Cheat Mod Ren'Py Rogue-Like Cheat Injector [v1.6.1] [SLDR]

[ZLZK]

You're only thinking of the cheat. It won't add duplicates, but if you turn on keys BEFORE the game gives you the cheats, you'll have 2. There are no checks to see if you have the keys before the game gives you the keys.

It is game design issue where there is no check and there is list instead of set.
I could probably do some bothersome code to avoid it, but there is no need.
If you get extra items in a list you just need to click that many times more to remove them.

You're basically saying "Hey, SLDR, do this thing for me. It'll probably cause a bunch of people to report issues and maybe break their saves and hence waste a bunch of your time with complaints and reports, thus voiding the point of this being a low-maintenance mode. But fuck you and all the other users of the cheat injector, I want it."

What I meant is I gave an idea and mod author can come up with actual working and bug proof code.
And I don't really care if it will be added or not. I'm just suggesting it.

 

[sleepingkirby]

It is game design issue where there is no check and there is list instead of set.

Well no. It's not a game design issue. The game's design is that there are key items and can only be obtained once and never lost. YOUR IDEA is breaking the design. It's like saying "The game design didn't account for me hacking my character's position to skip the boss fight." Well, of course not. Because that's not the intent or purpose of that design.

If you get extra items in a list you just need to click that many times more to remove them.

I covered this.

... might cause the player's game to have 2 of the same keys, thus cause issue/confusion with toggling as someone with 2 keys would press the button and see nothing that nothing has changed, and hence, think the button isn't working.

The problem isn't that it will or won't eventually be solved. The problem is that it's bad GUI and it'll cause users to send complaints/reports. Which goes against the very point of this cheat injector. Which is low maintenance and low attention from the author.

And I don't really care if it will be added or not. I'm just suggesting it.

Then you shouldn't care if someone says it's a bad idea. So...why are you still replying?

 

[ZLZK]

There are no checks to see if you have the keys before the game gives you the keys.

Turns out current game version has checks.

The problem is that it's bad GUI and it'll cause users to send complaints/reports.

Ok, without checks my code is bad. I don't disagree.

Then you shouldn't care if someone says it's a bad idea. So...why are you still replying?

I just thought my idea was doable, well my bad if it is not.

 

[sleepingkirby]

Turns out current game version has checks.

Checks for if you have keys before giving keys? No it doesn't.
./script Scenes.rpy:10247

            elif not EGirls[0].Event[0] and EGirls[0].Sleep >= 5 and EGirls[0].Loc == bg_current:
                            $ Event_Queue = [EGirls[0],"_Key"]

./script\ Functions.rpy:1319

        elif Event_Queue[1]:                   
                call expression Event_Queue[0].Tag + Event_Queue[1] #calls an event, ala "Rogue_Love"
                return

./Rogue_Scenes.rpy:350

label Rogue_Key:
        call Shift_Focus(RogueX)
        call Set_The_Scene
        $ RogueX.FaceChange("bemused")
        $ RogueX.ArmPose = 2
        $ Event_Queue = [0,0]
        ch_r "Hey, you've been sleeping over a lot, I figured you might want a key?"
        ch_p "Thanks."
        $ RogueX.ArmPose = 1 
        $ Keys.append(RogueX)
        $ RogueX.Event[0] = 1
        return

No checks if you have keys.


It'll do that when you're blackmailing the professor:

            "In was interested in a key. . . ":
                menu:
                    "Give me the key to your study." if "Xavier" not in Keys:
                            ch_x "Fine, take it. . ."
                            $ Keys.append("Xavier")
                    "Give me the key to your study.[[Owned] (locked)" if "Xavier" in Keys:
                            pass

                    "Give me the key to [GirlX.Name]'s room." if GirlX not in Keys:
                            ch_x "I. . . suppose I could do that. . ."
                            $ Keys.append(GirlX)
                    "Give me the key to [GirlX.Name]'s room.[[Owned] (locked)" if GirlX in Keys:
                            pass

                    "Never mind the keys.":
                            $ Count += 1

But not when the girl's give it to you on their own.

I mean, there's one in the failsafe. But you pretty much only hit that when the game is in an unstable state that the game can detect.

            if bg_current != "bg player":
                    "Your save is not in the player's room, which might cause errors due to missing local variables."
                    "You might want to load this save in version 0.984h, and move to the player's room before saving."
            "If you continue, know that this save migration is still being tested and may cause new errors."
            "Let me know if there are any clothing options behaving differently than expected, and stats that seem out of place,"
            "Anything unusual. I would recommend playing from this save file only a short distance, and not just continung forward indefinitely,"
            "until we're fairly certain that the migration process is fully functional. Be careful of where you save."
            "that said, it shouldn't cause any harm to try it. :D"
            hide blackscreen onlayer black   
    call Failsafe                #fix                #fix                #fix                #fix

label SpecialMenu: #rkeljsvgb
    while True:
        menu:
            "Tutorial":
                    jump Tutorial
            "Statchecker" if False:
                    "This element will check all the stats and make sure that they work in your current savegame."
                    "This is a good idea if you're getting 'variable not found' syle errors."
                    menu:
                        "Do you want to do this?"
                        "Yes":
                                $ renpy.pop_call()
                                call Failsafe
                                jump Player_Room

I just thought my idea was doable, well my bad if it is not.

It's doable. But so is lighting your car on fire. So's cutting off your nose to spite your face. So's mixing dish washing liquid with bleach. It's just not a good idea. Part of being a good programmer is know the difference between when you can and when you should. You can write buggy code or ignore bugs. But unless you want your computer to remain functional, you shouldn't write buggy code or ignore bugs.

 

[ZLZK]

Checks for if you have keys before giving keys? No it doesn't.

Well, version 1.61d have all the checks.
Each Girl_Key label has:

$ Keys.append(GirlX) if GirlX not in Keys else Keys

 

[sleepingkirby]

Well, version 1.61d have all the checks.
Each Girl_Key label has:

$ Keys.append(GirlX) if GirlX not in Keys else Keys

Oh, the unstable version that's full of bugs, capable of crashing and/or messing up your save game, whose code is likely to change almost immediately:


and thus might make any new features redundant/broken and the author himself said to not download?


That version?

 

[ZLZK]

Oh, the unstable version that's full of bugs, capable of crashing and/or messing up your save game, whose code is likely to change almost immediately:

I don't think that part will be changed since I think it was added because
you get keys from Xavier in same way as from my cheat,
without marking the event, so that also is bad code.

Since I had the chance to look into game code I noticed that event flag gives keys.
So this code should be good now:

        showif BetsyX.Event[0] == (BetsyX in Keys):
            textbutton "[BetsyX.Name]'s Key" text_size 15 action [ToggleSetMembership(Keys, BetsyX), ToggleDict(BetsyX.Event, 0, true_value=1, false_value=0)]
        else:
            textbutton "[BetsyX.Name]'s Key" text_size 15 action ToggleSetMembership(Keys, BetsyX)

 

[sleepingkirby]

I don't think that part will be changed

Yes, but you don't apply things to unstable versions because you never know, the author might decide to reverse it. They might mess up and release a different branch in the end, Oni might get hit by a bus, there's a dozen and one things that could happen between here and there so you wait for the official, stable release. You wait for official, stable release. All software follow this standard.

since I think it was added because
you get keys from Xavier in same way as from my cheat,

No you don't. It's still an append, not a toggle.

V1.61e
script Scene.rpy:6629

            "In was interested in a key. . . ":
                menu:
                    "Give me the key to your study." if "Xavier" not in Keys:
                            ch_x "Fine, take it. . ."
                            $ Keys.append("Xavier")
                    "Give me the key to your study.[[Owned] (locked)" if "Xavier" in Keys:
                            pass
                         
                    "Give me the key to [GirlX.Name]'s room." if GirlX not in Keys:
                            ch_x "I. . . suppose I could do that. . ."
                            $ Keys.append(GirlX)
                    "Give me the key to [GirlX.Name]'s room.[[Owned] (locked)" if GirlX in Keys:
                            pass

without marking the event, so that also is bad code.

Except, it doesn't matter/doesn't manifest until someone tries to toggle off the key, which you can't do until someone provides a GUI to do so. Hence my original post of

With key items in games you always want to you REALLY know what you're doing before you add and be allowed to remove them...

Since I had the chance to look into game code I noticed that event flag gives keys.
So this code should be good now:

        showif BetsyX.Event[0] == (BetsyX in Keys):
            textbutton "[BetsyX.Name]'s Key" text_size 15 action [ToggleSetMembership(Keys, BetsyX), ToggleDict(BetsyX.Event, 0, true_value=1, false_value=0)]
        else:
            textbutton "[BetsyX.Name]'s Key" text_size 15 action ToggleSetMembership(Keys, BetsyX)

That essentially says by giving yourself the key, you're going to skip the game content of the girl giving you the key. Is that what you really want? To have a cheat that removes a cutscene as a side effect of giving yourself the key? Well, that is until you decide to remove your own key, but then, that means you'll make the girl forget that she gave you the key and then you have to watch a cutscene again. Both results will have players reporting it as a bug.


Look, I get it. You want to contribute and make your mark on this cheat injector somehow. But you're proposing a solution that's looking for a problem. And that's how enshitification happens in tech. The game gives you an option to use the keys or not. Just let it go.

 

[ZLZK]

No you don't. It's still an append, not a toggle.

What I meant is that toggle use append as well.
So Xavier give you a key, and then girl still can give you a key which results in duplicate keys.

 

[sleepingkirby]

What I meant is that toggle use append as well.

Right, if you ignore the fact that no append can remove an item from the array like a toggle can. That's like saying 'a' flag is the same as a 'w' for a file handler.

So Xavier give you a key, and then girl still can give you a key which results in duplicate keys.

Yeah, but as I addressed previously, that's not the problem.

So you can potentially double up on 2 of the same person's keys. So setting that might cause the player's game to have 2 of the same keys, thus cause issue/confusion with toggling as someone with 2 keys would press the button and see nothing that nothing has changed, and hence, think the button isn't working.

 

[ZLZK]

Right, if you ignore the fact that no append can remove an item from the array like a toggle can. That's like saying 'a' flag is the same as a 'w' for a file handler.

I meant that both cases add items with append and both cases result in same effect.

Yeah, but as I addressed previously, that's not the problem.

Well if duplicate items aren't problem, I have no problem adding function/action that removes all duplicates on toggle.
But then you will find a reason why that is bad as well.

Look, I get it. You want to contribute and make your mark on this cheat injector somehow. But you're proposing a solution that's looking for a problem. And that's how enshitification happens in tech. The game gives you an option to use the keys or not. Just let it go.

Not at all, I was just interested in making such a code.

Anyway I'm not interested anymore, and I don't care enough to look further into it.

 

[sleepingkirby]

I meant that both cases add items with append and both cases result in same effect.

You can't ignore that appends and creative and toggles are destructive. That'd be like saying the 'a' and 'w' flag on a file handler are the same.

Well if duplicate items aren't problem, I have no problem adding function/action that removes all duplicates on toggle.
But then you will find a reason why that is bad as well.

Except I've already covered this. The problem is it'll generate bug reports. These things matter. These are the difference between sustainable and unsustainable code. The whole reason SLDR made this is so that it's low maintenance and introducing things that would generate bug reports and/or complaints are the opposite of that and void the very point of this cheat injector.

 

[ilego]

Hey folks, it's been quite a while. I stopped participating on F95Zone two years ago because real life got in the way, but for those of you who don't remember me, I was known for modding cheats into Rogue-Like to make it less annoying to see new content whenever new versions were released. I believe the cheats in the Expanded Mod were based on my work, so if you've been missing those cheats in the newest versions of Rogue-Like, here you go.

I eventually got tired of manually unpacking and editing game files for every single new version and all of its iterations from "a" to "z" while also playing tech support for both my mod's bugs and Oni's bugs, so it burned me out quite a bit and I fell off. Not long after I stepped away from the site, I wrote a Python script to automate the modding process for me. I kept tweaking and testing it and the cheats have been working for every version that I've tested for over a year now.

I intended to release this utility much sooner but I was still feeling burned out from participating in the community, so I put it off. I'm not interested in jumping back in and being active on the site again, but I'm releasing this tool now because it works and I won't have to update it very frequently. The only time this utility needs an update is when Oni adds a new character or completely overhauls the way he stores character/inventory/time data, which should be quite rare.

Anyway, give it a try if you're tired of grinding to see new content in Rogue-Like. If you have problems, please refer to the Installation section of the original post. It's pretty straightforward. If you still have problems, leave a comment in the thread but I'm not active on this site anymore, so I can't guarantee that I can help you.

SLDR not working

 

[sleepingkirby]

SLDR not working

SLDR is MIA. What/how is it not working because it's working for me.

 

[imzahai]

SLDR not working

injector for windows:

You must be registered to see the links

Repo can be found here:

• You must be registered to see the links
• original
  You must be registered to see the links
  here (will not be updating that in the future as gitlab is pretty bad)

---
use this, works fine.
sleepingkirby patched it.