Sexlab Adventures

[Teutonic]

5 hours ago, Sidewasy said:

One problem I have with this mod is that the laws only apply to the player. It's most noticable with public nudity inverted, in which case the player is the only one naked. Another thing that bothers me is that the taxes are added to the bounty. Having to pay taxes doesn't make you a criminal, not paying them does.

I aggree. It's just that I do not have solid solutions for them as of now. Taxation in particular was mostly a test to see if the feature has any merit at all.

[worik]

On 12/11/2019 at 6:25 PM, Teutonic said:

Taxation in particular was mostly a test to see if the feature has any merit at all.

The feature in itself is a good one.

It's just that we would need a second .... hmmm... "account"? ? Per hold.

 

Maybe an idea:

Spoiler

Imperial Mail - Post and Banking Service introduces a bank where you can store your money.

It has one public office in Solitude, but with your book, you can deposit or withdraw money from your account by talking to any innkeeper.

 

We would need the opposite.

E.G. Talking to the steward or a guards captain and asking for your dept, pay it, ask for a delayed payment (granting you another day)....

Instead of dialogue, it could also be done by an opened book (like the ledgers) in the palaces.

Or you introduce a dedicated tax officer NPC in each hold to avoid messing with the Stewards. ?

 

In addition, the courier could send you a "last warning" before your tax is transfered to your bounty because you didn't pay in time

 

[Lupine00]

On 12/12/2019 at 4:25 AM, Teutonic said:

Taxation in particular was mostly a test to see if the feature has any merit at all.

I'm finding that SLS ate SL Adventures lunch ... to a great extent.

Where I used to have SLAdv crimes, I have turned them off because they caused issues in SLS, and now use SLS licenses to limit the PC or sink cash.

 

Rape is an area where I've almost lost interest in the entire feature concept. It never feels quite right or justified in any mod, and there isn't sufficient ability to push back in SL Adv. There are places it would make sense, but getting them to work reliably ... it's hard.

 

SL Adventures is still a good mod. It didn't get worse, but it did stay still, and if you're playing Skyrim non-stop, you are going to crave freshness, or features that at least keep on growing better with some regularity.

 

My crime conditions are now very narrow - and even those were turned off recently because SLS started taking my licenses for having a bounty.

 

As @worik sort of implies, the bounty system itself is a bit basic to support the complexity that SL Adventures deserves.

Guard interactions on been caught committing a crime are either non-existent or basic.

 

Good/fun/interesting guard dialog interactions could make SL Adventures relevant to me again.

 

 

A rape system that is based around the rapists starting an actual fight ... unless you are bound to the extent where you can't resist...

That would sure get me interested.

e.g. Rapists attack via unarmed in towns, or with weapons in the wilderness.

You can try to fight them off, or just surrender. But if you fight, it's straight-out Skyrim combat. Brawl. Or draw weapons and kill them all!

Kill a rapist and the guards arrest you for murder though.

Get caught fighting rapists, and the guards may not come down on your side (or they may). 

 

 

A tax system that doesn't use bounties would be interesting too. If it had synergy with SLS, even better.

worik's suggestion is perfect, but how about replacing flat tax with something more configurable?

 

 

I think there's still almost limitless scope for a new Solicitation mod that had all the brothels, possible enslavement, kidnaps, and so on from ME, made new and fresh, and working with DD.

 

And there's certainly scope to enhance crimes in SL Adventures to make it more useful, more selective, and more interactive. It's a pity that it's not moving much, or stopped? I'm not really sure.

[dlj]

The MCM menu isn't appearing no matter what I try

[Teutonic]

23 hours ago, dlj said:

The MCM menu isn't appearing no matter what I try

You can try sending me a Papyrus log. 

[jlttsmiley30]

On 12/14/2019 at 2:18 AM, Lupine00 said:

I'm finding that SLS ate SL Adventures lunch ... to a great extent.

Where I used to have SLAdv crimes, I have turned them off because they caused issues in SLS, and now use SLS licenses to limit the PC or sink cash.

 

Rape is an area where I've almost lost interest in the entire feature concept. It never feels quite right or justified in any mod, and there isn't sufficient ability to push back in SL Adv. There are places it would make sense, but getting them to work reliably ... it's hard.

 

SL Adventures is still a good mod. It didn't get worse, but it did stay still, and if you're playing Skyrim non-stop, you are going to crave freshness, or features that at least keep on growing better with some regularity.

 

My crime conditions are now very narrow - and even those were turned off recently because SLS started taking my licenses for having a bounty.

 

As @worik sort of implies, the bounty system itself is a bit basic to support the complexity that SL Adventures deserves.

Guard interactions on been caught committing a crime are either non-existent or basic.

 

Good/fun/interesting guard dialog interactions could make SL Adventures relevant to me again.

 

 

A rape system that is based around the rapists starting an actual fight ... unless you are bound to the extent where you can't resist...

That would sure get me interested.

e.g. Rapists attack via unarmed in towns, or with weapons in the wilderness.

You can try to fight them off, or just surrender. But if you fight, it's straight-out Skyrim combat. Brawl. Or draw weapons and kill them all!

Kill a rapist and the guards arrest you for murder though.

Get caught fighting rapists, and the guards may not come down on your side (or they may). 

 

 

A tax system that doesn't use bounties would be interesting too. If it had synergy with SLS, even better.

worik's suggestion is perfect, but how about replacing flat tax with something more configurable?

 

 

I think there's still almost limitless scope for a new Solicitation mod that had all the brothels, possible enslavement, kidnaps, and so on from ME, made new and fresh, and working with DD.

 

And there's certainly scope to enhance crimes in SL Adventures to make it more useful, more selective, and more interactive. It's a pity that it's not moving much, or stopped? I'm not really sure.

I use sexlab defeat with sexlab adventurers which' let,s me tie up a xede at npc for a time.

 

[thepronpage]

To Teutonic and Lupine

 

Hello... Fantastic work on Sexlab Aroused Extended as well as Sexlab Adventures!!

 

I think I have encountered a problem with the 'Nude' function, and forgive me if somebody already mentioned it. Before I go on I would admit that I am not a programmer and am just speculating.

 

Previously, I set the criteria for 'nude' on SL Adventure, to be based on 'SL Aroused'. How I did it was tick of pieces of armour on SL Aroused to be considered 'nude'. That worked well.

 

Now, whatever I put the Bikini top as: Sexy, slooty, or even respectable in SLAX, when the criteria for 'nude' is 'SL Aroused', I still get fined.

So I use the other criteria, like 'Exposed chest or crotch'. But there is another problem:

 

I have a feeling the chest bikini, sometimes 'cover up' the bikini bottom... let me elaborate.

 

Currently, I am using the armours from 'Bikini Armour', where there are lots of different pieces of armour I could mix and match, including a 'bikini top' and 'bikini bottom'

I have switched around criteria for 'nude', to be a crime, just to test: 

 

Parameters:

1) Nude is a Crime. Will be FINED!!

2) 'on' means i am wearing, 'off' means I am not wearing it.

3) Bikini top is set as 100 slooty armor in SL Aroused Extended

4) Bikini bottom is  set as 100 bikini in SL Aroused Extended

 

Nudity is: Exposed Chest

Bikini top: on Bikini bottom: on ---> no fine

Bikini top: on Bikini bottom: off ---> no fine

Bikini top: off Bikini bottom: on ---> FINED!!

 

Nudity is: Exposed Crotch

Bikini top: on Bikini bottom: on ---> no fine

Bikini top: on Bikini bottom: off ---> no fine

Bikini top: off Bikini bottom: on ---> no fine

Bikini top: off Bikini bottom: off ---> FINED!!!

 

Nudity is: Exposed Chest or Crotch

Bikini top: on Bikini bottom: on ---> no fine

Bikini top: on Bikini bottom: off ---> no fine

Bikini top: off Bikini bottom: on ---> FINED!!!

Bikini top: off Bikini bottom: off ---> FINED!!!

 

Nudity is: Exposed Chest and Crotch

Bikini top: on Bikini bottom: on ---> no fine

Bikini top: on Bikini bottom: off ---> no fine

Bikini top: off Bikini bottom: on ---> no fine

Bikini top: off Bikini bottom: off ---> FINED!!!

 

Nudity is: Sexlab Aroused   Top is set as whichever ie Sexy, slooty, respectable etc...

Bikini top: on Bikini bottom: on ---> FINED!!

Bikini top: on Bikini bottom: off ---> FINED!!

Bikini top: off Bikini bottom: on ---> FINED!!

Bikini top: off Bikini bottom: off ---> FINED!!!

 

Therefore I postulate that the chest piece somehow covers the crotch as well, and for some reason the Bikini top counts as nude in SLAX as well.

 

PS: The only separate Top and Bottom bikini sets I have is from the Amazing World of Bikini Armours. 

 

Thanks

[genericuser27]

Any chance you could tell me where the script for wiping cum off is? I'd like to make it use up a linen wrap.

[Lupine00]

On 12/19/2019 at 12:20 AM, thepronpage said:

Therefore I postulate that the chest piece somehow covers the crotch as well, and for some reason the Bikini top counts as nude in SLAX as well.

There is a long standing tradition that slot 32 is the nudity determiner in most LL mods.

This is because checking the gear in a slot is extremely slow. GetWornForm is a very slow function.

 

SLD manages it because it isn't in a rush; it has a pretty clear idea of how long it takes to run over all the slots it checks.

Some other mods avoid it because they want really quick updates, or they use it in the MCM.

You can see this in SLAX... I reduced the slots handled to make the MCM much more responsive.

This came with downsides. Eventually I will support more slots, but you'll have to click a button to look at them, like the feature for SexLab strip handling, which solves that issue neatly.

 

Back to game play...

 

Bikinis typically do not fit in slot 32; that's their special sauce. That means a lot of mods think they look like a naked player.

Some mods now check bikini slots, but as you see, it comes at a price.

SLS has a mechanic to auto-wear a body replacer in slot 32 that looks like clothing to most mods, when bikini top and bottom are worn.

 

If you want to use a bikini without SLS, you can use a body replacer manually as long as its flagged appropriately.

 

SL Adventures could let you specify an extra slot to check, and that would be another way to resolve this - you could then set your bikini bottom slot there.

 

 

Another detail is that SLAX supports flags for armor that is "illegal" and "respectable" and those could be handled explicitly, if SL Adventures wanted.

 

I think it's possible to improve things from where it stands now.

 

I will add a flag to SLAX that can be checked for with the standard worn has flag check (which is cheap) that can be set on bikini bottoms or similar items that should render you non-naked, and another that indicates that you are clothed. Mods that support those will be able to check (and handle bikini's efficiently) without additional slot checks (or slot checks at all. For mods that want to support it, slot checks would not be needed at all. Which is a big performance win.

 

Some modders will never support SLAX, and some old mods will never be updated, but for those that want to offer players more options, it will be possible.

I need to do more with it, and get some updates out, but I seem to be stuck in a DF tarpit for now.

[legraf]

3 hours ago, genericuser27 said:

Any chance you could tell me where the script for wiping cum off is? I'd like to make it use up a linen wrap.

In SLAdventures_PlayerArousedScanner.psc, function Function HotKeyWipeCum()

 

[Corsayr]

6 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Bikinis typically do not fit in slot 32; that's their special sauce.

which bikini mods don't use slot 32 for their top? 

 

TAWoBA does which is like 99.9% of the bikini armors people use.

 

I have used a lot of other bikini mods, and I can not for the life of me think of a single one that doesn't use slot 32 for the top part of the bikini

 

 

 

 

[Lupine00]

2 hours ago, Corsayr said:

which bikini mods don't use slot 32 for their top? 

Sets that use a corset in slot-32, pasties of various kinds...

 

The use of slot-32 follows from wanting to put in a body-replacer. It's a lot easier to weight if you do that. Otherwise there's a tendency for breasts to poke through on slider scaling that can be hard to overcome when setting up bodyslide.

 

CT uses slots 45 and 48 for panties, but this is not a rule...

 

Some older designs didn't account for bodyslide UNP, or seven base outfits often had less need to use slot-32.

 

I think Arcane Knickers uses slot-32 for the bottoms and does the body replace based on that.

This is fine until somebody uses a different bottom with a bra that uses only the bra slot, and then it ends up clipping.

The reverse occurs in TAWoBA (and most other mods), the panties tend to exhibit clipping problems when used outside their 'set'.

 

TAWoBA is pretty sketchy though. In some cases you can equip two tops at once.

 

Aradia has a bra in slots 51 and 56 and a cuirass in slot-32.

 

While it's probably true most people use TAWoBA, it looks ... old and bad for the most part. It matches up with vanilla OK, but not so well against any vanilla replacer. The UUNP conversion work is by no means perfect either. Just putting in a skimpy armors mod produces a better result in most cases.

Aradia probably looks even worse, but it has a certain charm and coherence that TAWoBA doesn't.

 

Ninirim and Melodic are in a different era.

[Corsayr]

7 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Sets that use a corset in slot-32, pasties of various kinds...

Not to nit pick but if it is using a corset it generally isn't a bikini... ?

 

*Corsets in TAWoBA are abs (which challenges the idea of what is typical) 

 

7 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

CT uses slots 45 and 48 for panties, but this is not a rule...

CT? (But what does it use for the top?)

 

7 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Ninirim and Melodic are in a different era.

Nini and Melodic both tend to use the 32 spot for bikini tops when they make bikini style outfits 

 

So with Nini, Melodic, and TAWoBA all doing bikinis with the top in the 32 spot how are bikinis "typically" (your words not mine) not behaving like that? ?

 

Your original assertion seems inaccurate.  

 

7 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

the panties tend to exhibit clipping problems when used outside their 'set'

This has not been my experience, and I mix and match constantly (because most of the time I am running on armor found in chests)

 

 

7 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Aradia has a bra in slots 51 and 56 and a cuirass in slot-32

In my travels the 4 slots that typically denote "naughty bits covering" cloths are

 

32 and 56 for tops 

52 and 49 for bottoms

 

You watch those 4 slots and you will capture nudity with a high degree of accuracy. 

[Lupine00]

  

8 hours ago, Corsayr said:

16 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Sets that use a corset in slot-32, pasties of various kinds...

Not to nit pick but if it is using a corset it generally isn't a bikini... 

The implication is that if the corset is in slot-32, the bikini-top can't be?

And the reason the bikini-top isn't in slot-32 is because of that decision.

 

But if you take issue with the "typically". I agree, that's not the right word; "occasionally" might be better.

Maybe even "rarely"?

 

I thought TAWoBA had a mix of bra-slot and body-slot tops in it, because I found in (unmodified) TAWoBA it's quite possible to stack two different tops, as the slotting is haphazard.

 

I admit to a failure of memory on this.

I went to some considerable lengths to research what slots were used for bikini top/bottom items when setting up the slot options in SLAX.

I didn't limit myself to just a few creators, I tried to look at the broadest possible range of sources.

I guess that led to me remembering the "problem" (as it was for me) that there was some considerable variation in slot choices made by armor/clothing creators, and not remembering that in most cases they did use slot 32 for the top. I was looking for exceptions, and thus remembered the exceptions.

 

In practice, slot-32 is used in the vast majority of bikini tops. It feels like a mistake to me, but it is the reality.

 

Personally, if I was making a bikini mod, I'd put the panties in slot-32 if the bra was bra-like. The "proper" panty slot has more contention on it than the bra slot, and to me, it seems like being bottomless is "naked" and topless is not naked. The weighting problems are about the same either way. If somebody uses items for a different body to the one you put in your armor, it's always going to mess up and cause clipping. While UUNP ought to be "standard" many UUNP conversions are made from original bodies that never were UUNP and will never map perfectly to it. (Or will only map perfectly if somebody does vertex-level editing on them).

 

As regards Ninirim and Melodic, the point (that you chose to ignore there, though presumably do not dispute) is that TAWoBA is not the universal gold standard of bikinis. It never was and it never will be. It was just a big set of stuff that primarily delivered volume - and even now, years later, after many ESP hacks and updates, and UUNP conversions, it still has quite a few bugs, boots without heels (recently addressed by DW), and other visual and gameplay deficiencies.

 

Whether it's most popular or not ... I don't know ... we have very little factual data on that, but as it's heavily promoted in search results due to its prominent Nexus position, maybe it is. Nexus recommends what is popular, and what Nexus recommends becomes popular. Alternatives - many of which are contemporary in age - (and some of which do not use slot-32 for the top) are numerous, but hidden away on sites with low traffic compared to Nexus or LL, or in ancient posts on LL, or only accessible via Baidu.

 

However, I suspect that Grim, Nini and Melodic are also candidates for most popular. We don't have information on that.

Few Melodic or Ninirim outfits contain a bikini in any meaningful sense, but there are other contenders like Luxury Suite, Daz, Fox, etc. The Daz bikini collections are probably the biggest (I didn't count) set of actual bikinis (not armor) though many of them are made a full swimsuits (they're definitely going to be in slot-32) and I can confirm that Daz bikini outfits use slot-32 for the top uniformly.

 

I guess my point here is that it's all speculation: we do not know the most popular bikini mod.

 

 

But this began with someone complaining they were being treated as naked in bikini tops, that probably came from TAWoBA.

 

As it turns out that they very likely had a slot-32 item equipped... (Though I believe that there are some broken items in TAWoBA that aren't slotted consistently).

 

Is the cause that they tagged their TAWoBA tops with the SLA naked keyword?

Mine don't have that keyword, but I'm not sure what that even means, as my TAWoBA has been edited considerably.

 

 

The problem with slots is that there are FOUR places they have to be set, and if they aren't consistent, problems ensue, some quite subtle.

In the Armor item.

In the ArmorAddon.

In the NIF - TWICE (once in 0 and once in 1).

 

I suspect that any NIF disagreement causes the armor not to load at all?

 

 

As I was remarking on keywords, because we cannot ever rely on slots 100%, and shouldn't - as there are all kinds of factors that lead to slot choice - proper and detailed keywording is the best solution.

 

If there is a distinct (accurate) keyword for panties, and for bikini top and bikini bottom, we can identify the player is wearing those things without scanning the entire slot-set and calling GetWornForm 32 times - which is incredibly slow.

[legraf]

2 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

If there is a distinct (accurate) keyword for panties, and for bikini top and bikini bottom, we can identify the player is wearing those things without scanning the entire slot-set and calling GetWornForm 32 times - which is incredibly slow.

So is WornHasKeyword faster than, say, four GetWornForm calls?  If so it's a clear win.  I would love to see SLAX support two standard keywords, one for covering the lower naughty bits, one for covering the upper - and then mods can decide for themselves what is "too naked" by their standard.  Lower is surely more necessary for non-nude, for both males and females.  These would be keywords not only for standard bikini tops & bottoms, but for full slot-32 cuirasses too, some of which explicitly do not cover one of these areas (but which might permit wearing underwear that does).

 

There are so many LL mods, at least, which would benefit by being able to quickly and consistently check this, it would be worth retrofitting heaps of items to make it happen.  A less-drastic retrofit would be possible if slot 32, specifically, were assumed to cover both areas unless it had a "this area uncovered" keyword, but that loses the elegance of slot-agnosticism and doubles the number of keywords needed.

 

One possible elaboration ... should there be even more granularity, or a separate set of keywords, to indicate "blocks this one of the usual three apertures" that SL tends to be interested in?  In this case the "panty" keyword might logically be split, right from the start, into "front lower" and "back lower" coverage, both of which would usually be required to be non-naked to most mods.

 

Should this discussion perhaps continue on the SLAX thread, if that's the most likely place for these keywords to be declared?

[Lupine00]

  

21 minutes ago, legraf said:

Should this discussion perhaps continue on the SLAX thread, if that's the most likely place for these keywords to be declared?

 

Responded here: https://www.loverslab.com/topic/130406-sexlab-aroused-extended/?do=findComment&comment=2854387

[AVS]

5 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

  

I thought TAWoBA had a mix of bra-slot and body-slot tops in it, because I found in (unmodified) TAWoBA it's quite possible to stack two different tops, as the slotting is haphazard.

 

 

TAWoBA intentionally has duplicates of the Dwarven bikini tops set to slot 48 for use with the cyborg bodies in that set, as the bodies have to occupy slot 32 for the limb replacement to function properly. I continued to use that slot when making outfits for use with my expanded Dwarven Cyborg Collection to keep consistency with TAWoBA, and included slot 48 versions of the tops in my revamp of the old 'Armored Bikini' set as about 75% of my motivation for making it was to get more cyborg-usable outfits. Personally I also like to use the slot 48 tops on non-cyborg'd characters as I use the SoS-based pubes alongside panties set to slot 52 so the pubes get displaced properly, and having the rest of the outfit off of the 'body' slot means I don't have to muck around with SoS's 'revealing' setting for each top. 

[legraf]

56 minutes ago, AVS said:

Personally I also like to use the slot 48 tops on non-cyborg'd characters as I use the SoS-based pubes alongside panties set to slot 52 so the pubes get displaced properly, and having the rest of the outfit off of the 'body' slot means I don't have to muck around with SoS's 'revealing' setting for each top. 

Does any slot-52 item always "win" against SOS pubic hair?  That's useful to know!

[Lupine00]

1 hour ago, AVS said:

TAWoBA intentionally has duplicates of the Dwarven bikini tops set to slot 48 for use with the cyborg bodies in that set, as the bodies have to occupy slot 32 for the limb replacement to function properly

While that makes sense, the cyborg bodies probably shouldn't even be in the mod.

They don't quite fit.

 

The wearable chaurus creatures are probably another instance of stuff that deserves its own mod to do it properly, with interesting effects, possibly a quest or two.

 

I guess I can remove them from my copy. For weird reasons, I seemed to only see the slot-48 tops as drops for a long time, so when I got another drop (slot 32) I thought *that* was the strange one.

[AVS]

2 hours ago, legraf said:

Does any slot-52 item always "win" against SOS pubic hair?  That's useful to know!

 

In my experience, yes. The game seems to treat the parts SoS adds the same way as it does the standard bodypart meshes, where it's the 'default' model displayed only if there's no equipped item taking up that slot. The 'revealing armor' system complicates things though, as it defaults to blocking slot 52 entirely when any slot 32 item is worn. You have to mark any upper body-only slot 32 outfit as 'revealing' in SoS's MCM to get either the slot 52 panties or an SoS add-on to appear while it's equipped, which can be slightly annoying.

 

1 hour ago, Lupine00 said:

While that makes sense, the cyborg bodies probably shouldn't even be in the mod.

They don't quite fit.

 

The wearable chaurus creatures are probably another instance of stuff that deserves its own mod to do it properly, with interesting effects, possibly a quest or two.

 

I guess I can remove them from my copy. For weird reasons, I seemed to only see the slot-48 tops as drops for a long time, so when I got another drop (slot 32) I thought *that* was the strange one.

 

They're basically artifacts of the original stand-alone bikini sets at this point. When Nise combined those separate releases into TAWoBA they made a number of changes and additions to the outfits, but the more peripheral stuff didn't see much further development. They even neglected to leave in the cyborg-use version of the Dwarven pasties, which was just bizarre considering that those were designed to be used on the cyborgs right from the start. It was also pretty clear that Nise was unlikely to revisit things themselves following the blow-up that happened right after the initial release of TAWoBA, which is a large part of why I decided to expand on the cyborg concept myself in my own mod. 

 

I do personally think it's useful that the extras are still in there, though, if just as a resource to have access to them without having to install the stand-alone versions and have the extra .esp files and redundant items that would come with. I'd certainly take them off of any leveled lists, though. 

 

[thepronpage]

On 12/28/2019 at 12:38 PM, Lupine00 said:

There is a long standing tradition that slot 32 is the nudity determiner in most LL mods.

This is because checking the gear in a slot is extremely slow. GetWornForm is a very slow function.

 

SLD manages it because it isn't in a rush; it has a pretty clear idea of how long it takes to run over all the slots it checks.

Some other mods avoid it because they want really quick updates, or they use it in the MCM.

You can see this in SLAX... I reduced the slots handled to make the MCM much more responsive.

This came with downsides. Eventually I will support more slots, but you'll have to click a button to look at them, like the feature for SexLab strip handling, which solves that issue neatly.

 

Back to game play...

 

Bikinis typically do not fit in slot 32; that's their special sauce. That means a lot of mods think they look like a naked player.

Some mods now check bikini slots, but as you see, it comes at a price.

SLS has a mechanic to auto-wear a body replacer in slot 32 that looks like clothing to most mods, when bikini top and bottom are worn.

 

If you want to use a bikini without SLS, you can use a body replacer manually as long as its flagged appropriately.

 

SL Adventures could let you specify an extra slot to check, and that would be another way to resolve this - you could then set your bikini bottom slot there.

 

 

Another detail is that SLAX supports flags for armor that is "illegal" and "respectable" and those could be handled explicitly, if SL Adventures wanted.

 

I think it's possible to improve things from where it stands now.

 

I will add a flag to SLAX that can be checked for with the standard worn has flag check (which is cheap) that can be set on bikini bottoms or similar items that should render you non-naked, and another that indicates that you are clothed. Mods that support those will be able to check (and handle bikini's efficiently) without additional slot checks (or slot checks at all. For mods that want to support it, slot checks would not be needed at all. Which is a big performance win.

 

Some modders will never support SLAX, and some old mods will never be updated, but for those that want to offer players more options, it will be possible.

I need to do more with it, and get some updates out, but I seem to be stuck in a DF tarpit for now.

Hello

 

Thanks for your detailed response. But I have to apologise if I need to clarify, as some of it might have flown over my head, given that I am not very savvy in programming.

2 questions:

 

1)

"SL Adventures could let you specify an extra slot to check, and that would be another way to resolve this - you could then set your bikini bottom slot there."

So do you mean that there is an extra slot to check, which I could, or you are considering adding it in later?

 

2)

So currently in SLAX, for the nude criteria of "exposed crotch", which mods do you have in mind which have clothes that covers the top and not bottom, and would fit the criteria?

 

Yeah, the flagging system which indicates the PC is clothed sounds great, so if I am not wearing top and bottom, it counts as naked. Because now I could flag clothes I am wearing as "illegal" or "nude", but sounds like it would be much harder to flag clothes to be "illegal" or "nude" if I am NOT wearing it. 

 

Thanks!

 

 

[Lupine00]

4 hours ago, thepronpage said:

Yeah, the flagging system which indicates the PC is clothed sounds great, so if I am not wearing top and bottom, it counts as naked. Because now I could flag clothes I am wearing as "illegal" or "nude", but sounds like it would be much harder to flag clothes to be "illegal" or "nude" if I am NOT wearing it. 

As was pointed out, in most cases, bikini tops do cover slot 32, but there is a set of dwarven tops in TAWoBA that use a different slot, and there are also some other mods that don't use slot-32. Slot 32 is used in most cases though. I mis-typified that.

 

In terms of flags, we don't have those flags in SLAX yet - though I can add them very easily, and may even do so this week  

 

For mods that need to check for absence of things, they can check the keywords on the player very easily and if the keyword isn't there, then the "quality" that word implies is lacking.

So, if we check the player for the zad Heavybondage keyword, and it's not there, the player isn't in heavy bondage. If we check for respectable clothes and it's not there, then the clothes are not respectable. If we check the various cuirass and clothes flags and they're not there, it's likely the player is effectively naked. If we have, and check for a bikini top flag, and it's not there, we know the player doesn't have one of those either.

 

It's more checks than simply checking for the illegal clothes flag, or the slooty clothes flag, but it's relatively inexpensive to check several keywords. But their absence doesn't imply total nakedness. The best way to determine that is to look for the armor and clothes keywords, but failing that, checking slot 32, and failing that, other reasonable slots that we wish to consider. It's up to the modder what they wish to consider, but there are certain conventions as determined by the Beth guide to slots and the DD guide to slots (which differ).

[Corsayr]

10 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

but there is a set of dwarven tops in TAWoBA that use a different slot

I think those are for using the dwarven mechanical limbs because the limbs are in the 32 slot. 

[Lupine00]

8 hours ago, Corsayr said:

I think those are for using the dwarven mechanical limbs because the limbs are in the 32 slot. 

Yes. That was confirmed by AVS just above.

 

I plan to try removing the armor items for those, and for the cyborg bodies from my TAWoBA esp - I'll leave the AAs as they don't matter.

Hopefully, that will prevent SLS from putting them into chests  

[monsta88]

Hello all,

 

I'm trying to define Skimpy armor by keywords. I click on Add keyword and type in "Transparent". I get an error message "Could not find the keyword. Did you misspell it?"

 

I'm not sure what I'm doing here. I imagined that I can add keywords to the actually worn torso armor/clothing, but it seems that's not it.

 

Can someone tell me, how can I use this feature? I don't really like the SL Arousal's limited Naked or Not Naked choices, so I'd like to use something in-between.