HTML Inner Empire [v1.69] [Defiant Explorer]

[Defiant Explorer]

I also like the concept of allowing one skill to aid in another check. You'll do it however you will. I just want to share the idea of using passive bonuses instead of activated bonuses.

For example, say the MC notices there is a secret passage behind a bookshelf, but the shelf is very heavy.
- Active Bonus: You could have a make Mind check to use a wood plank as a lever to reduce the requirement for the Vigor check to move the bookshelf. It's both simple and it works, but it also requires a whole extra step.
- Passive Bonus: But say by virtue of the MC having 3 points invested in Mind, she gets a +1 bonus to the Vigor check and uses the wood plank as a lever to move the shelf with less effort. I imagine this could be less work.

You already spell out everything required to fulfill a check, I would not expect you to do combined checks any differently. Anyone with at least the bare minimum knowledge of how RPGs work will get it instantly. If someone cannot comprehend your game and wants to leave a dumb review, they're only showcasing their stupidity.

Thanks for the suggestions. But in the first case, isn't it easier to do two direct checks, one with brute force (let's say Vigor 5), and the second with the use of brains and leverage, and let it be, dunno, Mind 3? What's the difference?

As for the second point. The idea is interesting, just one additional thing though... Passive checks are such a pain in the ass. When you see one description of a passive check, there are actually three of them:

a) Description + code with added exp for passing the check.
b) Description + code with a "plug" variable, without adding exp (because you already received it). Engine feature. Otherwise, there would be a duplication of exp if refreshing the browser page or if you entered the Character page, for example, and then returned back to the game. This "plug" variable prevents this; you gain exp for passing a passive check only one time, as intended.
c) Alternative description, in case you did not pass the passive check.

And...

d) All choice options on the passage where there is a passive check contain switching the “plug” variable back to "false" so that the next passive check does not break.

As you can see, in the context of a combination of code and text, this is not so simple. I've already regretted several times that invented passive checks at all xD But it's too late to change anything. They are and will be part of the gameplay. But if possible, I would prefer not to complicate my life even more where the logic of ordinary straightforward checks can handle it. I hope you understand.

 

[Gibberish666]

Thanks for the suggestions. But in the first case, isn't it easier to do two direct checks, one with brute force (let's say Vigor 5), and the second with the use of brains and leverage, and let it be, dunno, Mind 3? What's the difference?

As for the second point. The idea is interesting, just one additional thing though... Passive checks are such a pain in the ass. When you see one description of a passive check, there are actually three of them:

a) Description + code with added exp for passing the check.
b) Description + code with a "plug" variable, without adding exp (because you already received it). Engine feature. Otherwise, there would be a duplication of exp if refreshing the browser page or if you entered the Character page, for example, and then returned back to the game. This "plug" variable prevents this; you gain exp for passing a passive check only one time, as intended.
c) Alternative description, in case you did not pass the passive check.

And...

d) All choice options on the passage where there is a passive check contain switching the “plug” variable back to "false" so that the next passive check does not break.

As you can see, in the context of a combination of code and text, this is not so simple. I've already regretted several times that invented passive checks at all xD But it's too late to change anything. They are and will be part of the gameplay. But if possible, I would prefer not to complicate my life even more where the logic of ordinary straightforward checks can handle it. I hope you understand.

You're the boss. I know the passive check is easier and less time consuming on paper and pencil, but I guess that doesn't mean it works as well in code. lol

 

[Defiant Explorer]

You're the boss. I know the passive check is easier and less time consuming on paper and pencil, but I guess that doesn't mean it works as well in code. lol

Well, yes, at the table we use such a cool mechanism as our brains. But a computer, no matter how powerful, can only count, not interpert. So it turns out that some ideas in your head are cool, but when you try to figure out how to code them as an algorithm with abstract values, your head starts to melt a bit... Or at least for a homebrew programmer like myself, it melts. I'm sure real programming pros are like, "Whaaat? Hold my beer. See? It's so easy!"

Nevertheless, I'm not giving up on ideas. Even if they are difficult to implement. I just usually try to correlate the degree of their coolness with whether it is necessary to try to realize them in this way or to look for a simpler way with the same effect.

 

[portiamento]

Nice! Is there a cheat mode, by any chance?

with this save, you can start the game with all of the stats maxed.

 

[damnedfrog]

Well, yes, at the table we use such a cool mechanism as our brains. But a computer, no matter how powerful, can only count, not interpert. So it turns out that some ideas in your head are cool, but when you try to figure out how to code them as an algorithm with abstract values, your head starts to melt a bit... Or at least for a homebrew programmer like myself, it melts. I'm sure real programming pros are like, "Whaaat? Hold my beer. See? It's so easy!"

Nevertheless, I'm not giving up on ideas. Even if they are difficult to implement. I just usually try to correlate the degree of their coolness with whether it is necessary to try to realize them in this way or to look for a simpler way with the same effect.

Basically, my idea is to have some unusual ways to overcome some situations.
To allow a non athletic Selene to sometimes succeed physical task without spending tons of insight points, but by using her more intellectual attributes in a creative way. And in the opposite, a non to much intellect Selene could use her Vigor or Agility, instead of Mind or Intrigue.

By example, in the game Atom RPG, sometime in a dialog with a NPC, you could try a Strength check instead of Charisma to convince them of something. Clearly by intimidate rather than persuade them.
Or in the first Captain America movie, during the training, when the soldier who can bring back the flag on top of a mast could return to the camp in a car instead of marching. All the other stronger and more physical soldiers fail to climb up to the top of the mast. Then the future Captain America just unlock the mast which drop to the ground, and then just walk to get the flag.

It shouldn't be all the time. In some situation, just brute force, or on the opposite pure intelligence, could work.
And also, a non athletic Selene should have to struggle more in physical tasks, and an athletic one more in intellectual/intrigue tasks.
But from time to time, it would be fun to have an unorthodox way.

 

[Defiant Explorer]

Basically, my idea is to have some unusual ways to overcome some situations.
To allow a non athletic Selene to sometimes succeed physical task without spending tons of insight points, but by using her more intellectual attributes in a creative way. And in the opposite, a non to much intellect Selene could use her Vigor or Agility, instead of Mind or Intrigue.

By example, in the game Atom RPG, sometime in a dialog with a NPC, you could try a Strength check instead of Charisma to convince them of something. Clearly by intimidate rather than persuade them.
Or in the first Captain America movie, during the training, when the soldier who can bring back the flag on top of a mast could return to the camp in a car instead of marching. All the other stronger and more physical soldiers fail to climb up to the top of the mast. Then the future Captain America just unlock the mast which drop to the ground, and then just walk to get the flag.

It shouldn't be all the time. In some situation, just brute force, or on the opposite pure intelligence, could work.
And also, a non athletic Selene should have to struggle more in physical tasks, and an athletic one more in intellectual/intrigue tasks.
But from time to time, it would be fun to have an unorthodox way.

I get the idea. I also understand how to do it (it's a bit more complicated than usual, but it's doable). What I don't quite get... Why? I mean, wouldn't it be easier to just use different checks in situations where it's possible? Like when seducing Lasander, where you can use all abilities except Perception. And that's only because I have no idea how to seduce with Perception. So you only need to be good at one of the five abilities to succeed.

But there are situations where I intentionally narrow the choices down to one single ability. Simply because everything else is not even theoretically useful there. For example, from the last update, it's the moment of Meralion's rescue in the water. Nothing can help there, except for the purely physical ability to swim. Or when Cadonis tries to seduce Selene. It all comes down to whether she can overcome a... carnal urge. Even if she can't, it's not a disaster. She just slept with him (or not), nothing more, nothing less.

Can these situations be twisted to add alternate checks in some contrived way? Yes. But is it right to reduce the effectiveness of any ability in this way? After all, what's the point of specializing and planning for build strengths if you can always use your strengths, whatever they are? It's like giving the warrior access to magic and stealth in class-based RPG systems. What's the point of mages and rogues then, if warriors can do all their tricks? Which is why I'm not so sure.

 

[Defiant Explorer]

From the side, it probably looks something like this:


I should probably just shut up and thank you all for the suggestions xD

Spoiler: Grunt

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[Gibberish666]

Basically, my idea is to have some unusual ways to overcome some situations.
To allow a non athletic Selene to sometimes succeed physical task without spending tons of insight points, but by using her more intellectual attributes in a creative way. And in the opposite, a non to much intellect Selene could use her Vigor or Agility, instead of Mind or Intrigue.

By example, in the game Atom RPG, sometime in a dialog with a NPC, you could try a Strength check instead of Charisma to convince them of something. Clearly by intimidate rather than persuade them.
Or in the first Captain America movie, during the training, when the soldier who can bring back the flag on top of a mast could return to the camp in a car instead of marching. All the other stronger and more physical soldiers fail to climb up to the top of the mast. Then the future Captain America just unlock the mast which drop to the ground, and then just walk to get the flag.

It shouldn't be all the time. In some situation, just brute force, or on the opposite pure intelligence, could work.
And also, a non athletic Selene should have to struggle more in physical tasks, and an athletic one more in intellectual/intrigue tasks.
But from time to time, it would be fun to have an unorthodox way.

In other words, you don't want to see specialists "punished" for specializing. I understand how and why this could be interesting. However, that defeats the idea of "role-playing." You're not supposed to be good at everything. By being denied access to some content due to playing one build type you're encouraged to play the game multiple times with different builds. This is usually a good thing.

The game is already quite lenient and generous by allowing you to spend Insight to accomplish tasks your MC is otherwise unable to do - and she still gets the xp for it. In fact, you can even go into your character menu and spend Insight to level up a score by 5xp per Insight immediately prior to a check, potentially allowing you to gain more xp than you otherwise would.

From the side, it probably looks something like this:

I should probably just shut up and thank you all for the suggestions xD

Spoiler: Grunt

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

I think it's important to discuss these things and understand why an idea may be better or worse for the game (as long as nobody takes rejection personally (fucking internet culture and entitled people)).

 

[Hordragg]

In other words, you don't want to see specialists "punished" for specializing. I understand how and why this could be interesting. However, that defeats the idea of "role-playing." You're not supposed to be good at everything. By being denied access to some content due to playing one build type you're encouraged to play the game multiple times with different builds. This is usually a good thing.

While I generally do agree with you, having too much content gated behind specific stats or combinations thereof can easily be seen as a detriment. Playing different builds can be time consuming and depending on the build in question may even end up not being fun. I mean, this isn't an MMO where different classes and their respective mechanics help to alleviate the boredom that can be end-game-content.

Seeming to be ever so starved for time, I tend to stick to one build only, trying to not lock myself out of content I'd enjoy. In this case, I opted for a highly perceptive, highly intelligent Yardanarian survivor developing a strong(ish) mind (after a 'fair start'). A combination I settled on after having read each ethnos and backstory, data-mined (if utilizing ripgrep, cut, sed, and GNU datamash can be considered such) all ability checks, and replayed the start of the game several times. Now, being barred from certain choices for lacking certain stats certainly adds to my character, but I don't feel like trying to maximimze my available options constitutes bad role-playing. The latter would be having my survivor fully submit to Barnabas' demands, cashing in gold, insight, and… being put in a rather arousing predicament. Very nice, but very out of character. Unlike my getting a kick out of power-bottoming Lasander. Or going back to his wife, casually introducing myself. Such fun!

Ah well, I've yet to play the latest update and it'll be quite interesting so see her being confronted with more physical checks.

 

[Defiant Explorer]

While I generally do agree with you, having too much content gated behind specific stats or combinations thereof can easily be seen as a detriment. Playing different builds can be time consuming and depending on the build in question may even end up not being fun. I mean, this isn't an MMO where different classes and their respective mechanics help to alleviate the boredom that can be end-game-content.

Seeming to be ever so starved for time, I tend to stick to one build only, trying to not lock myself out of content I'd enjoy. In this case, I opted for a highly perceptive, highly intelligent Yardanarian survivor developing a strong(ish) mind (after a 'fair start'). A combination I settled on after having read each ethnos and backstory, data-mined (if utilizing ripgrep, cut, sed, and GNU datamash can be considered such) all ability checks, and replayed the start of the game several times. Now, being barred from certain choices for lacking certain stats certainly adds to my character, but I don't feel like trying to maximimze my available options constitutes bad role-playing. The latter would be having my survivor fully submit to Barnabas' demands, cashing in gold, insight, and… being put in a rather arousing predicament. Very nice, but very out of character. Unlike my getting a kick out of power-bottoming Lasander. Or going back to his wife, casually introducing myself. Such fun!

Ah well, I've yet to play the latest update and it'll be quite interesting so see her being confronted with more physical checks.

Well, by and large, the most impenetrable "walls" in the context of available content are between different Origins, not abilities. That is, if a certain scene/description/dialog option is tied to, say, Vagrant, only those who play that Origin will see it. With abilities, it's easier. Yes, you'll have to pay the price in Insight points. But if you really want to get (or avoid) some scene or situation development, it's well worth the price. Insight is an accumulative thing and pretty useless if you don't spend it on anything.

 

[damnedfrog]

In other words, you don't want to see specialists "punished" for specializing. I understand how and why this could be interesting.

Well, not totally.
I just think that sometimes, it would be interesting for a specialist to have a way to perform no to badly outside of her specialty.
Or that it could be fun (sometimes again) to have an option to do things differently than would be expected.

 

[damnedfrog]

I get the idea. I also understand how to do it (it's a bit more complicated than usual, but it's doable). What I don't quite get... Why? I mean, wouldn't it be easier to just use different checks in situations where it's possible? Like when seducing Lasander, where you can use all abilities except Perception. And that's only because I have no idea how to seduce with Perception. So you only need to be good at one of the five abilities to succeed.

But there are situations where I intentionally narrow the choices down to one single ability. Simply because everything else is not even theoretically useful there. For example, from the last update, it's the moment of Meralion's rescue in the water. Nothing can help there, except for the purely physical ability to swim. Or when Cadonis tries to seduce Selene. It all comes down to whether she can overcome a... carnal urge. Even if she can't, it's not a disaster. She just slept with him (or not), nothing more, nothing less.

Can these situations be twisted to add alternate checks in some contrived way? Yes. But is it right to reduce the effectiveness of any ability in this way? After all, what's the point of specializing and planning for build strengths if you can always use your strengths, whatever they are? It's like giving the warrior access to magic and stealth in class-based RPG systems. What's the point of mages and rogues then, if warriors can do all their tricks? Which is why I'm not so sure.

Like I wrote in my previous post (in reply to Gibberish666), I wouldn't want choices that overcome specializing all the time.
Just from time to time, when it could fit with the situation.
Which is not the case at the end on the last chapter, I totally agree.

Why?
The less important reason will be to avoid being completely unable to access a part of the game just because of a low attribute. But I agree that with the Insight point mechanism, it's unlikely to happen.
But the main reason is for the fun to have some unconventional choices.

 

[Defiant Explorer]

Like I wrote in my previous post (in reply to Gibberish666), I wouldn't want choices that overcome specializing all the time.
Just from time to time, when it could fit with the situation.
Which is not the case at the end on the last chapter, I totally agree.

Why?
The less important reason will be to avoid being completely unable to access a part of the game just because of a low attribute. But I agree that with the Insight point mechanism, it's unlikely to happen.
But the main reason is for the fun to have some unconventional choices.

Damn, I'm bound by the "no big spoilers" rule. Well, let's just say that soon (not in the next update, but probably after that), a situation is planned where there will be physical checks first to avoid the situation entirely. And if that doesn't work out (you can't or don't want to pass those checks), then after a while you can try mental tricks. And if that doesn't work out either, then... [censored by Divine Dominion]

But here... First of all, plans can change. Secondly, even so, basic straight checks are enough. I mean, there's not much point in overcomplicating things. I do, however, reserve the brazen right to use the ability combo idea if I really need it xD

 

[JadeKitten]

I didn't like Io's touching during the scene with Meralion. Almost ruined it.
Can't wait for a threesome scene tho (with two guys). Or even a gangbang :3

 

[Defiant Explorer]

I didn't like Io's touching during the scene with Meralion. Almost ruined it.

Side note: add "slap her hands" option next time.

- Bad, bad Io! Don't touch me there!

Can't wait for a threesome scene tho (with two guys). Or even a gangbang :3

It absolutely will. One day.

 

[Jedsls]

One question, when will the next update be?

 

[Defiant Explorer]

One question, when will the next update be?

At the best and earliest - around the end of December.

 

[Buffmutti]

I'm just here to say that i love this game. So many starting options (Race, Origin and the Attributes) allow very different playthroughs (from a total slut that jumps on every cock that is visible to a lesbian "nun" (since she has nearly no sex at all in this game)).
I was just a bit surprised that the Selene from the Slums was a virgin while the noble Selene was not. I was expecting the opposite because a girl from the Slums could easily get the idea of selling her body to earn some money, while noble families tend to value the virginity of their daughters higher because a virgin is worth more in a marriage.

 

[nenaliina]

This question isn't exactly about the game, but how do you make the 1.5 saves work in 1.6?
The update didn't mention that old saves wouldn't work, but at least for me old saves are not automatically included and it seems I can't just load from the disk either.

I have never had to do this before so an 'user error' is very likely unless the old saves just don't work. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[Defiant Explorer]

This question isn't exactly about the game, but how do you make the 1.5 saves work in 1.6?
The update didn't mention that old saves wouldn't work, but at least for me old saves are not automatically included and it seems I can't just load from the disk either.

I have never had to do this before so an 'user error' is very likely unless the old saves just don't work. Any help would be appreciated.

I have no idea. Saves should work without any problems. Moreover, saves from the disk can even work from different versions of the game, such as the mobile or online versions (yes, enthusiasts have made these versions on their sites) on the main offline (my) game version.

Pretty much, this is the first report that saves don't work between updates. Need more data, like, is it giving some kind of error? Or is it just not launching? Please attach the save file if possible. I'll test running it on different versions, maybe that will indicate what the problem is.