HTML Unholy Arts [v0.4.5c] [Deep Interactivity]
- Thread starter DeepInteractivity
- Start date
-
- Tags
- adventure anal sex bdsm dating sim fantasy female domination female protagonist footjob futa/trans futa/trans protagonist handjob lesbian monster girl multiple penetration multiple protagonist oral sex religion rpg simulator spanking teasing text based transformation turn based combat vaginal sex virgin voyeurism
If they think they're going to lose the challenge, it's normal, yes. If they refuse the challenge and you want to fight anyway, you should just assault.
Do you mean you get stuck in a screen or that you fail one of the checks to keep advancing the scene?
I can't replicate the issue on my own, so I'd thank you if you sent me your save. Also, just to confirm, please tell me in which version you're playing.
nevermind i solved it still thanks for the help.
- Mar 3, 2020
- 99
- 290
Bug: in the text of
SE ShunnedByHerOwn RepairHerImage, the property supValPardon is checked, rather than supsValPardon.
Thanks for the report, though it was already fixed in version 0.3.2.
This aside, I was recently asking for feedback regarding the future development goals on Patreon, including animations for sex scenes and a spin-off simulation game, perhaps someone here is interested in reading and sharing their ideas:
You must be registered to see the links
First the easy answer, regarding animations. All I can say is that I don't really give a flip about animations in general, except for the purposes of giving a quick visual indicator of important aspects of a scene - which I prefer without animations anyway, and wouldn't be accomplished by a sprite any better than the portraits already do. (The only thing I'd get out of it is "this character is present, and having sex", and watching them thrust their hips is just a distraction that doesn't provide any new information.) That said, I know a lot of people treat animations as a dealbreaker and only play games that have them. I don't know how many of those people there really are, but they exist. I also don't know whether or not sprite animations would be enough to satisfy them.
As for the side game thing... I honestly am not sure exactly what you're saying would go into making these games, and can't get a sense of how hard they'd really be, so I can't give any input to whether they'd be worth your time or a remotely good idea. I should also preface by saying I haven't even really played the main game in a while, so I don't know how much has changed and how much its current form is able to accomodate what I'm looking for already. Since saves aren't compatible between versions and I hate restarting games, I've been waiting for a lot of progress to be made before giving it another shot. Last time I played, the game stopped right after the succubus gives you your first(?) power.
Anyway, the only thing I'm really interested in with this or any other game is mind control. This refers to pretty much any form of "unnatural" mental change in one's favor. One would think that means I lean towards scenarios focused on domination, and that's true, except for one major caveat: Pretty much any "mundane" forms of domination are very unappealing to me. This includes everything from aggressive behavior/rape, bondage, punishment, and even just "social displays of dominance" (i.e. bullying). To put it another way, I'm more interested in things that make someone desire to submit and obey rather than things that sap their will to fight back. While it's probably too much to ask for an entire scenario dedicated to that premise (since it would have far less broad appeal), it would be great if any "domination"-focused scenario was designed with the idea in mind that one could play entirely in that fashion, while avoiding aggressive and bullying behaviors except when absolutely necessary (e.g. fighting someone who's outright hostile to you and bringing them to a state where you can begin working your charm on them).
With that in mind, something like the villagers and monsters one sounds like it could be really appealing if, instead of outright subduing and dominating (as the only option), a human character might have access to a special "monster-taming magic" that makes a captured monster obedient, and can be further worked on to gradually mold them into the type of pet/slave/attack dog you want them to be. Some types of monsters could also have unnatural ways to enslave prey, like generic charm magics, some sort of viral corruption that turns others into their own kind (which probably just works on humans), psychic powers/demonic whispers, or some sort of brain parasite. I'm imagining some kind of plant girl who can plant a seed in someone's hair that takes root inside their skull, making them susceptible to manipulation by the plant's pheromones and eventually blooming into a loving and obedient slave.
I don't know how much this deviates from what you had in mind and would complicate your plans from what might otherwise have been a simple and easy-to-make game mode, though. Or whether it would already have been feasible to play this way with what you already had in mind. ...For that matter, how feasible is it to play this way in the current version of the main game? Last I checked, there was just a single option for "hypnotic glance" as a social action (and a combat action that couldn't be used to achieve victory) unlocked at the very end of the existing content.
Last edited:
Thanks for your in-depth response! I'll be replying to things most directly related to Unholy Arts first.
One of the points in favour of the side game is that a lot of the work I'd be doing for it would synergize pretty well with Unholy Arts: I could create (for example) draining actions with severe/long-term consequences for the side game pretty soon since a purely simulation game doesn't require many considerations for balance, and I'd have them ready for the moment it's appropriate to implement them in Unholy Arts.
Right now I'm trying to keep saves compatible between all versions 0.3.X, and will likely keep doing so until right version version 0.4. It's giving me some headache to keep track of all potentially missing variables and taking security measures to update this data at different checkpoints, but otherwise it would be far too disruptive to play through the first adventure on many different playthroughs. Please make sure that you read the Save Compatibility text file on every version you play to ensure that you keep compatible saves made at the correct timeframes.
You probably stopped playing around day 11-12. As of version 0.3.1, you have main story events until day 22, and the adventure begins after day 25 in version 0.3.2. There are also a bunch of random events, some of which might only take place under the right conditions (check the random story events guide file, there will be in-game ways to find out about these requisites in the future).
The player doesn't have access to new hypnosis actions yet, but there's a new mechanic for battle scenes that makes energy and willpower damage to overflow into lust damage if the target has ran out of those resources, so you could win by spamming hypnotic glance. It's not an optimal strategy (and personally I find it a bit boring) unless you pick a fight against a NPC low on willpower. Spoilers for latest supporter version and future plans regarding more hypnosis content:
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
One of my goals with the core code of Unholy Arts (and the code of this side project, by extension) is to be able to create simulated scenarios that cater to very different kinks at relatively low cost, so I'd do well in figuring out ways to customize the settings to allow what you're looking for. You mention:
But perhaps a more appropriate way to recreate the playstyle you're looking for would be the Village Life scenario, with options to provide the PC and some/all/none of the NPCs with hypnosis social actions, which would remove the forceful domination that you're not interested in.
One of the points in favour of the side game is that a lot of the work I'd be doing for it would synergize pretty well with Unholy Arts: I could create (for example) draining actions with severe/long-term consequences for the side game pretty soon since a purely simulation game doesn't require many considerations for balance, and I'd have them ready for the moment it's appropriate to implement them in Unholy Arts.
Even with the added context of the response given to Rosen King, I have to say that I am personally not super interested in a side-game, I already really enjoy the concept of "futanari monastery simulator" and I quite like the characters. But I think it can be a good idea if a sizable ammount of your supporters are requesting content that wouldn't fit into Unholy Arts' design, I also know that quite a few devs work on side-projects to avoid burning out if nothing else.
Regarding animations, a little more art is always very nice, personally I'd be more interested in lewd edits of the current portrait's art (visible bulge, nude), but chibi/sprite animations also sound cool. I guess the idea would be to have them reflect the current positions in battle and during sex (idle, on knees, mounting from behind, mounting from the front, etc)?
I was just wondering how rare are you intending the random events to be. Asking as just looking at the requirements for some, it seems it will be pretty easy to get none of them unless there is a ton of them for all cases.
If you have to be partnered with X (nash for eg.), then it's a 1/5 chance (5 NPCS). If you have to be sub (sub vs dom, that's now 1/10). Then if you can't be in any bondage 1/20 (assuming 50/50 chance) and so on.
So many exclusion checks pretty quickly brings up the chance to never seeing it. So either you have to have a ton of events so at least some get seen... and avoid paths where non will, or game will seem empty on the day to day training time (not the plot daily events). And you'll be spending lots of time making stuff that mostly won't be visible content.
One way to avoid that is to have one split like being partnered with X (to choose a path), and then have all the other switches just change the content, as opposed to making it not trigger. Like if being in bondage is stopping it, have the check just add in a bit to remove it so it makes sense, but still play the scene.
Just a thought after looking at the changelog listed requirements for random events.
If you have to be partnered with X (nash for eg.), then it's a 1/5 chance (5 NPCS). If you have to be sub (sub vs dom, that's now 1/10). Then if you can't be in any bondage 1/20 (assuming 50/50 chance) and so on.
So many exclusion checks pretty quickly brings up the chance to never seeing it. So either you have to have a ton of events so at least some get seen... and avoid paths where non will, or game will seem empty on the day to day training time (not the plot daily events). And you'll be spending lots of time making stuff that mostly won't be visible content.
One way to avoid that is to have one split like being partnered with X (to choose a path), and then have all the other switches just change the content, as opposed to making it not trigger. Like if being in bondage is stopping it, have the check just add in a bit to remove it so it makes sense, but still play the scene.
Just a thought after looking at the changelog listed requirements for random events.
- Sep 7, 2018
- 83
- 80
yeah this having a bunch of neat events is fine. but nested requirements quickly lead to instances where people aren't going to see them and then complain about "Lack of content" even if there are a lot of things you've made
Pretty much.
tontoman In the future, I will implement an in-game system that will allow you to check the requirements for story events to fire, so that players have easily accesible means to follow the appropriate "routes". This way you will not be depending on whether you are lucky enough to happen to come accross the appropriate circumstances like a sailing ship adrift.
Well, ironically, I do feel it's a bit more fun when there's some sort of conflict, even fighting. The problem is when that fighting and assault and abuse is exclusively supposed to be "the sexy part". Or... maybe I'm not conveying this right. It's kind of hard to pin down. But if some monster were to attempt to rape and dominate my character, but I wrestled them to the ground and managed to slap a magic collar on them that filled them with a desire to please me, that would be fun. Having the uncertain and magically suggestible monster then go through training to gradually teach her to fully embrace what I have in store for her would be fun. What wouldn't be fun is slapping a regular collar on them and chaining them to a wall, then whipping and punishing them until they learn to sit when I say sit. And trying to have sex with someone while they're still saying "no" (or in the case of this game, "no u") is pretty much the same.
But to be honest, I'm perfectly fine with the enemy trying to assault and dominate me into submission, even though it's a turn-off for me, as long as *my* victory conditions can be something else. After all, you're supposed to try not to lose in a game, and I've never liked the style of "Game Over games" where the real goal is losing and seeing all the bad endings. In fact, I find being on the receiving end of mind control to be a turn-off as well (at least when I identify as the protagonist), so it honestly wouldn't make any difference if it was a fight between two hypnotists or a fight between a rapist and a hypnotist. That's why the monster scenario fits so well. Winning means getting to do the sexy thing, losing means doing the unsexy thing. Sounds like standard game design to me.
The only problem with this in the current state of the game is, as you said, I can't really win via mind control except by spamming a single impractical move over and over. (And also, presumably, there's no different result between that kind of victory and any other.) I'm fine with other characters trying to freeze my feet and then scissor me or whatever the hell they think will make them victorious, as long as I can win my way. I can see how this would be more difficult to design in the battle system as opposed to the social system, though... It could be easier to implement with some of the monster characters, though. For instance, a monster that implants a brain parasite in their victim could try to pin them down so they can implant the parasite, then spend the rest of the fight triggering commands in the parasite that accomplish the same things as standard battle actions, like preventing them from using their hands or increasing sensitivity in certain areas, until it assumes complete control. It could even have multi-stage moves like the pinning actions already in the game, where certain actions are only available if you've induced a certain state or disabled certain body parts. But now I feel like I'm getting off track.
(Edit: Actually, adding multi-stage hypnosis attacks could be a good way to expand on that idea in the main game as well. Maybe when the enemy's willpower is low enough, you can induce a trance that incapacitates them for one turn during which you can implant one of several triggers that you can then activate later on in the fight. And *maybe*, if it's not too complex to program, you could make it possible to implant those triggers during social actions, and have them only decay after a certain number of days depending on how successful the trance was and/or how vulnerable to hypnosis the character has become through repeated trances. Though at that point maybe we're talking about too many changes to core mechanics for something that isn't the main focus of the game.)
Last edited:
- May 12, 2018
- 345
- 497
I think that something is missing in the game about the feature where we can have discussions with more than two participants, like a jealousy sub-system (because that is what I as a player sometimes get to feel). Maybe it's just me that's missing something, but if two people want to chat, or better yet have an intimate time/conversation, it's usually considered pretty rude of an outside party to interfere, no matter how friendly we could otherwise be towards the intruder.
Otherwise said, I honestly find it extremely unsatisfying as the player to go out of my way to build relationships with some NPCs ("enjoys spending time with the player" or "considers her protegee" status), ask them to be my tutor (or tutor them) and stuff, me following them to be taught stuff that sometimes is sub-optimal, basically focusing all my efforts on them, and then watch them leave with another NPC in the middle of a discussion to shank each other, without me being able to do crap about it. Assaulting could be an option, but that sounds fairly extreme just to have some quality time with someone. They could at least restrict themselves to do it while the player is not around, which would also seem like a more "realistic" social behaviour.
I realize this game is not a simple romancing simulator, and again I might be handling the gameplay incorrectly or just failing to see the whole picture, but I've never really cared much about NTR (even if it's disguised such as in this game).
Otherwise said, I honestly find it extremely unsatisfying as the player to go out of my way to build relationships with some NPCs ("enjoys spending time with the player" or "considers her protegee" status), ask them to be my tutor (or tutor them) and stuff, me following them to be taught stuff that sometimes is sub-optimal, basically focusing all my efforts on them, and then watch them leave with another NPC in the middle of a discussion to shank each other, without me being able to do crap about it. Assaulting could be an option, but that sounds fairly extreme just to have some quality time with someone. They could at least restrict themselves to do it while the player is not around, which would also seem like a more "realistic" social behaviour.
I realize this game is not a simple romancing simulator, and again I might be handling the gameplay incorrectly or just failing to see the whole picture, but I've never really cared much about NTR (even if it's disguised such as in this game).
Last edited:
In order to alleviate this problem, egalitarian sex was divided between normal egalitarian sex (which allows 3rd characters to join as well), and exclusive egalitarian sex, and NPCs don't use the latter. If you're still having issues with this, should I assume that they're leaving you behind because they proposed dominant/submissive sex?
- Feb 11, 2019
- 13
- 3
Playing on normal I've beaten Claw both times I've played through this (once in the most recent version, not sure if any balance changes were made after the first time). It didn't seem too hard so I would think it'd definitely still be possible on the Hard difficulty.
- May 12, 2018
- 345
- 497
First, thank you very much for your reply.
To give you some context, my understanding is that the "merit" feature isn't the fully implemented thing yet that it will be once we get closer to a more stable end-game. There is no point for me to try to earn some, as there are no consequences yet if I lose some.
Therefore I try to give my character some other "temporary" goals and/or motivations. One of these motivations is to play my character out according to rivalries, friendships, romances and other power-play aspects (Dom/subby) that I have artificially planned out in my mind and set for each NPC before even starting a run.
For example, I could want my character to see Claw as a fearsome rival, Ate and Nash as genuine friends and potential romantic partners, Mir as someone pretending to enjoy being a sub but actually hiding strong Dom tendencies, and Val the reverse.
If Claw talks to my character, she would most likely try to shorten the discussion, and only stay if Claw manages to bully her. With Ate or Nash, the discussion would be light-hearted instead. With Mir or Val, there could be plenty of innuendos. Basically, the "mood" would never be the same, and the "result" should never be the same either.
As the discussion system currently works, my character can start a discussion with Nash, it heating up to lead to some foreseeable "quality time", with both characters being "worked up", but then suddenly Claw and Mir showing up, and the whole business suddenly not making any sense any more, with Nash suggesting to have sex to one of the other NPCs who agrees. Either my character gets invited (and she has no reason to willingly accept with Claw heading to the same bedroom), or she is not and then just watches her potential mate leaving to "cheat" on her without being able to do anything about it.
Again, I am aware that the game is not player-centric (which is good in my book!) and not just a simple romance simulator with separate and clean-cut LIs, like "Mass Effect" for example. To me, the game seems to be designed to be much more than that : playing out relationships between 6 (more?) characters, within a competition, and managing to steer them in a direction that they eventually benefit to us, the player, to "win" the game.
However, I think that the relationships and discussions *specifically* involving the PC should play out differently. Going back to the scenario I've described above, Claw should have to assault my character to get a chance at having sex with her, otherwise my PC would never agree to it. Nash or Ate should seek out more intimate face-to-face discussions. Mir or Val could very well be interested in threesomes or more with the PC, but with their own purposes in mind (eventually submitting to or dominating her). If there are to be discussions between several parties with "conflicting" interests, they should never lead to sex, but maybe serve to "work out issues" between characters, with mediators who don't necessarily have to have just benevolent intentions either. There could be "bribes", betrayals, drugging, forceful captures of 2 or more vs 1 and all kind of diplomacy or scheming really.
I'm not sure this is possible with how the current "discussion" system works.
As a final side-note, relationships between NPCs themselves are fine, as the player can already try to influence them by bad-mouthing or delivering praises.
Last edited:
I know it doesn't solve the entire issue, but if you want private conversations you can get an NPC to follow you and then go to your bedroom or theirs, other NPCs cannot go there so you should be able to have a private conversation without being interrupted.
But yeah otherwise you can't really directly control who other characters want to interact with or how they feel about other people (outside of unique events) nor try to exclude someone from a public conversation. Maybe one of the dialogue options could always be an angry one if an enemy is in the conversation so that you can try to provoke them regardless of your current mood, but I think that it is fair that if you are the one that wants to avoid someone then you should be the one doing the work to set up a conversation in a private place.