Devious Devices Framework Development/Beta

[El_Duderino]

Hi all,

 

Just did a little testing with the latest dev build and a new game. Some interesting findings and a confirmation of an old bug report:

 

- the lack of polling events still occurs, even with a new game (empty MCM list of events and also no events actually happening in the game... no struggles, no plus going off randomly etc)

 

- I'm not sure if this is new to DD or if something like that could happen already with the 3.0 wrist restraints system: while my char was wearing a straightjacket, a DCL event attempted to equip an armbinder. Which then failed (as it should), with the correct DD error message "impossible to wear multiple armbinders" and no changes to my char's equipped items being made.

 

- also not sure if this is new, but it's the first time I've seen it work like that in the game: a follower (3DNPC/vanilla follower), equipped with armbinder, does NOT equip her weapon any more when a fight breaks out (as I think they would have done in the past). Instead, the DD bound combat animations play, which is so cool to see on NPCs!

 

- torches at night still override the bound wrists pose on NPCs though, but I'm not sure if that should be given much priority at this point

 

- and speaking of bound combat, the (legless) straightjacket doesn't seem to play fitting bound combat anims. No kicking, instead it looks like my char is trying to punch her opponents with her shoulders (normal fist combat anims playing without visible arms maybe?) I think the armbinder bound combat anims might work well for the straightjacket, without any changes to them (supposing the arms would remain visible anyway due to the model's slots?)

 

- I really like the default values for the new escape mechanic, settings feel "right" to me with the differences between materials and various restraints

 

- for giggles: equipping bondage mittens after equipping a straightjacket results in a truly terrifying hardcore experience

[Darkpig]

I was play- uh testing with the new DD build with the pony gags and the mouth seemed to close every time I interacted with the pony gag harness with blinders. Don't know if this is really an issue but it seems kind of glaring since I'm using the mod Skysouls.

[DW2016SS]

a little problem, straight jacket and harness have been regard as clothes.they will hide piercings and belt.

the idles has some flaw.

 

and...how about recovery slave boot to prevent sprint.

Skyrim.rar

[verel]

Hello,

 

i took a quick look at the latest dev build of DD v4 from the 4.7.and have to issues with it.

 

1. After seeing the new escape system in action and struggling half of a day in game time with a key to get out of the Iron Prisoner’s Chains I find it more than problematic to have no options for tweaking the difficulty of the new system. Even with the yoke equipped in earlier version of DD it took less time to struggle out of it with a key.

 

The new system makes a major mistake in my opinion, it restricts the user and takes away the freedom to tailor their DD experience to their liking. Having a global override option in the MCM would be good for things like: difficulty to escape, key break chance, cool downtime between escape attempts, and the number of keys needed to escape the device.

 

2. The inability to craft the new DDx items seems to be inconsistent with earlier Versions of DDx.

[HyperonicX]

Hello,

 

i took a quick look at the latest dev build of DD v4 from the 4.7.and have to issues with it.

 

1. After seeing the new escape system in action and struggling half of a day in game time with a key to get out of the Iron Prisoner’s Chains I find it more than problematic to have no options for tweaking the difficulty of the new system. Even with the yoke equipped in earlier version of DD it took less time to struggle out of it with a key.

 

The new system makes a major mistake in my opinion, it restricts the user and takes away the freedom to tailor their DD experience to their liking. Having a global override option in the MCM would be good for things like: difficulty to escape, key break chance, cool downtime between escape attempts, and the number of keys needed to escape the device.

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

Thanks for putting them into words! XD!

 

[El_Duderino]

 

Hello,

 

i took a quick look at the latest dev build of DD v4 from the 4.7.and have to issues with it.

...

The new system makes a major mistake in my opinion, it restricts the user and takes away the freedom to tailor their DD experience to their liking. Having a global override option in the MCM would be good for things like: difficulty to escape, key break chance, cool downtime between escape attempts, and the number of keys needed to escape the device.

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

Thanks for putting them into words! XD!

 

I for one really enjoy the new system and its default settings, but I get that there may be others who don't. It seems there's currently some ongoing discussion about this (see also here: http://www.loverslab.com/topic/21484-devious-devices-integration-v33b-11182016/page-433 and ff.), so this might be a good opportunity to ask this question:

 

Could it potentially break anything in DD or a DD-based mod if I (or anybody else) were to create a mod full of overrides (same FormIDs) for the DDi/x armor items, changing their default escape settings to something else (easier, or more difficult)? Or is the only safe way to go about this to create new instances (new FormIDs) of the items in said new mod?

 

For the record, I've already successfully attempted the latter (you know, creating chastity belts that require ten keys, lol) and it is really easy. Can even be done in Tes5Edit and doesn't take very long at all. But of course those new items won't be picked up by mods that equip the original DD items like Cursed Loot or Captured Dreams.

[Princessity]

The decision to transfer all control over to the API is final. But numbers are not. Default difficulties are subject to change and the advantage of the new system is that each device can be different in that regard. We could have metal devices be harder to escape from than leather ones, or rusty devices be easier to escape from but carry a higher risk of jamming. And these are just a few examples.

 

If testers have any ideas on what the default difficulties and features of each device should be, that would be very helpful. We have a lot of items at our disposal so there's room to cater to a lot of different preferences.

[verel]

The decision to transfer all control over to the API is final. But numbers are not. Default difficulties are subject to change and the advantage of the new system is that each device can be different in that regard. We could have metal devices be harder to escape from than leather ones, or rusty devices be easier to escape from but carry a higher risk of jamming. And these are just a few examples.

 

If testers have any ideas on what the default difficulties and features of each device should be, that would be very helpful. We have a lot of items at our disposal so there's room to cater to a lot of different preferences.

 

 

If you don't want an global override, why not implement an item editor like Frostfall does with unrecognized clothes and armor. This would allow people to tweak the difficulty on a per item basis. This would be the most flexible solution to this problem.

[Kimy]

We removed the difficulty silders because they were so powerful that users could change item behaviour so drastically that modders making items could no longer rely on their behaviour at all. An example: The user could set whether or not to destroy the key after item removal. If this was set to true and a modder (let's say her name was Kimy) created a set of restraints with only ONE available key for the entire set (which is a fairly realistic thing), the user would lose the only existing key after unlocking the first restraint. That's...bad.

 

Modders making items have to be able to make items with reliable behavior. The old system wouldn't let them. And since all that stuff was hardcoded into the framework where it would affect each and every single DD item, there was almost no way to change it from a content mod's end. That's why we moved control over to the modders, where it should be. And let's be honest, that's consistent with the way video games are generally designed - the difficulty is (mostly) set by the designer. I sometimes wish action games would come with a "Kill this stupidly hard boss for me, NOW!!!" button, but they usually don't. I get the idea that no set of default values will ever satisfy everyone, but it's a better solution than the framework limiting content mods in their creativity and their right to define their own difficulty standards for themselves.

 

Next thing, since the old system was a "one size fits all" solution, there was no way to assign different difficulties to different types of items. There was ONE silder affecting ALL items. No item was harder to struggle out from than another. A metal restraint was as hard or easy to escape from as a thin latex one. All locks were the same - it was not possible to implement high security locks harder to pick than cheap, simple ones. And if you had a key you could unlock yourself, no matter where the lock was placed. It didn't matter if in reality it would have been super hard to unlock yourself. In the end, there was just one type of restraint with different looks.

 

Now, you will notice that e.g. metal restraints cannot be cut, while leather/latex restraints can. Gag harnesses are harder to escape from than strap gags. Strap harnesses are super easy to cut, while thick arm cuffs are harder. Getting a key into a yoke's lock is super hard, while unlocking a pair of leg cuffs is trivial. All these things would have neigh on impossible to implement in the old system. And the one price users have to pay for that huge increase in interesting item mechanics is that there cannot be global toggles for these individual item mechanics anymore, as they would destroy that exact advantage.

 

I realize that taking away something people are used to is never easy. But in this case it was necessary.

 

What I would recommend is - download the dev build and actually test the new system. As Princessity said, the default values are totally up for debate. They are largely untested and are based on Kimy Guesswork™. If they turn out to make items too hard/easy/unfun/unbalanced/boring, let us know, and we'll consider changing them!

In addition to that, I am thinking about whether it's possible to have ONE difficulty slider that would affect the device struggling/cutting/lockpicking chances. They are already designed to take certain modifiers into consideration, so putting a reasonable modifier into user control is not something I'd rule out. I CAN however rule out there there will ever be on/off switches for entire features (e.g. lock shield or destroy key). I can also rule out that the modifier system will be allowing -drastic- changes to the default values. For reasons given above, that would destroy the system. So that's just not going to happen.

[El_Duderino]

(...)

I realize that taking away something people are used to is never easy. But in this case it was necessary.

 

What I would recommend is - download the dev build and actually test the new system. As Princessity said, the default values are totally up for debate. They are largely untested and are based on Kimy Guesswork™. If they turn out to make items too hard/easy/unfun/unbalanced/boring, let us know, and we'll consider changing them!

(...)

 

 

Well, I've said it before and I'll happily say it again, I'm a big fan of the new escape mechanics in DD. After a little testing that I did with the newly configured values on the latest build's DDx devices I must say I really enjoy the default settings so far. Some items are almost trivial now, like simple leather cuffs and gags, but highly restrictive items can take some time to escape from. Which I personally like, it adds more depth and also fits my gameplay style (where I usually offset difficult DD settings with low trap chances in DCL etc.).

 

That being said, I think that the introduction of that difficulty slider you've brought up, to globally lower or increase some of the  escape mechanic aspects, sounds like a good idea to me.

[Veladarius]

Since Kimy requested this discussion moved here:

 

/re: Overriding framework assets: Not cool. But what's totally acceptable is duplicating the standard library in a new mod using a new namespace and changing any values you want, then releasing it as an alternative library.

Making an alternative set of devices does me or anyone else that doesn't want the new system no good if it doesn't replace the current devices. Other mods will still use the basic DD items as would CD for its basic punishment as it gets its items by tags (I would have to make new tag sets and set CD's system to exclude any items from DDi or DDx entirely).

 

As for changing EVERY single item, it took me about 2-3 days to go through the entire library. It's more than 10 mins, but hey, you have to do it only once. 

 

@Vel: Just for clarification: Are you opposed to the new escape system because you hate it, or because there is no user control? Huge difference.

For example: Are you sure that the default values for the lock shield are THAT much a game breaker, considering that I set them to a couple -hours- only? The old (albeit configurable) defaults were -several days-. Again, ALL default values are up for debate. Including lock shield timers and escape/unlock cooldowns. Mind suggesting some you could live with?

 

Also, would you guys mind to continue the debate in the dev thread? We're currently debating that exact issue there:  http://www.loverslab...20#entry1946149

 

 

Yes, I hate the new system and don't use it, it isn't how I want my game play experience to be. These are my settings from DDi:

 

I see no reason for an escape cool down, the stamina use is enough of a cool down as it is on those devices that require struggling against. As for any other devices the only thing that should stop me from attempting to unlock them is how many lock picks I have and hoping I am good enough to get them unlocked before running out.

 

I can see the shield lock being used on some devices from mods but not on every generic device. If I have a key I see no reason that I should not be able to use it then and there.

 

Out of all the options the only one I use is the chance for the key to break and even that is only set to 5% and it happens enough for me, typically at inopportune times.

[Kimy]

Ok, I have no problem setting the shield lock default to zero, essentially eliminating it from all standard library devices. If that's what people generally want (in other words, tell me your opinion!) But even now it's at a ridiculously small amount of time (a couple hours), essentially meaning that you can't unlock a device RIGHT after got locked on you, if you happen to have a key. But I am not dead set on keeping this feature active for standard devices, if there is general consent among users that they don't want it.

 

Next, the escape cooldown, as I have explained, is meant to prevent spam escape attempts. Like: Player gets put in an armbinder, keeps standing in the -exact- place they got tied up at, and keep spamming "Struggle" as long as it takes to get out of the item. That's extremely boring and pointless, but unless there is a mechanic discouraging this behavior, it's the MOST EFFICIENT way to get out of an restraint. Why wear it if you just have to spam a button long enough to escape ANY item? The cooldown might sound silly as an idea, but it encourages actually playing with a restraint instead of -immediately- get out of them. With the old escape system, I made -every- single custom restraint I ever made to be inescapable, just because there is otherwise no way to prevent a player from spamming escape attempts, and that's what the game would encourage them to do.

If people have a better idea to prevent spam escape attempts, I am willing to listen, but stamina recharges in mere seconds out of combat, so stamina hits won't just cut it. And is in fact just an escape cooldown too, albeit a short one. Preventing spam unlock attempts is one of the cornerstones of the new escape system, and there is no way I can be convinced to let go of the feature. If people feel the default cooldown isn't right, I am willing to consider -that-, but I seriously don't think it's too long right now. It's the equivalent of six minutes real time right now.

 

The default key break chance is 25%, which sounds like a lot at first glance, but it means that on average you can unlock three out of four restraints without issues.

[Veladarius]

Ok, I have no problem setting the shield lock default to zero, essentially eliminating it from all standard library devices. If that's what people generally want (in other words, tell me your opinion!) But even now it's at a ridiculously small amount of time (a couple hours), essentially meaning that you can't unlock a device RIGHT after got locked on you, if you happen to have a key. But I am not dead set on keeping this feature active for standard devices, if there is general consent among users that they don't want it.

 

Next, the escape cooldown, as I have explained, is meant to prevent spam escape attempts. Like: Player gets put in an armbinder, keeps standing in the -exact- place they got tied up at, and keep spamming "Struggle" as long as it takes to get out of the item. That's extremely boring and pointless, but unless there is a mechanic discouraging this behavior, it's the MOST EFFICIENT way to get out of an restraint. Why wear it if you just have to spam a button long enough to escape ANY item? The cooldown might sound silly as an idea, but it encourages actually playing with a restraint instead of -immediately- get out of them. With the old escape system, I made -every- single custom restraint I ever made to be inescapable, just because there is otherwise no way to prevent a player from spamming escape attempts, and that's what the game would encourage them to do.

If people have a better idea to prevent spam escape attempts, I am willing to listen, but stamina recharges in mere seconds out of combat, so stamina hits won't just cut it. And is in fact just an escape cooldown too, albeit a short one. Preventing spam unlock attempts is one of the cornerstones of the new escape system, and there is no way I can be convinced to let go of the feature. If people feel the default cooldown isn't right, I am willing to consider -that-, but I seriously don't think it's too long right now. It's the equivalent of six minutes real time right now.

 

The default key break chance is 25%, which sounds like a lot at first glance, but it means that on average you can unlock three out of four restraints without issues.

 

 

Then I am sorry to say I can no longer support DD going forward as I don't feel this is the right direction for DD as a framework to go. CD and any other mods will not be updated to support any versions beyond the current ones if I even decide to continue to update them.

[Kimy]

I am sorry to hear that, but it's your decision. Apparently there is no room for compromise here, and yours is the most negative feedback I ever got about the new system. Most of the other modders and players seem to like at least the general idea of it (most of the controversy is about how much user influence there should be, but not the system itself). The DD team also universally thinks the new system is a good thing (which is why we went ahead with it). It's not that Kimy forced her will on the team there. This is basically a backport of the system I implemented for Fallout 4 DD, and most people who played it were like "Cool, can we have that for Skyrim, too?"  Yes, we can. But I guess it's just hard to please everyone. I signaled multiple times that I am totally willing to talk about default values, but if you're so opposed to the system in principle that you want to shelve your mod over it, I guess there is not much more I can say at this point, except that I am sorry.

[El_Duderino]

 

Then I am sorry to say I can no longer support DD going forward as I don't feel this is the right direction for DD as a framework to go. CD and any other mods will not be updated to support any versions beyond the current ones if I even decide to continue to update them.

 

I find that to be a quite extreme reaction. I'm currently running the development build of DD alongside CD 4.15 and everything works rather well. I think we should focus on discussing which settings to use for the escape system, because there is still a lot of potential for tweaks and changes (as Kimy and Princessity have mentioned numerous times already). Are you so fundamentally opposed to the new system that you don't even want to consider this?

 

I just went through the past pages here, the new escape system has been part of the dev build for quite a while already. Trying to sum up what others have commented on, I think these are the areas that might be most useful to discuss:

 

- escape attempt cooldown -- how long? same for all or different based on device type?

- key break chance -- how high? or 0 by default? what were users setting the old DD MCM option to?

- struggle/lockpick success chances -- how high? how much difference between device types?

- lock shield -- should default items use it?

- option to include a difficulty slider in MCM to affect (some of?) the above? (see Kimy's post a page back)

 

Anything else?

 

And for the record, my personal opinion on all of the above is so far, after limited testing, that I like the values how they are.

[pinky6225]

Question regarding "is meant to prevent spam escape attempts"

 

If the person playing wants to do that then why not let them, its like restricting the ability to open the console and use unequipitem - if i have a reason to break emersion by doing that (boredom/mod fuck up/more amusing randomness) then shouldn't that be on my head

 

 

[Veladarius]

I am sorry to hear that, but it's your decision. Apparently there is no room for compromise here, and yours is the most negative feedback I ever got about the new system. Most of the other modders and players seem to like at least the general idea of it (most of the controversy is about how much user influence there should be, but not the system itself). The DD team also universally thinks the new system is a good thing (which is why we went ahead with it). It's not that Kimy forced her will on the team there. This is basically a backport of the system I implemented for Fallout 4 DD, and most people who played it were like "Cool, can we have that for Skyrim, too?"  Yes, we can. But I guess it's just hard to please everyone. I signaled multiple times that I am totally willing to talk about default values, but if you're so opposed to the system in principle that you want to shelve your mod over it, I guess there is not much more I can say at this point, except that I am sorry.

 

 

 

 

Then I am sorry to say I can no longer support DD going forward as I don't feel this is the right direction for DD as a framework to go. CD and any other mods will not be updated to support any versions beyond the current ones if I even decide to continue to update them.

 

I find that to be a quite extreme reaction. I'm currently running the development build of DD alongside CD 4.15 and everything works rather well. I think we should focus on discussing which settings to use for the escape system, because there is still a lot of potential for tweaks and changes (as Kimy and Princessity have mentioned numerous times already). Are you so fundamentally opposed to the new system that you don't even want to consider this?

 

I just went through the past pages here, the new escape system has been part of the dev build for quite a while already. Trying to sum up what others have commented on, I think these are the areas that might be most useful to discuss:

 

- escape attempt cooldown -- how long? same for all or different based on device type?

- key break chance -- how high? or 0 by default? what were users setting the old DD MCM option to?

- struggle/lockpick success chances -- how high? how much difference between device types?

- lock shield -- should default items use it?

- option to include a difficulty slider in MCM to affect (some of?) the above? (see Kimy's post a page back)

 

Anything else?

 

And for the record, my personal opinion on all of the above is so far, after limited testing, that I like the values how they are.

 

 

 

As I had stated I had no interest in using that system, I found it to be nothing but annoying and detrimental to the way I play and saw no reason to go from making it optional to mandatory no matter what the default values are. I am sure that I won't be the only one with this opinion.

 

I doubt that anyone updating will have issues with CD since I use so few standard items but any devices with new device keywords will not be recognized or removed nor will they be used.

 

I truly am disappointed to say that I can no longer support DD as it was the mod that got me to start modding in the first place.

 

I may not stop development of CD but I am done here.

[UnEvenSteven]

Perhaps a compromise, instead of a cool-down timer after a single failed escape attempt offer several attempts to escape (depending on device) before going into cool-down. For example the lock on a Chastity Bra looks rather difficult to get to so maybe the player only gets 3-4 attempts to escape with lockpicking before they get tired and have to wait. It could be explained that their hands start hurting/cramping from fiddling with lockpicks in a awkward position.

 

A Chastity Belt could have 6-8 attempts since their lock is on the front. Leg Cuffs could have 10 attempts, Arm Cuffs only 5 since you could really only use one arm when attempting to lockpick them. Having a key for any device (excluding strict arm restraints) should allow for instant escape. Maybe all these escape attempts before going into cool-down could be increased or decreased depending on the setting of that proposed difficulty slider.

 

Yes a player could still spam escape attempts but only for a certain amount of times before having to wait. Just some thoughts regarding the escape mechanism in hopes for a compromise.

 

I have to agree with others on the lock shield, it shouldn't be used on the base devices from DDI/DDx. The lock shield mechanic should only be reserved for custom devices in mods.

 

 

[tuxagent7]

As a player, i like having options to customize everything to my liking, less chance, more chances, how often do i find key

 

More options,  better for me since i cant mod anything so i twerk...no i mean tweak

 

I like where the team is going and if i can still tweak, turn off/on the settings in the mcm and still use the console, then i am happy

 

 

[merManc]

It's really a shame to see a great modder potentially leaving the devious world. Hopefully some sort of compromise can be reached.

 

Personally, I'm not a fan of losing the customisation options. I'm probably unusual, but I don't actually use any plug-ins, just the master files. All the devices I use are standard ones that I manually lock on my character, nothing quest-related or from other mods. So I'm entirely dependent on the devious mcm for setting how tough the devices are to get free of. Giving modders control of how the devices work in their own mods is definitely the right thing to do in my opinion, but if there is any way at all to still allow the player to control regular devices I would be all for it. What harm is there in letting the player decide how best to enjoy his or her own game? If they screw it up for themselves then it's their own fault, and what some people might consider "screwing up" others might simply find the most fun way to play.

 

I'm a great believer that player freedom and player character freedom are completely separate things. The more freedom I have to determine how the devices in my game work, the less freedom my character usually ends up with, in the way I find the most fun. It's one of the reasons I don't like the blindfolds. My character should be blinded by them, but I don't see why I, the player, should have my vision impaired as well and would love the option to just disable all visual effects. Being able to see my character blindfolded and helpless kind of feels like the point.

 

On the specific subject of the lock shield, I have to admit I hate it. I couldn't enjoy fallout 4 devious devices specifically because of that. Having the right key and not being allowed to use it for 8 or 9 hours for no logical reason just drove me up the wall, and not in the fun devious way. If there is to be no player freedom to tweak things and we have to play with a default, please, please have the lock shield set for zero. Preferably also key break, jam lock, and catastrophic fail chance zero as well.

 

Obviously this is all just my opinion and if I'm in the minority then fair enough. Just adding my thoughts to the debate. Whatever the decision I'm looking forward to seeing how it turns out.

[Slorm]

Question regarding "is meant to prevent spam escape attempts"

 

If the person playing wants to do that then why not let them, its like restricting the ability to open the console and use unequipitem - if i have a reason to break emersion by doing that (boredom/mod fuck up/more amusing randomness) then shouldn't that be on my head

 

I tend to agree. At present getting an armbinder from a DCL dodgy chest is annoying in the game sense it should be. It effectively incapacitates the pc until it's removed and from immersion point of view it would be suicide to continue on in a dangerous dungeon with your arms tied behind your back. No adventurer in their right mind would do it if faced with that situation and would do everything they could to escape there and then. Obviously less restrictive items (cuffs, belt etc) that allow the pc to effectively defend themselves are not an issue

 

I think as well that not everyone is interested in bondage per se and being constantly bound up. There are also players like myself that use DD as a fun way to either debuff their pc and put them into "interesting" situations in the short term rather than long term binding, so I would leave this down to the player.

[Kimy]

Perhaps a compromise, instead of a cool-down timer after a single failed escape attempt offer several attempts to escape (depending on device) before going into cool-down. For example the lock on a Chastity Bra looks rather difficult to get to so maybe the player only gets 3-4 attempts to escape with lockpicking before they get tired and have to wait. It could be explained that their hands start hurting/cramping from fiddling with lockpicks in a awkward position.

 

A Chastity Belt could have 6-8 attempts since their lock is on the front. Leg Cuffs could have 10 attempts, Arm Cuffs only 5 since you could really only use one arm when attempting to lockpick them. Having a key for any device (excluding strict arm restraints) should allow for instant escape. Maybe all these escape attempts before going into cool-down could be increased or decreased depending on the setting of that proposed difficulty slider.

 

Since Vel never made ANY constructive suggestion here, I don't think he's interested in improving the system. He's opposed it it in principle, and that's it for him. I don't think short of a kill switch for the entire thing, there is nothing I can offer to him. And the kill switch is the one thing I am not going to do.

 

The cooldown essentially defines an "average" time the player will remain locked in a restraint before they can escape it. The old system didn't have that. You'd just instantly struggle off anything because nothing kept you. I can't see the appeal in that. It's boring and mindless, and essentially means that players don't ever have to play with restraints locked on them, because ALL devices not explicitly disabling the entire escape system could be near-instantly escaped from (as in without moving one inch). According the Vel, that was exactly what he wanted. To each their own. *shrug*

 

Question regarding "is meant to prevent spam escape attempts"

 

If the person playing wants to do that then why not let them, its like restricting the ability to open the console and use unequipitem - if i have a reason to break emersion by doing that (boredom/mod fuck up/more amusing randomness) then shouldn't that be on my head

 

I tend to agree. At present getting an armbinder from a DCL dodgy chest is annoying in the game sense it should be. It effectively incapacitates the pc until it's removed and from immersion point of view it would be suicide to continue on in a dangerous dungeon with your arms tied behind your back. No adventurer in their right mind would do it if faced with that situation and would do everything they could to escape there and then. Obviously less restrictive items (cuffs, belt etc) that allow the pc to effectively defend themselves are not an issue

 

I think as well that not everyone is interested in bondage per se and being constantly bound up. There are also players like myself that use DD as a fun way to either debuff their pc and put them into "interesting" situations in the short term rather than long term binding, so I would leave this down to the player.

 

 

Open CK and look at the escape cooldown for the armbinder. I swear most people hammering the new system never actually tried it.

[bicobus]

 

The need to wait between escape trials is a bit odd, because the player will remove those devices anyway and all this feature is doing is stalling.

 

What this feature is meant to do is preventing the player from standing still where they are and spam escape attempts for as long as it takes. While the realism of the cooldown is debatable, it -does- prevent the player from instantly escaping any item just by trying long enough and encourages her to continue playing the game, which the restraint still worn.

 

This is a weakness of the game of random, it can be fixed with proper content like cursed loot and the mini-quests to remove devious items. The removal would succeed 100% but invite the player to work for it. I'm referring to the "I can't help you, but I know somebody who can." answer, then send the player to the next city.

 

Yes, these features are meant to coexist. There are multiple paths to freedom: Struggling, finding help, doing quests, scavenging for keys etc. That's supposed to make bondage content much more interesting than offering one route of escape that's distinctively easier than the others (which is spamming escape attempts), but also super boring.

 

Err, yeah, I go with you on this case. I don't enjoy being forced to use the gag talk system, and enjoy is a very light word to express my hate for that "mini game". If other annoying features becomes like that one, with no way for the user to tweak or disable them, I'll just not upgrade DD. However if the vanilla items are configurable through the MCM, then it would alleviate most of my issues. It is not currently the case with gag talk.

 

I thought long ago about bringing DCL's gag talk system to DDI, but DCL's gag talk system doesn't make sense without DCL. If you have any ideas how to revamp the DDI gag talk and make it more fun, let me know in the dev thread!

 

§ 1: It is irrelevant for the framework, any kind of waiting period goes into game design. It has to have a purpose beyond basic mechanic, like encouraging the player to seek other form of help. In my games I find no key, nor exists any npc capable of removing a device for me. The only way to remove them, if they are "rogue" devices, is through the escape mechanic. If the devices are put on my character through a third party mod, that mod will usually handle the removal part (sd+, Captured Dream, POP).

 

By extension, I find no reason to wear bondage in my games. There is no mechanic in place that would encourage me to do so, with the exception of Shout like a Virgin which will provide boons and constraints alike. However SlaV do not rely on escapes nor keys to remove the devices, bypassing the DDi feature entirely.

 

If I have experienced DDi properly, struggling is the only path to freedom given by the framework. Unless the player find some kind of key, which don't exists in the world. Keys that can be crafted after a long quest, and even then the different materials aren't easy to come across.

 

§ 2: Yes I have an idea: remove the gag talk entirely or disable it by default. Instead have a "mmmhf" sound every time the player select a dialogue option. It's not difficult to make yourself being understood when you can't talk or your interlocutor do not understand what you are saying. If somebody think of a mini-game they are free to implement it in their own mod, but the DDi thing is superseding every other mod out there. As you said, a gag system make sense along the mod that introduce it.

 

By extension, you could have an extra dialogue option referring to the player's gag and leading to the "Seems like you are having fun." mini-game which is far more enjoyable than the constant failure state due to randomness. And even if you want to keep the gag talk, make it so it is weighted around the chance of success and number of usages: the more accustomed the player character is, the higher the chances for success. I tried to quickly put something together to explain what I meant, but I got distracted by the co-optional podcast so this is what I have. It's nothing great and I'm not really good at math, so there is probably a better way to go at it.

 

 

[...]

What I would recommend is - download the dev build and actually test the new system. As Princessity said, the default values are totally up for debate. They are largely untested and are based on Kimy Guesswork™. If they turn out to make items too hard/easy/unfun/unbalanced/boring, let us know, and we'll consider changing them!

[...]

 

Emphasis is mine.

Instead of guessing around, wouldn't it better to draft a roadmap and call the various active modders who depend on DDi for comment on your ideas? In short, a RFC before investing resources and time into actual development. The varied individual could then read and propose an amendment to the RFC, which would then need to be reviewed and accepted by DDi's core team.

 

I don't see any of DDi's features as bad per se, they just seem one sided.

 

As for the call for testers, I'm sorry but I can't invest time into testing DDi. I already am testing other mods (beta and stable) and setting those on an unstable foundation would destroy the last remnants of sanity I possess. Sorry about that.

 

I'll go back to the coop podcast now, thanks for your attention.

[donotbugme]

Hi Folks, I am looking at the dev branch of dd, downloaded around an hour ago maybe I have a consistent crash to desktop when equipping xx02fa8f or xx02fa8b chains (I hope I have that right, mine are 0d in place of xx but i'm 86% certain thats just load order.) 

 

CTD occurs when equipping Iron Prisoner Chains or Rusty Iron Prisoner chains around one second after, or if i click the ok button, when I either attempt to do something with the inventory or leave the menu, my gut says i've probably forgotten something but a reinstall of the dev branch did not fix and im outta ideas. in papyrus logs I have only a ream of item registrations. Freshly loaded up character. wait for init. Any idea what I can try that would be more helpful?

 

[07/04/2017 - 09:34:58PM] [Zad]: OnEquipped(Prisoner: Rusty Iron Prisoner Chains)

[07/04/2017 - 09:34:58PM] [Zad]: Sending device event DeviceEquippedPrisoner Chains(Prisoner:1)

[07/04/2017 - 09:34:58PM] [Zad]: SyncInventory(): Equipping Prisoner Chains.

[07/04/2017 - 09:34:58PM] [Zad]: RestraintScript OnEquippedPost Full

 

 

 

A request: Is it possible to get something like a container "zadx_deviousContainer" containing all of the currently supported and expected to be working items. or a pointer to get something that helps me get a hold of all the things in a semi easy manner, would help me tinker about. Thanks

[Slorm]

 

Open CK and look at the escape cooldown for the armbinder. I swear most people hammering the new system never actually tried it.

 

 

I'm not "hammering" anything, it was just a comment to think about in regard to the armbinder escape mechanism. But I apologise if I have offended you.