have a question about the Slave Collar? I have been locked in the wretched thing and my attempts to solicit sex to get it off ended up with Lydia, the bitch, locking me in a slave gag. Now I can’t talk at all, restraints keys won’t work, and I can’t solicit sex. Does being raped count towards the sex needed to convince it to come off or does it need to be consensual sex?

[Lupine00]

44 minutes ago, twsnider1138 said:

Ok, I have a question about the Slave Collar? I have been locked in the wretched thing and my attempts to solicit sex to get it off ended up with Lydia, the bitch, locking me in a slave gag. Now I can’t talk at all, restraints keys won’t work, and I can’t solicit sex. Does being raped count towards the sex needed to convince it to come off or does it need to be consensual sex?

I can't promise it, but IIRC, any sex will do. Solicitation is probably a lot slower and harder than an aggressively tuned rape mod (which could also be DCL in this case).

 

You're lucky, you could have ended up in a belt ... when that happens, and you're gagged, you might have some problems.

DCL used to try and rape you anyway, but I think that's supposed to be fixed now.

[twsnider1138]

23 minutes ago, Lupine00 said:

I can't promise it, but IIRC, any sex will do. Solicitation is probably a lot slower and harder than an aggressively tuned rape mod (which could also be DCL in this case).

 

You're lucky, you could have ended up in a belt ... when that happens, and you're gagged, you might have some problems.

DCL used to try and rape you anyway, but I think that's supposed to be fixed now.

Thankfully I had a couple head restraints key and was at least able to get out of the gag. Also the fact that you can customise the menu to require up to 1000 days or sex partners to get the collar off scares me.

[thedarkone1234]

37 minutes ago, twsnider1138 said:

Thankfully I had a couple head restraints key and was at least able to get out of the gag. Also the fact that you can customise the menu to require up to 1000 days or sex partners to get the collar off scares me.

I hope it wasn't tuned that way as you got the collar because I think whatever it was when you got it sticks for that collar.

Anyway, while you are stuck, get yourself a "dibella's charm" (not the amulet, its a DCL item. The dollmaker has it, I think) and enjoy being a literal god in combat

[twsnider1138]

25 minutes ago, thedarkone1234 said:

I hope it wasn't tuned that way as you got the collar because I think whatever it was when you got it sticks for that collar.

Anyway, while you are stuck, get yourself a "dibella's charm" (not the amulet, its a DCL item. The dollmaker has it, I think) and enjoy being a literal god in combat

Hehe, thankfully not. I just decided to see what the maximum was after playing around.

[Xiaron]

16 hours ago, Kimy said:

Its author needs to fix that, then. That's seriously breaking expected SexLab behaviour. Quite a few mods rely on these events getting properly fired.

 

2 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Alas, being Skyrim modding, it's not that simple. If my memory serves me, you can't have separate orgasms if you fire that event.

Correct as far as I have been able to tell. If you don't turn off the ending event, you get an extra orgasm for all participants at the end. Which somewhat defeats the purpose of SLSO. Ed is good about doing patches, but like I said he appropriately follows permissions, and DCL is listed as no patch. (FHU does have a patch btw.)

 

So Kimy, would you allow Ed to make a SLSO patch for what sounds like just a line or two of script? It's not something I'm going to ask you to go out of your way to add, but I would like to have that feature working if possible.

[manhunt]

So, with the dresses, pony boots and restrictive gloves, the parts that they get equipped on just turn invisible. The corsets, most cuffs, some posture items like the collars for example, don't even appear but don't turn the body parts that they get equipped on invisible. Did i install it incorrectly? I installed all the requirements.

[Cole745]

Question can you only get enslaved once by either Leon or Leah after the quest? There isn't an option to be enslaved to them after I've completed the quest.

[neosuduno]

OK I have gone over the whole thing so far, and here are the things I dislike about the mod and what I like (The like was strong enough to keep the mod installed).

The dislikes are in three things:

The prison is basically repetitive, and not at all fun. When all you have is misogynistic men as people to interact with, it is not a good character design. Truth is that the flat characters have been getting worse and worse, and that is my biggest gripe. It is one thing if the stereotype is diverse, but in this case, they are all basically the same character with different skins. A flat character can work wonderfully if they are colorful, but that is not the case here.

 

I point that out since Kimy is capable of writing character, very well in fact.

 

That brings me to the Doll maker and Leon. Leon is an example of the kind of character Kimy was aiming for done right. His sister is not much different. They have a better attitude and more diverse approaches that make them more tolerable, and the fact that they keep switching things up make it more interesting, as opposed to the prison.

 

The Dollmaker is an excellent example of a terrifying taskmaster. She actually has a business to run and her approach to failure may be punishing, but nothing you cannot deal with or are turned off by.

 

Sasha is a Sub, but one portrayed right. He has/had a job and an identity. A name to the face makes it easier to relate, even if it is just a title.

 

Lastly, and my favorite part of the Mod, is how she portrayed Sheogorath, as a trickster that sends people on subtle and merry quests down a path others could only see as crazy! Kimy nailed the Mad God's personality and Modus Operandi so well I could almost hear Wes Johnson's voice whenever he opened his mouth. THAT is portrayal of a character done right, and something I would love to see more of.

 

Seriously Kimy, great work on the Prince of Madness, I would love to see more of him in this mod, as you fit him into the mods brand of madness so perfectly that you could mistake the whole Cursed Collar quest as Canon.

[Kimy]

16 hours ago, Xiaron said:

 

Correct as far as I have been able to tell. If you don't turn off the ending event, you get an extra orgasm for all participants at the end. Which somewhat defeats the purpose of SLSO. Ed is good about doing patches, but like I said he appropriately follows permissions, and DCL is listed as no patch. (FHU does have a patch btw.)

 

So Kimy, would you allow Ed to make a SLSO patch for what sounds like just a line or two of script? It's not something I'm going to ask you to go out of your way to add, but I would like to have that feature working if possible.

I would consider that a problem caused by another mod that said other mod needs to fix on their end. No, I don't think patching DCL is a clean solution for that problem.

[Lupine00]

40 minutes ago, Kimy said:

I would consider that a problem caused by another mod that said other mod needs to fix on their end. No, I don't think patching DCL is a clean solution for that problem.

In that case, it means you are opposed to the entire concept of SLSO, because you have interpreted its core behaviour as a defect.

 

Raising an end-orgasm event when there is no orgasm would also be a defect.

 

 

My position is that SLSO is trying to fix a significant deficiency in SexLab. SLSO cannot change the meaning of end-orgasm, and that meaning has a long history of being interpreted both by SexLab itself, and other mods as meaning "orgasms for all". SLSO could (in fact) patch SexLab so it doesn't recognise it, but that wouldn't change how other mods see it, they would still need patching appropriately to have correct behaviour.

 

That interpretation is simply counter to the entire premise of SLSO. The only time SLSO could issue that event is in the rare case that "orgasms for all" happens to occur simultaneously.

 

If your position is you will not support SLSO, it is disingenuous to say that is because SLSO is broken. SLSO has no alternative. It cannot raise that event. If it does, SexLab will count an orgasm it shouldn't, and other mods will see it as a player orgasm, even if there was no player orgasm.

 

 

Do you have an alternative, better proposal as to how SLSO should operate?

That would be the constructive thing to offer at this point. At least there could be some debate about it.

 

 

Should SLSO (for example) raise end-orgasm on the end of player-orgasm, and simply assume that nobody cares at all about NPC orgasms? If they get an extra one they shouldn't, so what? Right? (I don't like this position, but some people might be OK with it).

 

Should SLSO offer this above capability as an option, that can be enabled in the MCM, only for those that need to raise it to work around mods that refuse to ever support SLSO events (which requires  zero dependency on SLSO, because they're events)?

 

It might be tolerable if you are a player slavery mod, but what about all those PaH people? They are presumably very particular about tracking orgasms for their subs... It is part of their "thing". It is not trivial or irrelevant stuff to them.

 

 

It's such a tiny feature of DCL, that I can see it might not seem worth the trouble.

But if it's simply that, then say that. "Not enough return on effort. More important stuff to do. Not a priority for DCL." That's fair.

 

But to twist this into being a defect in SLSO that it should fix - when it clearly cannot "fix" it - is manifestly unjust.

[Kimy]

People still mistakenly assume that I need to care about what literally every other mod does. I...don't. DCL links against SexLab. Not SLSO. Which means I adjust my mod's behaviour against SexLab's and make it work with mine. If you'd ask me if I wanted to change some things in SL, gosh, yes, I would! But thing is that if I'd change the things I'd love to change, I'd make it no longer work with all the mods that assume it works just like it does, which is why I don't do that. If SLSO chooses to change core behaviour of SL..., I dunno why people assume that's something other mod developers need to care about. Sorry, but no, I don't care. You cause the problem, you solve it! On your end, that is. What's "unjust" is expecting ME to cater to literally every other mod on LL. I honestly have no such obligation. If SLSO is incompatible with DCL, I will add it to DCL's "Conflicts and Known Problems" section, and that's as far as it goes.

 

 

[SkyAddiction]

1 hour ago, Kimy said:

People still mistakenly assume that I need to care about what literally every other mod does. I...don't. DCL links against SexLab. Not SLSO. Which means I adjust my mod's behaviour against SexLab's and make it work with mine. If you'd ask me if I wanted to change some things in SL, gosh, yes, I would! But thing is that if I'd change the things I'd love to change, I'd make it no longer work with all the mods that assume it works just like it does, which is why I don't do that. If SLSO chooses to change core behaviour of SL..., I dunno why people assume that's something other mod developers need to care about. Sorry, but no, I don't care. You cause the problem, you solve it! On your end, that is. What's "unjust" is expecting ME to cater to literally every other mod on LL. I honestly have no such obligation. If SLSO is incompatible with DCL, I will add it to DCL's "Conflicts and Known Problems" section, and that's as far as it goes.

 

I think, to clarify, people are asking if you'd be willing to allow Ed86 to make a patch for SLSO that affects DCL, not asking you to patch DCL to accommodate SLSO. That would correctly place the onus of maintenance on Ed86 to maintain compatibility between SLSO and DCL, not on you to maintain compatibility between DCL and SLSO. If users were to successfully lobby Ed86 to do so, you would assume no responsibility for broken saves or any problems that might arise from your updates of DCL, and Ed86 would assume responsibility to update the DCL patch for SLSO after you make changes to DCL.

 

It's not the worst compromise, though you would still have the reasonable argument of denial that SLSO problems could show up in the DCL support thread when you update DCL.

 

the tl/dr: I think people are still confused by the amount of control you're reserving over the mods you manage - is it a "no patches, period, ever" stance, or "no direct patches to mods I manage, but other mods can patch theirs to mine if they assume full responsibility for maintaining compatibility with mods I manage, of which responsibility I assume none" sort of thing?

 

I think that distinction is something a lot of people don't understand and has resulted in a fair bit of discussion in this thread over the last month or so.

 

Edit: super tl/dr - Can other mod makers make and maintain compatibility patches to their own mods to ensure they work with DD/DCL? That's what people don't really understand.

[Roggvir]

Is the Leon's quest supposed to stop after removing the combination lock collar?

No longer enslaved by Leon, i even dismissed him as follower, but i see in the console the quest is still running and i see "[DCUR] Sex attacks are disabled due to conflicting quests!" in the log - would that be the conflicting quest?

I am not aware of any other quests running, i see only vanilla game quests in the quest log.

 

EDIT:

After looking at dcur_library.checkDCURQuestRunning() and checking all conditions, the Leon quest is the only thing that evaluates as true because it is still running.

So, is it safe to use stopquest in the console to stop Leon's quest? or am i suppsed to do something else beside stealing his master key, trying all combinations until i unlock the collar, and dismissing Leon?

[atheus]

I have been playing around with Leah and Sasha, trying to make my life a bit more complicated and I seem to have come across a mishmash of bugs that pretty much make it all unusable. I'm not 100% sure what the intended behavior is, but let me explain what is going on and if anyone can tell me what should be happening I would appreciate that!

 

Leah:

In a nutshell, the DOMINATED quest never ends even after removing the collar, suspends DCL via "active quest", and most of her restraints either come off effortlessly, or are nearly impossible to remove without escaping from Leah completely by stealing her key.

1. On my first run through the Leon quest, I accidentally talked to Ustolf's Guard just before talking to Claudius for a ride back to Whiterun. The guard got excited by a gagged, armbinder bound woman and decided he wanted to add a blindfold and hobble skirt to the fun. This caused Claudius to be unable to add the Obsidian Blindfold as the last step (a trivial detail, but while I'm here).
    
2. It took me 4 times finishing Leon's quest to learn that I was doing something wrong by clicking through Leon's dialog as quickly as I was reading it. Despite him saying that Leah was in the Bannered Mare, she was actually right behind me in Leon's house every time, so I would just turn around and talk to her (since that is what Leon just told me I should do). The notice in the corner told me to offer her my body, so I did so without delay, not realizing that Leon was still slowly removing all of the Obsidian restraints from the party after I finished talking to him (I had expected that it would be Leah who would remove these restraints after I talked to her, and he just intended to leave me bound up for her, since that is what his dialog indicated he was going to do). Leah usually started applying new rules which would add a restraint before the obsidian ones were fully removed, causing the removal process to halt incorrectly. The first two times it halted just before putting the new slave collar on. The third time Leah replaced the obsidian chastity belt with her chastity belt before most of the obsidian stuff had  been removed, which apparently caused the obsidian corset to bug. It proceeded to remove everything except the corset. This is when I finally realized that Leon needed all of the time allotted to his speech to finish removing the obsidian restraints and add the slave collar.
   
   Each time I think Leon trying to remove the corset popped up a dialog for me to click on for the obsidian corset whether I wanted to "try to escape" or "carry on" or whatever.
    
3. Experimenting with how to free myself from slavery to Leah, I stole the key and found several bugs
   a - failing to steal the key resulted in penalty devices being added to my character. These could be unlocked without need to struggle or have a key.
   b - setting the probability to steal the key to 100% did not guarantee being able to steal it. It didn't seem like the probability slider affected it at all.
   c - setting the probability of getting caught trying to guess the combination to 100% did not guarantee getting caught trying to pick the lock.
   d - after 45 minutes of trying, I was unable to cause Leah to catch me in the act of trying to guess the combination.
   e - after finding the combination (and removing the collar once I redid it and got a slave collar), the DOMINATED quest is still present as an active quest, however Leah's dominant dialog options are gone. DCL's "Active quest running" continues to show "TRUE", so I can't really use this save any more.
   (as a side note, I was surprised that DCL was showing active quest running just because of Leah's domination even before I broke free)
    
4. Leah's punishments:
   I decided to ignore Leah's dress code right off the bat, and she put me into a hobble skirt. I immediately struggled out of the hobble skirt easily, and went on to continue playing. I did not pay much attention to the note saying that I didn't want to put the hobble skirt down. A while later after a few fast travels, I was confused by a message saying that I "heard a click from my chastity belt" or somesuch, and that I could probably remove it if I wanted to... At the time I wasn't wearing any bondage gear of any sort, so I didn't know what it was from. (EDIT: It turns out I had put the maiden's virtue chastity belt into another follower's AFT backpack, a week earlier, and forgotten about it, so the message was unrelated to Leah).
   
   A bit later after seeing how Leah's stuff worked a bit more, I noticed that I had the "Bondage Lover" box ticked (I usually don't) , and that the Hobble Skirt was supposed to have been deleted after I removed it. However, when I put the Hobble Skirt back on, and then "unlocked" it, it immediately unlocked. Furthermore, all Leah's punishment items such as a corset, yoke, large ballgag, etc, could immediately be unlocked. I did not have any keys that should facilitate this. I'm still not sure whether this had anything to do with the chastity belt timer that popped, or vice-versa.
    
5. Leah's Rule: No rest without permission
   I found that whenever she applied this rule, I could just ignore it. If I went to rest without permission, I would wake up to messages indicating all rules had been removed while I was sleeping. No punishment awaited me when I woke. If I asked her for permission before resting and she refused it, that didn't matter. Still no punishment. The only way to be vaguely "punished" is to actually receive permission to rest, in which case she would add full body restraints before going to bed. At one point after putting on the full body restraints a notice popped up in the corner of the screen about me having rested without permission (I had slept one hour a bit before that). Not sure what jiggled it loose, but since I was already tied for bed, it didn't seem to want to pursue the issue any further. Maybe if I had a short one-hour nap shortly after she applied the no-sleep rule and let things float for a while after that? I'm not sure.
    
6. Leah's Rule: Restrained in safe areas
   Entering Whiterun she applied heavy shackles which if I attempt to unlock them indicate that they use standard restraints keys. However, when I go to unlock them with a restraints key in my inventory, it says I don't have the correct key. I consoled myself one of each kind of body, head, hand, etc. key and none of those worked either. I noticed they could be picked, but the first picking attempt resulted in the safety preventing further picking attempts.
   
   Moving outside of Whiterun and running out to Fort Geymoor which had been taken over by bandits, Leah made no move to remove the shackles. Instead, the message indicating she was locking them onto me since we were in a safe area repeated several times on the way out of town. At least she killed the bandits for me!
   
   Returning home to try to sleep off the rules strangely required 24 hours of sleep even though I had been out for at least 9 or 10 hours testing the safe area rule. After 24 hours sleep, the rules changed, but she still didn't remove the shackles.
   
   I next decided to steal Leah's Master Restraints Key. This worked on the heavy shackles.
    
7. Leah's Rule: Naked
   Seems to work, except if I break the rule, any restraint she puts on as a penalty can be unlocked without need for a key.
    
8. Leah's Rule: Rubber Dress
   It seems any of the Dollmaker armor will suffice. No need to wear the rubber dress she gives you. As with naked, any penalty devices can be unlocked instantly without need for a key.
    
9. Leah's Rule: Max 500 Gold
   The warning time for this is quite long, and winds up being feckless since any restraints she adds can be removed as with the dress code ones. There is a typo in the notification in the corner which says "Slaves aren't allowed to carry that much giold!" or something like that.
    
10. Leah's Rule: Random Restraints to keep things interesting
    Some can be removed immediately. The only one I found that couldn't was the armbinder. While I could not remove the armbinder (eventually it told me I didn't have the right key), it did not prevent me from immediately removing other penalty restraints which were added after (for having too much gold). This matches the behavior of standard restraints with fiddled locks.
    
    After resteing and having the rules reset, Leah didn't bother removing the armbinder, leaving me with the options of successfully picking it (extremely difficult) or stealing Leah's key again, thus ending the submission to her completely.
     
11. Leah's Rule: Full chastity
    No problems with this one. I confirmed that the chastity devices could not be removed (first of Leah's restraints that actually locked for me) and then went back to sleep. By the time I woke up, Leah was ready for new rules and removed them. Strangely, the same chastity belt and bra can be removed easily if they are added as a penalty.
     
12. Leah's Rule: Monogamy
    She did not react to me repeatedly having sex with Sasha right in front of her.

Sasha:

 

Having Sasha in full restraints, when I go to remove all restraints, it gives me an error saying I don't have the correct key to remove her armbinder. The result is that it removes all the restraints except for her ankle chains and the armbinder. If I then click to remove her arm/leg chains, the armbinder again complains of not having the correct key, but it does remove the ankle chains. Then finally choosing to remove the armbinder on its own as the last request works.

[Xiaron]

4 hours ago, Kimy said:

People still mistakenly assume that I need to care about what literally every other mod does. I...don't. DCL links against SexLab. Not SLSO. Which means I adjust my mod's behaviour against SexLab's and make it work with mine. If you'd ask me if I wanted to change some things in SL, gosh, yes, I would! But thing is that if I'd change the things I'd love to change, I'd make it no longer work with all the mods that assume it works just like it does, which is why I don't do that. If SLSO chooses to change core behaviour of SL..., I dunno why people assume that's something other mod developers need to care about. Sorry, but no, I don't care. You cause the problem, you solve it! On your end, that is. What's "unjust" is expecting ME to cater to literally every other mod on LL. I honestly have no such obligation. If SLSO is incompatible with DCL, I will add it to DCL's "Conflicts and Known Problems" section, and that's as far as it goes.

 

 

I'm not asking you to do anything. I'm asking for permission of have the mod author of SLSO make a compatibility patch because you specifically say no one can make patches. That's all! So I'm asking for permission to do exactly what you're saying I should do, does that mean a patch is okay? Because honestly I'm confused here. 

[ChickenToaster34]

I am currently having a reoccurring issue, i don't know if someone else had the issue and got a solution (there are over 800 pages so forgive me if i missed it) but bear with me.

The issue i'm having is as follows

1) Get bound with DD

2) get unbound via keys/events/other (not using a debug feature)

3) cannot swing weapons/cast spells

I am allowed to Draw my weapon/Raise my hands for spells/fists but cannot cast said spells/swing my weapon. I don't know why this issue occurs but I've narrowed it down to only occurring after I've had any kind of arm/wrist devices. (arm-binders/mittens/etc.) however not regular gloves. if there is a conflict or if the mods just having an issue that can be easily fixed in the in game Mod Manager. any advice would be helpful and appreciated.

[Xiaron]

On 2/7/2019 at 11:25 AM, Peterpeterpeter said:

If I continue the Leon quest: At the point where I should be taken to the Party, the game completely freezes. Always have to kill Skyrim and restart.

I just had the same issue, I got Claudius to move outside to the market again, then talked to him. Teleport worked fine after that.

[Kimy]

11 hours ago, SkyAddiction said:

 

I think, to clarify, people are asking if you'd be willing to allow Ed86 to make a patch for SLSO that affects DCL, not asking you to patch DCL to accommodate SLSO. That would correctly place the onus of maintenance on Ed86 to maintain compatibility between SLSO and DCL, not on you to maintain compatibility between DCL and SLSO. If users were to successfully lobby Ed86 to do so, you would assume no responsibility for broken saves or any problems that might arise from your updates of DCL, and Ed86 would assume responsibility to update the DCL patch for SLSO after you make changes to DCL.

 

It's not the worst compromise, though you would still have the reasonable argument of denial that SLSO problems could show up in the DCL support thread when you update DCL.

That's exactly why I don't like people posting patches against DD or DCL. Both are -very- complex mods. The person who actually made the patch might be able to determine when a problem was caused by their patch, but -users- of said patch usually can't tell if the bug originates in DCL or in that patch made by another person. They will report the problem to ME. And I don't want to have to deal with this stuff -in addition- to all the genuine issues that end on my desk.

 

I have occasionally tolerated patches when I had the impression that the patch was merited enough AND there was little chance I'd get flooded in support requests for problems caused by that patch. But the more patches people make, the higher the chance that they will cause issues. Particularly when patches start not only to overwrite DCL, but EACH OTHER (by patching the same script or the ESP).

 

Which is why I really intend to keep the number of patches against DD or DCL to an absolute minimum. Me allowing or tolerating one patch doesn't mean that I will okay the next. It will always depend on the situation. If a patch changes files I rarely touch, chances are that I will say yes. If they touch files I habitually change with every single update, chances are that I will say no. The SLSO patch would be in the latter category - it would need to change one of DCL core scripts. On top of the circumstance that I disagree with implementations that so drastically change framework behaviour to begin with. Sorry, but I think it's just bad practice, and this case is a good example, why. Mods based on a framework expect it to work in a certain way, and when a 3rd party modder thinks they can just rip out framework features and replace them with something else, stuff is basically guaranteed to break. But for the past few weeks I more and more got the impression that this sort of Wild West approach to development is apparently normal to some parts of the modding community.

11 hours ago, SkyAddiction said:

 

the tl/dr: I think people are still confused by the amount of control you're reserving over the mods you manage - is it a "no patches, period, ever" stance, or "no direct patches to mods I manage, but other mods can patch theirs to mine if they assume full responsibility for maintaining compatibility with mods I manage, of which responsibility I assume none" sort of thing?

 

I think that distinction is something a lot of people don't understand and has resulted in a fair bit of discussion in this thread over the last month or so.

 

Edit: super tl/dr - Can other mod makers make and maintain compatibility patches to their own mods to ensure they work with DD/DCL? That's what people don't really understand.

The DD and DCL licence clearly state that releasing patched versions of its scripts or ESP is not allowed. People cannot release changed DD or DCL files without asking me first. It's really clear enough, one should think. But then again, I get that nobody reads ReadMes, so that's probably why some people are confused...

 

TL/DR: I reserve 100% control over releasing patches against DD and DCL, and no, I am not going to ok that particular patch.

[Kimy]

I will put this in a separate post, so it doesn't get lost in the general debate on how much a control freak I am. ?

 

What I -can- offer to SLSO, is registering for whatever (if any) alternate mod event SLSO fires when one partner orgasms and execute DCL's existing inflation feature from there. I'd need to be able to easily tell if the player is a part of that animation and who her partner(s) are, just like with the regular SexLab event. I will not start reading SLSO's code, though. Somebody would need to tell me what to register to. If no such events get fired by SLSO, we're out of luck. I will not go any farther than this.

[SkyAddiction]

12 minutes ago, Kimy said:

[Explanation]

The DD and DCL licence clearly state that releasing patched versions of its scripts or ESP is not allowed. People cannot release changed DD or DCL files without asking me first. It's really clear enough, one should think. But then again, I get that nobody reads ReadMes, so that's probably why some people are confused...

 

TL/DR: I reserve 100% control over releasing patches against DD and DCL, and no, I am not going to ok that particular patch.

 

No, I get it, but then I come from a family full of attorneys, so I can parse your terms of use without any real difficulty. I do (sort of) apologize for baiting you into that extensive reply, but posting a "Kimy says" liturgy doesn't have anything like the same force or legitimacy as "Kimy actually says herself." I think the issue should be clear to everyone and the why as well. It's what I expected and it's a fair argument.

 

Oh, and thanks for the TL/DR. That kind of sassy turnabout is quintessential Kimy and it made me actually laugh out loud. 

[BakersDelight1234]

Not to butt in on the tail end, but whatever happened to us just being kinky basdards?