Devious Devices Framework Development/Beta

[Kimy]

I merged a new and totally overhauled device escape system to the repo. This was the equivalent of performing open heart surgery on the framework, to thorough testing is needed!!!

 

Players can now try to escape a device by struggling, lockpicking or cutting it open. The difficulty can now be set by the modder on a device level! One escape attempt can be performed once in a given period, also defined on the device level. If no local statements are made, default values are used.

 

Players can now also attempt to repair jammed locks, so the framework now finally features a built-in way to handle them. The difficulty of repairing a jammed lock can also be set by the modder creating the device.

 

The old (legacy) escape system is no longer selectable in MCM and has been disabled. Global settings affecting escape difficulty have also been removed, to give the modder control over their item difficulties.
Custom messages can also be defined on the device level, overriding standard framework message, if desired.

 

@DD authors: Please test against your custom items and tell me if there are any problems. The new feature should seamlessly pass through to any custom items using -standard- DDI features. Conversely, if your custom item did not allow escape before, it should not now - but please test to make sure!

[VirginMarie]

@Kimy

 

I've done a preliminary test with some Virgin Devices. No problems so far. Going to test more.

1. (minor) Version number notified in game is 3.3. I see v3.4 in mod manager
2. I see no more destroy key feature in MCM. Fine assuming this is intended. Is it intended?

 

[Darkpig]

The bound combat with the straitjacket still uses the punching animation. The new escape mechanics seem to be working so far...

[Kimy]

 

@Kimy

 

I see no more destroy key feature in MCM. Fine assuming this is intended. Is it intended?

 

 

Yes, I am removing most/all difficulty controls from MCM and make them item properties instead. So modders now will get full control over item behaviour and difficulty, as they should.

 

[VirginMarie]

 

 

@Kimy

 

I see no more destroy key feature in MCM. Fine assuming this is intended. Is it intended?

 

 

Yes, I am removing most/all difficulty controls from MCM and make them item properties instead. So modders now will get full control over item behaviour and difficulty, as they should.

 

 

 

Cool

Any chance this release could include the option to make silent, the quest messages when equipping/removing chastity devices via script (as we've discussed in the past)?

[Kimy]

 

 

 

@Kimy

 

I see no more destroy key feature in MCM. Fine assuming this is intended. Is it intended?

 

 

Yes, I am removing most/all difficulty controls from MCM and make them item properties instead. So modders now will get full control over item behaviour and difficulty, as they should.

 

 

 

Cool

Any chance this release could include the option to make silent, the quest messages when equipping/removing chastity devices via script (as we've discussed in the past)?

 

 

Yes, I wanted to do this in ages.

 

[naaitsab]

@Kimy,

Regarding the subject of escaping. Would it be possible to set the armbinder struggle key via MCM instead of locked to TAB? I know a lot of users use TAB to close containers and such judging from comments made on the subject.

Closing the struggle pop-up everytime is 'a bit' annoying

[Kimy]

@Kimy,

Regarding the subject of escaping. Would it be possible to set the armbinder struggle key via MCM instead of locked to TAB? I know a lot of users use TAB to close containers and such judging from comments made on the subject.

Closing the struggle pop-up everytime is 'a bit' annoying

 

The armbinder/struggle mechanics are under review, too.

[UnEvenSteven]

 

The armbinder/struggle mechanics are under review, too.

 

 

Here's hoping the clearly visible locks on Armbinders will finally have some use. I think even the descriptive text when putting on an Armbinder mentions closing the locks but they're never required to be unlocked to remove the Armbinder.

 

Of course this means the player would need a NPC and a key to help them out of an Armbinder. Maybe it could just be a hardcore option where all the restrictive arm restraints (Arm/Elbowbinders, Yoke and Straitjacket) require a key and a NPC to remove them.

[VirginMarie]

Events are occurring while riding a horse, which of course gets one very stuck. I'm not sure which event because rather than seeing the animation I end up walking on the horse. This has always for me occurred but very rarely. With the dev version I downloaded yesterday, it's happened 3 times now over a space of 30min.

 

 

I'm also getting errors like below repeating some in my log. Full log attached in case you want to see. This log ends at the point I was stuck on the horse. I don't think the two are related.

[04/14/2017 - 02:26:30PM] ERROR: Unable to call UnregisterForSleep - no native object bound to the script object, or object is of incorrect type
stack:
	[Item 17 in container  (00000014)].zadPiercingNippleScript.UnregisterForSleep() - "<native>" Line ?
	[Item 17 in container  (00000014)].zadPiercingNippleScript.OnUnequipped() - "zadEquipScript.psc" Line 269
[04/14/2017 - 02:26:30PM] ERROR: Unable to call UnregisterForSleep - no native object bound to the script object, or object is of incorrect type
stack:
	[None].VirginChastityChaurus.UnregisterForSleep() - "<native>" Line ?
	[None].VirginChastityChaurus.OnUnequipped() - "zadEquipScript.psc" Line 269
[04/14/2017 - 02:26:31PM] ERROR: Unable to call RegisterForSleep - no native object bound to the script object, or object is of incorrect type

Papyrus.0.log

[Princessity]

Hummm... this could be the new chastity belt struggle. I thought all our existing events don't animate while mounted but we may have to make double-sure. Thank you!

 

Just to narrow it down, do you have the hardcore mode option on?

[Princessity]

DDi and DDx builds have been updated!

 

Added an Elbowbinder prototype with a new, stricter model and appropriate animations. It needs... ALL the testing.

 

Known issues (please don't report these):

• No combat animations. Work in progress.
• No struggling animations. Available but not implemented yet.
• Only one variant (Black Elbowbinder). I need to make sure it's set up properly before adding variants.

[Loki15kun]

I have been reading this developement update thread and I saw the changes about key's and devices.

After thinking a lot about it, I could not understand the change proposed as a user.

 

Why can't I as "mod user" adjust key break/key jam chance? Will I have to edit/recompile every mod and script from now on in order to adjust it to my liking?

 

How I play now:

When I play with devious devices I mostly play it together with DCL, completing some quests and dungeons acquiring some devices and in general progressing with the story quests/exploration and searching for a escape methods/keys after being hindered enough.

(In a way I like the light bondage aspect of the mods without being forced to stop evertthing in order to remove devices)

I my case I strongly dislike the jam lock mechanics (since I see it more as a annoyance than a risk/reward solution) and either I put it very low and reduce jam costs or I put it on zero and enable key destruction after unlocking while enabling higher drop rates for keys and a low shield timer.

 

In other words, how will I be able to do it in the new model? Could a middle ground be reached (A JSON config per mod perhaps)? Or will I have to ask every mod creator how to do it, from now on?

 

Thank you all for everything.

 

 

[Kimy]

I have been reading this developement update thread and I saw the changes about key's and devices.

After thinking a lot about it, I could not understand the change proposed as a user.

 

Why can't I as "mod user" adjust key break/key jam chance? Will I have to edit/recompile every mod and script from now on in order to adjust it to my liking?

 

DD is a framework. The point of a framework isn't to provide features to the users directly, it's about providing features to other modders, THEY can create content with. If we allow the user to globally affect item behavior and difficulty, we limit the modders in what they can do. In DCL, I had to write a LOT of custom code to circumvent user-exposed framework settings, like key break and key jam. Imagine if there is an item for which only one key exists in the world, and the user sets a Destroy Key chance greater than zero... Not good!

Another example: I made many quests involving quest items that cannot be escaped from without the key. Because the point of the quest was finding the key. Back then, the framework allowed the user to set escape difficulties, so I had to write custom code, for every. single. device I didn't want to allow this for.

 

Difficulty settings is something that just doesn't belong in frameworks. It's the job of the content mods to allow its users to set difficulty for THEIR mods. And theirs alone. Some DD mods are meant to be harsher. Some are meant to be easier. The framework needs to cater to both. You will find difficulty sliders for DCL in DCL - where they belong.

 

[Loki15kun]

Difficulty settings is something that just doesn't belong in frameworks. It's the job of the content mods to allow its users to set difficulty for THEIR mods. And theirs alone. Some DD mods are meant to be harsher. Some are meant to be easier. The framework needs to cater to both. You will find difficulty sliders for DCL in DCL - where they belong.

 

 

 

I understand it now. Thanks.

 

[Content Consumer]

I cannot find the elbow binder. What is the item name, exactly? I tried looking for "elbow" and "binder" and I'm only getting armbinders...

 

EDIT: Never mind, I'm an idiot. This last time I downloaded the master instead of the development archive. Derp.

[Content Consumer]

Elbowbinder test: Everything seems to be working fine (taking into account the "do not report" orders ). The tighter model looks very nice!

 

One (possible) issue - when I first put it on, I "manipulated the locks" to be sure I could get out of it. When I tried, I could not get out though. I don't know if this is because of the reworked escape mechanism - if the "manipulate" mechanic has been removed, it might be a good idea to remove the option from the popup.

[Princessity]

Nuh it's definitely not intended, in fact I remember specifically trying to fix that and succeeding... But I have been feeling this like weird sensation in the back of my mind like there was something I was thinking about and forgot to actually dooooo... It's weird...

 

Okay, just to make sure, have you downloaded the latest DDi build as well?

[Content Consumer]

Nuh it's definitely not intended, in fact I remember specifically trying to fix that and succeeding... But I have been feeling this like weird sensation in the back of my mind like there was something I was thinking about and forgot to actually dooooo... It's weird...

 

Okay, just to make sure, have you downloaded the latest DDi build as well?

 

Yep, all three about an hour ago.

[Princessity]

 

Can I just say how much I... appreciate that every single one of our arms restraints has not one, not two, not even three but four different components with functionality scattered all over the place? It's really... pleasant to work with and so incredibly... easy to identify and locate issues. I could not be... happier to be interacting with such a... well designed system.

[Content Consumer]

 

 

Can I just say how much I... appreciate that every single one of our arms restraints has not one, not two, not even three but four different components with functionality scattered all over the place? It's really... pleasant to work with and so incredibly... easy to identify and locate issues. I could not be... happier to be interacting with such a... well designed system.

 

(five minutes previously...)

 

"Okay, I deleted your last post. Now I want you to go in and say exactly the opposite of what you just said. And no cursing!"

[chaimhewast]

While testing the "escaped slave" start for CCAS, I ran into an issue where it would occasionally put an iron collar from SD+ when "Collar|restrictive,metal" is passed into the ModEvent (SD+ registers that collar under "collar,metal,iron,zap"). After a bit of reading, it looks like OnDDIEquip will only require every keyword if it's a ball, ring, or panel gag. It might be helpful if there were a way to have that call that requires all tags instead of just one.

[Content Consumer]

I have a question that's probably a really stupid one...

Is it possible to dynamically shorten and lengthen skeleton bones in-game?

For example, if you wanted to add a new armbinder like this:

 

 

 

 

You'd have to chop off the hands as normal, then animate the arms in a different position. And you'd have to do this for every new armbinder-type device (or every new device that requires any similar shenanigans) you want to add.

By altering the skeleton when the device is applied and then putting it back to normal when removed, you'd eliminate the need to have to do some extra work.

 

I was going to suggest something like the Amputator Framework, but all that does is replace the limb with an invisible armor piece, which would require taking up another body slot. And... I have the sneaky suspicion that any suggestion to change or add body slots  on items will probably put an angry mob at my door. 

 

If you could do that, I think it might simplify doing something like this:

 

 

 

 

Or this one. You could just model the device to look like arms and legs but not have to worry about how to animate the limbs.

 

 

 

 

[Content Consumer]

I've made up a Microsoft Excel document that shows all of the current device types and their associated tags. Should help with the new device equip modevent.

This is mostly for people like me who prefer to use sortable lists in nice column/row formats.

 

Example images:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NB: List fixed and moved HERE.

[chaimhewast]

Looks like you've got tags and devices backwards (the red/blue-highlighted cells contain tags, the entries below/right of them are references devices), but otherwise makes sense.