ck2 [mod] Noxbestia's Darkest Perversions

[Ashra XIII]

 

<--snip-->

 

During the time I played, I kept getting hammered with Yiffic revolts; sometimes one would pop up even as I was bringing my troops down from the last one I defeated. Eventually I stopped them by using my court chaplain to turn the province back to Catholic.I also (and I don't think it's this mod) had a Centaur show up in my realm right at the beginning of the game and try to rebel... unfortunately for him, I had my futanari troops already so he basically got a free trip to the dungeon.

 

<--snip-->

 

Edit: Oh, I started another game this morning, with a custom male 16 year-old ruler, and did get the Trap event! I chose the 2nd option, which eventually comes to a point where there are no choices for me to make, so I can't proceed or get rid of the event.   I imagine this is the same thing reported above, where only the first option will go all the way through.

 

To be honest, I usually play with "Provincial Revolts" set to none and shattered retreats set to "on."  The centaur may have been from this mod, since it can generate from 1 to 5 different starting centaur lands.  What tier was your character (count, duke, king, emperor) during all of this and where in the known world were you playing during this test?

 

As for any events you can't get rid of, I need to be able to track them down.  The event text of the part where you can't continue or a screen shot would help me do that.

 

 

The game I was describing above was the tribal Picts in the Charlemagne start. I had the Centaur lands set to all five, and one of them popped up in my kingdom. I didn't get the impression that anything was wrong there, as it seemed normal for the Centaur lords to start within other Demesnes, then revolt and become independent. He of course didn't count on my futa army, was all.  The Yiffic revolts seemed out of control though, happening like crazy as I described. 

 

The trap events that I can't get rid of are right at the beginning of the event, when my 16 year-old ruler is starting and I get the event. I meet the father and children, and the first screen has a bunch of choices which sound rather the same. Like, "I want you to come to my court", and "I want you to cum to my court". Picking anything but the first option leads to an event with no choices, and the only way to get out is to reload a save.

[NoxBestia]

 

 

<--snip-->

 

During the time I played, I kept getting hammered with Yiffic revolts; sometimes one would pop up even as I was bringing my troops down from the last one I defeated. Eventually I stopped them by using my court chaplain to turn the province back to Catholic.I also (and I don't think it's this mod) had a Centaur show up in my realm right at the beginning of the game and try to rebel... unfortunately for him, I had my futanari troops already so he basically got a free trip to the dungeon.

 

<--snip-->

 

Edit: Oh, I started another game this morning, with a custom male 16 year-old ruler, and did get the Trap event! I chose the 2nd option, which eventually comes to a point where there are no choices for me to make, so I can't proceed or get rid of the event.   I imagine this is the same thing reported above, where only the first option will go all the way through.

 

To be honest, I usually play with "Provincial Revolts" set to none and shattered retreats set to "on."  The centaur may have been from this mod, since it can generate from 1 to 5 different starting centaur lands.  What tier was your character (count, duke, king, emperor) during all of this and where in the known world were you playing during this test?

 

As for any events you can't get rid of, I need to be able to track them down.  The event text of the part where you can't continue or a screen shot would help me do that.

 

 

The game I was describing above was the tribal Picts in the Charlemagne start. I had the Centaur lands set to all five, and one of them popped up in my kingdom. I didn't get the impression that anything was wrong there, as it seemed normal for the Centaur lords to start within other Demesnes, then revolt and become independent. He of course didn't count on my futa army, was all.

 

The trap events that I can't get rid of are right at the beginning of the event, when my 16 year-old ruler is starting and I get the event. I meet the father and children, and the first screen has a bunch of choices which sound rather the same. Like, "I want you to come to my court", and "I want you to cum to my court". Picking anything but the first option leads to an event with no choices, and the only way to get out is to reload a save.

 

 

I assume you were getting the choices in the first of the three menu captures below.  The second and third variants are what you should have gotten, depending on whether you are lustful or not.  That has been fixed!  

 

If you want to explore some of the other stuff already written, the 3rd choice in the current (wrong) preview menu should take you to a bunch of different but mostly completed option paths.  This is the same as the second choice in the corrected menu that will be in the next upload.

 

 

EDIT: never mind... it still isn't working right for some reason.  It is totally skipping the sex scenes I wrote.

 

EDIT2: Okay, I had renumbered a bunch of things, but I was already getting sick and I didn't renumber the options so you went to the right events.  When I get this fixed I'll upload another preview version because I expect there are other errors like that which I will still have missed.

[NoxBestia]

Further delays...

 

I just discovered that when I was getting sick, I only wrote sex scenes for virgins for the trap family events.  So if your character isn't a virgin, I have nothing.  I can't put a final of 0.0.4.0 up like that, so I need to write non-virgin variants of all the virgin sex scenes I wrote.  I fear that this will take me a couple of days at least because of limited time to work on them because of my job and still being in the recovery stages of that damned sinus infection.

 

I'll probably keep spamming this group with little updates as I work on these things, but I will endeavor to keep my ADD under control enough that I don't work on any of the new things I want to add in until I have these created and put in.

[vinsanity15]

wow~thank you very much!!!

[Ashra XIII]

Are virgin sex-scenes that specific? I'd figure you could just edit out parts that mention virginity and use the same scenes for both... at least as a temporary measure. I don't think I've seen those events if they are in though... I really need to give the trap family another run soon.

[vienastoks]

Penis-wise, are we talking about Trap campaign? If so, microthingy is OK, even if it were the dominant in the distribution of things. I would have another suggestion though - let's shift negative opinion from micropenis trait to the trap trait. My logic is – people shouldn't be aware what kind of private parts I have unless I was a) in an intimate encounter with them, sharing an orgy with them, c) sharing a bath with them, d) or all the court is walking around stark naked.

Frankly, in RL I've known some people for decades, but I have no idea what size they are. So world-wide opinion adjustments due to things that people shouldn't know at all do not seem natural ("Charles, dear, did you know Wali of M'Saken has a tiny dicky? - Really? How I hate his guts!"). If we shifted opinion penalty to Trap trait, it would be more understandable - I mean it's clear from the very introduction of the campaign that the character should expect to be commented upon and criticized because of his trait (the initial dream). 

 

On the other hand maybe - just maybe - we sometimes are too harsh in doling out negative opinion against some traits. Vanilla does not do this or tries to be gentle. Take, for example, homosexual (which, I expect, should've been a big deal back then - it was a big deal even in my parents' generation). What vanilla does? Just gives -5 among vassals and a slight fertility penalty. 

 

On the other hand, my heir who is a minor still (but an incubus, werewolf and perverted) potentially faces constant revolts and mutinied regency council even though he hasn't done anything to deserve this (he will, though). We should probably allow for hipocrisy sometimes - during those times people shrugged off a lot of things that their lords did unless suffered personally. I mean, "he/she is our lord, that is their will and privilege" opinion should be dominant. Yes, there were revolts and witch hunts, but the latter were mostly against plebes, and we know about the former because there were so few of them really (and they were mostly about taxation, not personality traits).

 

Just my thoughts

[Ashra XIII]

I started a new game with a young male ruler, and got the trap family event once again. This time I chose to go to the inn, and chose the option "I don't know if I'm a trap". I next got the choice which seemed to be asking me which family members I wanted to focus on, so I opted to invite all of them to dinner. After that, nothing ever happened again.

 

I probably should have just admitted I'm a trap, but I wanted to see if they attempt to persuade or whatever. Instead I just got an immortal family in my court.

 

Edit: Now that I think about what you said before, I wonder if this lack of sex scenes is because my character wasn't a virgin? Do the sex scenes just not play, or should I get an event with 'too be written' type text?

[Halakason]

@Noxbestia

 

Not sure if there were more than 13 ghostfuckers but they just keep getting pregnant and end up having a whole list of children (over 20) which may lead to save bloating since the game keeps a record of all deceased characters.

 

Also if you want help with writing the variants send me the virgin ones (So I can get an understanding of the scenario) and I'll write you up some non-virgin variants. I have a lot of free time on my hands this week so I could finish them up for you asap.

[NoxBestia]

Penis-wise, are we talking about Trap campaign? If so, microthingy is OK, even if it were the dominant in the distribution of things. I would have another suggestion though - let's shift negative opinion from micropenis trait to the trap trait. My logic is – people shouldn't be aware what kind of private parts I have unless I was a) in an intimate encounter with them, sharing an orgy with them, c) sharing a bath with them, d) or all the court is walking around stark naked.

Frankly, in RL I've known some people for decades, but I have no idea what size they are. So world-wide opinion adjustments due to things that people shouldn't know at all do not seem natural ("Charles, dear, did you know Wali of M'Saken has a tiny dicky? - Really? How I hate his guts!"). If we shifted opinion penalty to Trap trait, it would be more understandable - I mean it's clear from the very introduction of the campaign that the character should expect to be commented upon and criticized because of his trait (the initial dream). 

 

On the other hand maybe - just maybe - we sometimes are too harsh in doling out negative opinion against some traits. Vanilla does not do this or tries to be gentle. Take, for example, homosexual (which, I expect, should've been a big deal back then - it was a big deal even in my parents' generation). What vanilla does? Just gives -5 among vassals and a slight fertility penalty. 

 

On the other hand, my heir who is a minor still (but an incubus, werewolf and perverted) potentially faces constant revolts and mutinied regency council even though he hasn't done anything to deserve this (he will, though). We should probably allow for hipocrisy sometimes - during those times people shrugged off a lot of things that their lords did unless suffered personally. I mean, "he/she is our lord, that is their will and privilege" opinion should be dominant. Yes, there were revolts and witch hunts, but the latter were mostly against plebes, and we know about the former because there were so few of them really (and they were mostly about taxation, not personality traits).

 

Just my thoughts

 

First, thoughts and feedback are always welcomed, especially if phrased constructively as you jsut did.  Second, I often start out with negative opinions intentionally way too high and then lower them during play testing.  Preview versions have not been play tested much by me, if at all.  Regardless of all that, you are correct that the level of malice is WAY too high right now.  Before 0.0.4.0 goes live, I'll be running play-testing games on the hardest difficulty with all revolts turned on.

 

Believe it or not, your endowment would have been a thing of legend or ridicule, though this was often kept out of a lot of the public records.  In nomadic and tribal cultures, nudity was very common and dependent on the weather and what tasks you were doing.  We wont even get into the ulster kings having to have intercourse with a white mare before they were fully crowned (though I do believe I put that in an untriggered event somewhere).  For my discourse on feudal culture below, I am over-generalizing and there was much more variation form place to place, but in Europe in general, the following is adequately documented if one looks beyond the "sanitized" texts.

 

What a lot of people today don't think about is that in the pre-Victorian eras, you would have been seen nude many times in your life, especially on your wedding night.  In many feudal societies, the consummation of your marriage was attended by the court and honored guests.  The more important you were, the more people watched you and your wife.  There was feasting, singing, bawdy jokes, stories, sometimes other sexual activities going on in the room because other people got into the mood.  Water and food were brought to the copulating couple in bed to they could keep at it longer.  And so on and so on.

 

Privacy was a different concept back then.  In many places you had to walk though more than one other bedroom to reach your own.  They didn't "waste" space with hallways simply for privacy or modesty.  Another thing that disturbs a lot of people to lean is than in many pre-Victorian European areas, children of 10 or older were simply seen as smaller adults.  Like Crowley did in the 1920's, children of the middle ages were encouraged to be in the room watching while the full adults were having sex.  But in the middle ages, the children would be somewhat included.  Maybe not in the penetrative way, but definitely in a sensual/pleasurable way.

 

Again the above are over-generalizations, but they are part of the basis of why your endowment would be so well known, especially for a noble.  Another part of it is that in "Darkest Perversions" you are in a world of unnatural (and supernatural) sexuality.  Even if your playing settings have it censored so you never see it, children will have been nude together, perverted wet nurses would have performed oral sex on the older children while they were nursing, some twisted guardians or parents would have used genital pleasure and pain for reward and punishment (just like the catholic church was fond of doing and if you believe some sources, still practices).  To be honest, in the world of Darkest Perversions, making it to 16 and still being a virgin should be half worthy of sainthood in and of itself (if non-Yiffic Christian, Muslim, or Jewish).

 

And now for some code that isn't working quite as desired yet:

nox_gigantic_balls = { 
	is_visible = {
		FROM = {
			nox_is_sexually_active = yes	# biologically, puberty has hit
			OR = {
				NOT = { trait = virgin }	# other people have seen it, so the rumors spread
				character = FROM			# can always seen your own junk now that puberty has hit
			}
		}
	}
<--snip--->

My plan when I have it working like it should, is that a male's adult endowment isn't known to even himself until puberty hits for his species.  Other people wont know until you have lost your virginity, and then the rumors and tales will spread!  I want the negatives and bonuses caused by genitals not to take effect until your endowment is known.

 

EDIT: I just remembered why I was using a general malice... and you are correct, that should be on trap not on micro_penis.  And even on trap, it is still potentially too high.

[NoxBestia]

Are virgin sex-scenes that specific? I'd figure you could just edit out parts that mention virginity and use the same scenes for both... at least as a temporary measure. I don't think I've seen those events if they are in though... I really need to give the trap family another run soon.

 

Enter this in your console for an example of a specific virgin only-sex scene event with your trap character:

 

event NOX_yiff.2414

 

You don't have to be a virgin for it to work if you force execute it like this, but you do have to have triggered the initial trap family event.  You can for trigger that by: event NOX_yiff.800

[ngppgn]

 

Penis-wise, are we talking about Trap campaign? If so, microthingy is OK, even if it were the dominant in the distribution of things. I would have another suggestion though - let's shift negative opinion from micropenis trait to the trap trait. My logic is – people shouldn't be aware what kind of private parts I have unless I was a) in an intimate encounter with them, sharing an orgy with them, c) sharing a bath with them, d) or all the court is walking around stark naked.

Frankly, in RL I've known some people for decades, but I have no idea what size they are. So world-wide opinion adjustments due to things that people shouldn't know at all do not seem natural ("Charles, dear, did you know Wali of M'Saken has a tiny dicky? - Really? How I hate his guts!"). If we shifted opinion penalty to Trap trait, it would be more understandable - I mean it's clear from the very introduction of the campaign that the character should expect to be commented upon and criticized because of his trait (the initial dream).

 

On the other hand maybe - just maybe - we sometimes are too harsh in doling out negative opinion against some traits. Vanilla does not do this or tries to be gentle. Take, for example, homosexual (which, I expect, should've been a big deal back then - it was a big deal even in my parents' generation). What vanilla does? Just gives -5 among vassals and a slight fertility penalty.

 

On the other hand, my heir who is a minor still (but an incubus, werewolf and perverted) potentially faces constant revolts and mutinied regency council even though he hasn't done anything to deserve this (he will, though). We should probably allow for hipocrisy sometimes - during those times people shrugged off a lot of things that their lords did unless suffered personally. I mean, "he/she is our lord, that is their will and privilege" opinion should be dominant. Yes, there were revolts and witch hunts, but the latter were mostly against plebes, and we know about the former because there were so few of them really (and they were mostly about taxation, not personality traits).

 

Just my thoughts

First, thoughts and feedback are always welcomed, especially if phrased constructively as you jsut did. Second, I often start out with negative opinions intentionally way too high and then lower them during play testing. Preview versions have not been play tested much by me, if at all. Regardless of all that, you are correct that the level of malice is WAY too high right now. Before 0.0.4.0 goes live, I'll be running play-testing games on the hardest difficulty with all revolts turned on.

 

Believe it or not, your endowment would have been a thing of legend or ridicule, though this was often kept out of a lot of the public records. In nomadic and tribal cultures, nudity was very common and dependent on the weather and what tasks you were doing. We wont even get into the ulster kings having to have intercourse with a white mare before they were fully crowned (though I do believe I put that in an untriggered event somewhere). For my discourse on feudal culture below, I am over-generalizing and there was much more variation form place to place, but in Europe in general, the following is adequately documented if one looks beyond the "sanitized" texts.

 

What a lot of people today don't think about is that in the pre-Victorian eras, you would have been seen nude many times in your life, especially on your wedding night. In many feudal societies, the consummation of your marriage was attended by the court and honored guests. The more important you were, the more people watched you and your wife. There was feasting, singing, bawdy jokes, stories, sometimes other sexual activities going on in the room because other people got into the mood. Water and food were brought to the copulating couple in bed to they could keep at it longer. And so on and so on.

 

Privacy was a different concept back then. In many places you had to walk though more than one other bedroom to reach your own. They didn't "waste" space with hallways simply for privacy or modesty. Another thing that disturbs a lot of people to lean is than in many pre-Victorian European areas, children of 10 or older were simply seen as smaller adults. Like Crowley did in the 1920's, children of the middle ages were encouraged to be in the room watching while the full adults were having sex. But in the middle ages, the children would be somewhat included. Maybe not in the penetrative way, but definitely in a sensual/pleasurable way.

 

Again the above are over-generalizations, but they are part of the basis of why your endowment would be so well known, especially for a noble. Another part of it is that in "Darkest Perversions" you are in a world of unnatural (and supernatural) sexuality. Even if your playing settings have it censored so you never see it, children will have been nude together, perverted wet nurses would have performed oral sex on the older children while they were nursing, some twisted guardians or parents would have used genital pleasure and pain for reward and punishment (just like the catholic church was fond of doing and if you believe some sources, still practices). To be honest, in the world of Darkest Perversions, making it to 16 and still being a virgin should be half worthy of sainthood in and of itself (if non-Yiffic Christian, Muslim, or Jewish).

 

And now for some code that isn't working quite as desired yet:

nox_gigantic_balls = { 
	is_visible = {
		FROM = {
			nox_is_sexually_active = yes	# biologically, puberty has hit
			OR = {
				NOT = { trait = virgin }	# other people have seen it, so the rumors spread
				character = FROM			# can always seen your own junk now that puberty has hit
			}
		}
	}
<--snip--->

My plan when I have it working like it should, is that a male's adult endowment isn't known to even himself until puberty hits for his species. Other people wont know until you have lost your virginity, and then the rumors and tales will spread! I want the negatives and bonuses caused by genitals not to take effect until your endowment is known.

 

EDIT: I just remembered why I was using a general malice... and you are correct, that should be on trap not on micro_penis. And even on trap, it is still potentially too high.

Some notes on the code and the end:

-I think trait effects, including opinion modifiers are applied even if the trait is hidden.

-I think

the code doesn't correspond to your intent. As you wrote it, it always returns true, since from -> character = from is trivially true.

[NoxBestia]

 

 

And now for some code that isn't working quite as desired yet:

nox_gigantic_balls = { 
	is_visible = {
		FROM = {
			nox_is_sexually_active = yes	# biologically, puberty has hit
			OR = {
				NOT = { trait = virgin }	# other people have seen it, so the rumors spread
				character = FROM			# can always seen your own junk now that puberty has hit
			}
		}
	}
<--snip--->

My plan when I have it working like it should, is that a male's adult endowment isn't known to even himself until puberty hits for his species. Other people wont know until you have lost your virginity, and then the rumors and tales will spread! I want the negatives and bonuses caused by genitals not to take effect until your endowment is known.

 

EDIT: I just remembered why I was using a general malice... and you are correct, that should be on trap not on micro_penis. And even on trap, it is still potentially too high.

Some notes on the code and the end:

-I think trait effects, including opinion modifiers are applied even if the trait is hidden.

-I think

the code doesn't correspond to your intent. As you wrote it, it always returns true, since from -> character = from is trivially true.

 

 

According to my understanding from the write-up of the trait visibility system, the "from -> character = from" is to allow you to see your own trait, which will only trigger in this case if you are the one looking and you also have reached puberty.  Other people should only see the trait in you if you have reached puberty and are not a virgin.

 

If the opinion modifiers are applied even if a trait is hidden, then what I want to do wont work as I desire (at least as I am trying to do it here).  I'll run some specific test cases with this code and see what I can narrow down.   

 

As always, thanks for pointing this potential issue out.

[NoxBestia]

 

 

Some notes on the code and the end:

-I think trait effects, including opinion modifiers are applied even if the trait is hidden.

-I think

the code doesn't correspond to your intent. As you wrote it, it always returns true, since from -> character = from is trivially true.

 

 

According to my understanding from the write-up of the trait visibility system, the "from -> character = from" is to allow you to see your own trait, which will only trigger in this case if you are the one looking and you also have reached puberty.  Other people should only see the trait in you if you have reached puberty and are not a virgin.

 

If the opinion modifiers are applied even if a trait is hidden, then what I want to do wont work as I desire (at least as I am trying to do it here).  I'll run some specific test cases with this code and see what I can narrow down.   

 

As always, thanks for pointing this potential issue out.

 

 

Here is one from CK2 itself that _should_ be working as desired.  I see that its default scope is ROOT (the person we are checking to see if they can see the trait), so by me wrapping everything in FROM (the trait holder) I can definitely see where that can cause issues.

	is_visible = {
		OR = {
			character = FROM
			society_member_of = secret_religious_society_zun_pagan_reformed
			AND = {
				is_close_relative = FROM
				trait = secretly_zun_pagan_reformed
			}
		}
	}

[NoxBestia]

 

Some notes on the code and the end:

-I think trait effects, including opinion modifiers are applied even if the trait is hidden.

-I think

the code doesn't correspond to your intent. As you wrote it, it always returns true, since from -> character = from is trivially true.

 

 

Sadly, I have verified that even hidden traits give their opinion modifier.  That is very annoying and I shall have to figure out what I want to do about it.

[NoxBestia]

<--snip-->

I would have another suggestion though - let's shift negative opinion from micropenis trait to the trap trait.

<--snip-->

 

Trait Tweaks

 

"trap" general opinion has been altered from -5 to -10 (same as a dark world cheap whore)  In the future I will make an opinion modifier for men who were tricked into bed by the trap thinking he was a real woman.  It will be severe (unless the tricked man is bisexual or homosexual).

 

"dick_micro" now has no opinion penalty, but does have a -15 sex appeal.  

 

EDIT: I beleive I will eventually alter my genital assignment system to not assign your adult genital sizes until puberty hits so we don't have to worry about any of these negatives affecting pre-pubescent rulers.

[Fl0g]

I want to thank you for this mod, it's become a must have for a play through for me. When you needed surgery and were away for an extended period of time I was pulling for you. I'm glad you are back and swinging away even though you are fighting illness.

 

You are adding new content at a blistering rate and I appreciate it, and while some of it doesn't do much for me, new content is fun to try out. Speaking of trying stuff out, I have your mod semi-active in AGOT. It and most mods are a bit wobbly of course but I keep playing around with it. It's a compelling universe. Who doesn't want to kill (or whatever) Jeoffry or imprison (or whatever) Cerci?

 

I would love if you finished some of the content you started, but by all means follow your muse to your hearts content. While I might not make my ruler a Trap, it would be funny to make certain sadistic rulers into traps and then sell them to the Dothraki. That just might be my cruel streak talking. 

[NoxBestia]

I want to thank you for this mod, it's become a must have for a play through for me. When you needed surgery and were away for an extended period of time I was pulling for you. I'm glad you are back and swinging away even though you are fighting illness.

 

You are adding new content at a blistering rate and I appreciate it, and while some of it doesn't do much for me, new content is fun to try out. Speaking of trying stuff out, I have your mod semi-active in AGOT. It and most mods are a bit wobbly of course but I keep playing around with it. It's a compelling universe. Who doesn't want to kill (or whatever) Jeoffry or imprison (or whatever) Cerci?

 

I would love if you finished some of the content you started, but by all means follow your muse to your hearts content. While I might not make my ruler a Trap, it would be funny to make certain sadistic rulers into traps and then sell them to the Dothraki. That just might be my cruel streak talking. 

 

Thank you for your kind words.

 

AGOT and Warhammer are my favorite regular MODs so I will eventually make my stuff work with both of them.  But that wont be for some time.

[NoxBestia]

WTF Was I thinking???

 

Taking a bit of a break from coding and writing because I just hit a section of code that I didn't leave myself enough notes to know what the hell I had in mind.  I am sure it will come to me and then I can deal with it, but until then I have 7 copy/paste instances of an "option #3" that leads to a list of "tamer options" and I don't remember what those "tamer options" were supposed to be.  /laughs

 

I hate ADD sometimes.

 

On the brighter side, I think I am getting fairly close to being able to upload the next "preview" version of 0.0.4.0.  

 

EDIT: I did leave myself notes, just in a weird place in the code.  Yay!  Continuing progress...

 

[Hamof]

Couldn't you have genital traits apply a modifier to the character if they become known? So people find out you have a micro dick, it fires an event that activates a modifier that has the opinion modifier? (I'm not sure modifier is the right word, I mean those things that are shown beneath the traits.)

[NoxBestia]

Couldn't you have genital traits apply a modifier to the character if they become known? So people find out you have a micro dick, it fires an event that activates a modifier that has the opinion modifier? (I'm not sure modifier is the right word, I mean those things that are shown beneath the traits.)

 

Yes, that can be done.  That is precisely the kind of thing I was talking about when I said I would make an opinion modifier for men who were tricked into bed by the trap thinking he was a real woman.  Thank you for making the suggestion.  

[ngppgn]

 

 

 

Some notes on the code and the end:

-I think trait effects, including opinion modifiers are applied even if the trait is hidden.

-I think

the code doesn't correspond to your intent. As you wrote it, it always returns true, since from -> character = from is trivially true.

 

 

According to my understanding from the write-up of the trait visibility system, the "from -> character = from" is to allow you to see your own trait, which will only trigger in this case if you are the one looking and you also have reached puberty.  Other people should only see the trait in you if you have reached puberty and are not a virgin.

 

If the opinion modifiers are applied even if a trait is hidden, then what I want to do wont work as I desire (at least as I am trying to do it here).  I'll run some specific test cases with this code and see what I can narrow down.   

 

As always, thanks for pointing this potential issue out.

 

 

Here is one from CK2 itself that _should_ be working as desired.  I see that its default scope is ROOT (the person we are checking to see if they can see the trait), so by me wrapping everything in FROM (the trait holder) I can definitely see where that can cause issues.

	is_visible = {
		OR = {
			character = FROM
			society_member_of = secret_religious_society_zun_pagan_reformed
			AND = {
				is_close_relative = FROM
				trait = secretly_zun_pagan_reformed
			}
		}
	}

 

Indeed, but note how this example does NOT wraps the OR clause inside a FROM clause.

 

OR = { character = FROM <something else> } is normal; FROM = { OR = { character = FROM <something else> } } will always be true (the trait will be visble under any conditions) because the first part of the OR will be always be true (you are asking to FROM: "asnwer "yes" if you are FROM or if <something else>". By contrast, the snippet from vanilla is asking (the implicit) ROOT the same question (where FROM is the trait holder and ROOT is the player).

 

So, if my understanding is correct, the snippet should actually be

nox_gigantic_balls = {
    is_visible = {
        FROM = { nox_is_sexually_active = yes }   # biologically, puberty has hit
        OR = {
            FROM = { NOT = { trait = virgin } }   # other people have seen it, so the rumors spread
            character = FROM            # can always seen your own junk now that puberty has hit
       }
    }
<--snip--->

[Ashra XIII]

Had a bit of interesting times yesterday with this mod. It seems there are other paths with the trap family that can lead to either a decision with no options, or a looping set of events that go on forever. The looping one started with an unfinished event that said something like "Generic_Father_Talk" and had four options which were also not described. The event kept coming up every few in-game months, and I went through the choices to see if they did anything. After choosing the last option, I got a "Nox_Rape" series of events which kept looping forever, and forced me to reload.

 

Beyond that, I'm wondering if, in its current iteration, is this mod supposed to work for any ruler past the first? That's always the saddest part for me, when my trap ruler dies and the game basically becomes normal again.

 

I've also noticed that, for some reason which has nothing to do with this mod, racial traits (werewolf, neko, etc) never pass on to children. The only one that seems to work is centaur. I mention it only to ask if anyone else has noticed this.

[NoxBestia]

Had a bit of interesting times yesterday with this mod. It seems there are other paths with the trap family that can lead to either a decision with no options, or a looping set of events that go on forever. The looping one started with an unfinished event that said something like "Generic_Father_Talk" and had four options which were also not described. The event kept coming up every few in-game months, and I went through the choices to see if they did anything. After choosing the last option, I got a "Nox_Rape" series of events which kept looping forever, and forced me to reload.

 

Beyond that, I'm wondering if, in its current iteration, is this mod supposed to work for any ruler past the first? That's always the saddest part for me, when my trap ruler dies and the game basically becomes normal again.

 

I've also noticed that, for some reason which has nothing to do with this mod, racial traits (werewolf, neko, etc) never pass on to children. The only one that seems to work is centaur. I mention it only to ask if anyone else has noticed this.

 

I have already been working on fixing the things you have noted in your first paragraph.  The current preview should have never gone up, but I was ill and I thought it was in better shape than it really was.

 

Currently, the trap family events only fire for the first generation, but that is a temporary state.  I am trying to figure out how to deal with the fact that the twins _must_ be teenagers.  The easiest is to generate new twins each time, but that only works if the father is still alive and available.  If the "immortal" father is dead, then a new father and twins is easy, but I don't want to kill him each time either.  When I decide how I am going to handle this, then I will code it up and add it in.  Until then, if you are playing a new teenage (13-16 year old) ruler and want to have the event re-fire, you can console: event NOX_yiff.800

 

I will test this while working on the above and let you know what I find.  (For testing my fixes as I go, I just started a new test game with a 13 year old Karloman trap candidate married to a werewolf.)

[NoxBestia]

I Must Admit My Ignorance

 

I am working on the section of Darkest Perversions dealing with the religious views on the different kinks.  I am well studied in many religious beliefs and systems, but my knowledge of the Indian religions is rather weak and they are some of the most complex and somewhat contradicting ones out there, with many rules, and seemingly for every rule a dozen different exceptions that are largely based on one's caste.  Even in modern discourses there are contradictory statements by the same holy man.  For instance, in regards to homosexuality, the Dali Lama said that he could not condone it for the religious but that he had no problems with it between two non-religious people.  One Hindu discussion talked about how oral sex was a (whatever word they used for sin) but that so was sex even for procreation.  He went on to explain that everyone sins and the goal is to work towards enlightenment and not sinning.  Then there is the Jain belief in no absolutes...

 

So, to anyone who is well versed in any of the three Indian religions included in CK2, and their seemingly infinite subtleties, if any of my stated "religious views" on a sexual topic is grossly wrong, especially considering the time period and world of supernatural sexuality that this is set in, I will gladly accept correction.  To a lesser extent, I will admit my knowledge of Zoroastrianism and its sub-sects is not on par with my knowledge of the Abrahamic faiths and my knowledge of paganism, but it is one I have at least studied and read up on over the years.

 

Of course I can say with high confidence that in this plane of existence there is no higher corporeal expert on the Yiffic faith than me.  

[Stannis_Baratheon_]

I personally have never played in the India region, even though I have the dlc for it. I find myself having very little interest over in that area, so don't feel so ashamed or anything. You are correct in saying that it is complex, for India has always and will always be complex. I have nothing against the people there at all, but I wish that region was never added because maybe then the game would run better.

 

Edit: 

What I'm getting at here is I personally kinda hope you don't do too much work in that area. Of course this is your mod and you do you, but I probably will never touch it.