Ashenfire

I originally disliked Vortex. If the new version has the same disappointment, I might document them. For now, I will absorb the enthusiasm of this article and not make a negative comment. This still, was an amazing advancement for the community and I am thrilled that over 60% usage for gaming and modding goes through this project! It is so much fun to hear developers tell me of their new 'baby'. Since this new article of version 1.0 existing, I will give it another try!

For the record, my opening was that it was vanilla because I only installed the original game, thus vanilla. I digress, because later I added mods and you guys are saying it isn't vanilla after that. I am okay with that and will no longer refer to vanilla that way again.

In Win 10, C:\Users\username\AppData\Local\Skyrim = %localappdata%\Skyrim. Changing %localappdata%\Skyrim to %localappdata%\Skyrim.org proved they are not loading the list in this folder. I was not 'wondering why'. It was an osbervation that mod lists are NOT utilized and it KNEW what to load BEFORE the folder was being recreated, and did NOT replace the load order files other than to make empty files. As far as I can tell they just get loaded from the game directory \data folder if no mod manager is present.

Except for the part that I DID subscribe and unsubscribe without a mod manager. When you run steam and browse a steam mod account, it lets you subscribe and unsubscribe. I never utilized NMM, MO2, Vortex, Wrye Bash.

I never said subscribed mods won't affect my game. Only that subscribing to games doesn't stop making it 'vanilla'. There is a difference between a 'clean install' and a vanilla install. Anyways..... I was under the impression that if no mod manager was utilized, the Skyrim Launcher would STILL utilize steamloadlist.txt or maybe plugins.txt. But then it just dawned on me that when a user subscribes / unsubscribes, it will ADD/Remove the mods, thus the Skyrim Launcher can assume the \data folder is up to date and launch those mods. If this is so, then the question is answered.

I have edited the original post to address the files were original from the newly subscribed items and not from a previous install. That might have made you think I had an old install. It IS vanilla if I install a clean copy of the original, non SE version. It is not defined by what mods are installed. It is still vanilla. Since I have a newly formatted drive, installed vanilla Skyrim, NOT S.E version, subscribed to simple mods; I don't have to worry about interference or scattered files. Thus it will satisfy your criteria to do a search on how 'make vanilla skyrim' and follow its steps. If you want to call it 'Not Vanilla', then for the sake of the post I will stop calling it that because it defrays from the original question. I am more than familiar with the location of the installed mods and how to use DATA option in my launcher; it is WHAT I was referring to in the first place when I saw it loading even though I removed the load order lists in %localAppdata%. No postings that I have seen will suggest that the SKYRIM launcher will actually read the \data directory and figure out what mods I have. This goes back to my original problem that it knows what to load and prints it to my DATA load order in my launcher. I want to know how it found that information....it is not load order lists as suggested on Nexus.

I only installed the original content from Steam. I never utilized ANY DLC;etc. Shouldn't that be vanilla by definition? I will examine the link see if it shows me what I might have missed.

Utilizing Skyrim vanilla, no Wrye bash or any other load order system. Newly formatted drive. Windows 10. Installed skyrim original. NO DLC , no S.E. Subscribed to mods I like. Got stupid .ckm errors. Decided to learn its download behavior before troubleshooting .ckm error.Checking %localappdata%\Skyrim, I found plugins.txt, DLCLIST.txt, and SteamModList.txt, and NO loadorder.txt. Each of these lists had the mods I had just subscribed to, so I know they are the latest. I wanted to know which one is correct so I renamed the %localappdata%\Skyrim folder to %localappdata%\Skyrim.org. I expected my game to load NOTHING on game execution. I then executed the Steam Skyrim and it STILL was downloading from an ordered list and RECREATING %localappdata%\Skyrim folder and RECREATING plugins.txt (which is NOW, empty, It had no mod files). So what in tarnation is going on? Is the Skyrim launcher reading my \DATA folder and posting them to the launcher DATA list or is it reading from another load order list? Where is it really getting its list from?

Utilizing Skyrim vanilla, no Wrye bash or any other load order system. Checking %localappdata%\Skyrim, I found plugins.txt, DLCLIST.txt, and SteamModList.txt, and NO loadorder.txt. I wanted to know which one is correct so I renamed the %localappdata%\Skyrim folder to %localappdata%\Skyrim.org. I then executed the Steam Skyrim and it STILL was downloading from an ordered list and RECREATING %localappdata%\Skyrim folder and RECREATING plugins.txt (which is empty, no mod file listing). So what in tarnation is going on? Where is it really getting its list from?

I have been using this site long enough to see a change for the better. I see an attempt to make modding still fun and still give appreciation to modders. I am still looking around the site for clues why this site is being classified as greedy. I am perplexed. I have read in some of the comments that accuses this site of being greedy. Without pointing anyone out, I would like to ask, in general discussion terms; why is Nexus greedy. Why is the attempt to 'pat a mod author on the back' wrong? 2. I also agree with the contention that the reward system would be nice to reward people who make support tools (.bat .exe. .cmd) that make modding easier to do.

In response to post #56262141. #56262426, #56262576, #56262581, #56262936, #56263031, #56263146, #56266491, #56267106, #56267256, #56274311, #56277726, #56280516, #56292401, #56330506, #56342966 are all replies on the same post. WTH? Whats with the nationality hating? Any person who wants to scam, be elitist, a hater, comes from anywhere. How are we going to rationally discuss ANYTHING, with this mantra? Please refrain from bashing our nationality.

I find it interesting. Of course it is a MAJOR project. I am working on development of a smaller scale ( 2 years in the making, no help). I will keep your idea in my development plans.

@retroth97 That is the best thing since barbeque pizza! I am so glad my hex editor is still useful. You saved me so much trouble!

Or...... Email the authors. Added value: if your patch is compatibile, they can advertise that you helped and bring you more exposure. Added value: if your patch has a glitch that only the author can spot right away, the authors' peer review will save you grief and time by preventing you from making the error worse.

Story manager can start the quest based on who the person talks to, what the person picks up for inventory, when the person changes location, etc. I never start my quests until the person triggers an event. I am not good at all events, but I can start quests based on dialogue. One that I have in development wont start until a player does a special favor for the quest giver. It has been almost 2 years since I worked on production. So I am warming up to modding again and balancing it with learning how to code for my website. If you are good with what you have, then congratulations. If you are still wondering what else you can do, then maybe I can dust off my old mod and find some samples for you.

" If I understand this correctly, the way that the first sentence is worded makes it seem like the dialogue is coming from Ria. " Not so. When you add conditions, you can add it to any dialogue. It doesn't have to be Ria. This means that when the player is talking to the quest giver, you can add the conditions on the quest giver dialogue. If you choose the way @cloud1234 mentioned, it can work that way. One way to get dialogue to only show up, is make a new faction that pertains to a group of ideas. For instance, I created dialogue that only my created merchants could use. The merchants had all the vanilla factions and dialogue associated with them PLUS what I created. In that scenario, you create a faction that any NPC in the game can detect the faction to START the quest. You can either make the Player join the newly created faction whenever RIA joins the party or you can have the quest giver detect Ria in the party. In either case, using 'isinfaction' can be used without Ria being present or in dialogue.

It really sucks, when another country is actually TRYING to stop spyware, bots, and worse- virtual stalkers. Privacy matters. I expected USA to treat privacy seriously, stopping these stalkers. I will never turn off adblock, ever. I have built my firefox up with so much protection, I rarely to never see ads. I never have to use spyware programs to remove intruders. I have trained it so well because in the old days I spent days on end trying to get my browser to do what I WANT IT TO DO, not what these jerks make it do. I am literally poor, relying on a kind person to keep me off the streets. I would absolutely donate to nexus mods and pay for the server for a year, or even donate to security. I know for a fact, nexus is on my short list, of business/people to donate to. Thanks for switching servers. I hope your homework shows chances for better ads.

In response to post #37617910. oops...wrong place

@michael199310: Assuming your script was written correctly (you followed a 'howto' create a follower); you need to verify your Alias was 'filled'.

There is proof by the way. Most children actually do 'know' where they fit on the gender scale and are not allowed to express it. Some children will be confused, thats also true. Quote: "Nor should folks be able to dictate how folks practice their religion. Isn't that fair? How is forcing an institution to perform a religious ritual for a couple that violates the very tenets of said religion, in any way "the right thing to do"?" According to religious institutions, the sacred tenate is not being violated. Its their faith, so I won't make arguments for them. They agree that their rights are not violated as long as their right to practice their version of their faith is done in their 'PRIVATE establishment' a.k.a church. I stay away from those arguments for not wanting to be dragged into whose faith is the 'real thing' and listen to them dismiss other religions. Its not my place. You and I both agree on your point. I have stated that already. We don't have to be fundamentaly different. Sadly, the argument with gay marriage started out that the government should recognize marriage with the spirit that only participating churches would conduct the ceremonies. The government would treat the people the same by the eyes of the law. It was not meant to tell religious institutions to change their practice on their faith. It turned into haters from the left pushing too far to dictate how religion should be enforced. Something in my previous posts, I strongly believe is wrong for them to do. This still does not explain why a bathroom bill is part of the discussion. I have not heard a single argument from a gay person or a trans person demanding others must be like them. It is blown out of proportion and gay marriage is not related to trans folk who simply are by even scientific evidence, just men or women. But oh well... I tried to separate each value as its own argument because each have a different priority and should not be lumped together. I have articulated careful thought for both sides, and agree that both sides shall not infringe on the other. My line of thinking is fair, focused, and tries not to infringe on either side for political convenience. I said my peace.

Religion should never be used in arguments to pass a law. There is no 'infraction' of the minority. They have not committed a crime or injustice that preyed on innocent people. Hate or fear should never be used to single out religion, a group of people, or both, just to pass laws for someone's party because it is convenient. My agruments do not parallel anti gun rights. You are not being punished. My gun permit is the second amendment. I want anyone that ABUSES the right to be held accountable. For instance, robbing a bank with a gun is abusing the right. Using church referendums in PUBLIC law to tell me how to live my life is also abusing the rights granted to the church and abusing my rights. The problem with the left on gun rights, is that if a person is even LINKED to the crime committed by a gun or a drunken driver, they want to sue every body in the chain. This is NOT holding the the person who actually committed the crime, responsible. It is causing a drag net to catch everyone and make them criminals. That is the same argument with the bathroom bill. People who have not committed crimes will have to be branded, live in fear and shame, not from predators but from a dragnet. That is an unfair burden just to catch a phantom. The rights of a minority are just as important. It is a distinction about the protection of the minority from the the majority that separates the U.S. from other countries. The will of the majority can be 'just' as long as it does not single out a group of people based on religion, sex, ethnicity, etc. The people in a 'majority' can decide the fate of the country but not infringe on the minority in their eagerness to get their goals. It must still pass the muster of the Constitution. People used the very same argument that slaves are a minority, have no 'property value' and have no rights. It was lumped in with 'STATES RIGHTS' and now the same arguments are barfed up for the next generations to feed on. Other countries that do not make this distinction, use reiligion as a reason to force a woman to sew her genitals shut because she caused them to feel inpropriety. The rights of religion are vast. Once the rights are abused, they need to be dealt with by all the people, regardless of party affiliation or religious affiliation. Satanism is a recognized religion. I am not joking. I am okay with some idiot talking about sacrificing virgins, going through some sort of ritual. The minute he cries freedom of religion when we the people put him in jail for murdering a person, I will laugh my head off. He abused the religion. These arguments must be separated and more well defined. No one is holding the religious folk hostage because of a PUBLIC right to be treated equally in the law. My chief complaint is that the issue is clearer and society as a whole should be seeing eye to eye. It gets 'muddied' with religion and rabble rousers who water down the issue and get air time doing it. Breakdown: You are upset because you believe that the far left are infringing on the rights of religious establishments by dictating how the religions should be taught. I agree. You are upset that a small section of people(GLBT) are being represented by the far left yet; people in the GLBT don't neccessarily believe in the political parties either. They don't want their genitals and sex postitions being dictated by religion or government. They are not holding you hostage. Example: You and I petition the government to stop a farm owner from getting unfair treatment from a 'pork' bill. The local government listens and throws in their agenda. By the time someone reads the bill, it has so much more 'trash' in it, the title of the bill doesn't represent what the bill is about. GLBT community as a whole, suffers this fate. They don't argue loudly that their human rights is the only issue and the political parties throw their agenda on top. GLBT does not equate to the entire party. I am upset with the GLBT because having basic rights doesn't mean selling out my Constitution to get them. They for the longest time DID NOT want trans folk attached to their cause, by the way. So I believe these very separate issues should never be lumped into one category. You still have not explained, in your opening thesis how predators will camouflage themselves as 'trans' just to prey on someone, and how that the burden of the law should rest on law abiding citizens just because of an unfounded fear. You can argue that without involving church or crazy lefties. By the way, the solution you presented of having a third bathroom style is horrible. It does not solve your original assertion that your daughter will be safe by instituting this prejudist law. The predator will just see 3 bathrooms and STILL target either the men's or women's room based on the predator's choice. Solution. The left should stop dictating how religion is practiced in the establishment that the religion is mainly practiced in. (Private establishment reserves this right). The non believers of faith should get over their complaints that someone of faith expressed their love for God in a public area. How silly of them. The sexual preference a person has is separate than gender rights, which this 'bathroom bill' is attacking. We have laws already in place to deal with law breakers who violate public trust. The religious folk, no matter their political affiliation should not dictate how people live their lives. The religious folk should not pass religious laws unless the laws were created inside their PRIVATE dominion like a church/mosque and it affects their 'flock'; not the PUBLIC. I just can't believe I was willing to fight in a fox hole foreign or domestic, for the rights of others to worship an entity I don't even believe in, because I believe people can compromise, live in harmony with different ideas and faiths. In return I am told I am not worthy of life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness because I support a human cause separate from religion or even politics. I have been discriminated because of my hair, my skin pigmentation, my conservative values, my empathy for others, my gender. I absolutely fear if this is not understood, we will be having a conversation where two wolves and a sheep are debating whats for dinner and the sheep is actually thinking he has a say in the matter. We witnessed in history how jewish folk were called 'separate but equal' and were told that they had to be branded with a star and 'behave'. The same talk is now about forcing trans folk to wear 'triangles' and 'behave'. They must first COMMIT A CRIME en MASS before that argument can even be brought up.

Lets break it down then. You responded to this thread with saying that voiting for the president had something to do with child predators. That resulted in saying that trans people should be burdened by the law for a minute possibility of a child predator pretending to be them; when it is clearly not about trans people. That resulted in lumping trans people with child predators when that is a separate issue. That somehow got lumped into GLBT entire community where trans people have not been represented fairly by that group either! Yet, somehow, its okay to vote against a set of people based on the confusion stated above. There is MORE THAN ONE argument in those statements above. THAT is why its a tangent. Each argument has value and should be separately discussed. I promise you, trans folk are looking for equality and are NOT looking for drama. They WANT quiet lives! I feel bad that trans folk don't get represented properly from the GLBT community at a level they should be represented. Trans folk vote conservative, libral, democrat, republican as well. They are not the driving force to make you miserable. I for the record believe the churches are protected where the government can not tell them how to practice their religion. It was a fundemental fear that our predecessors would run from 'England's Tyranny' and repeat it in the new lands. This means that a person can not go into a mosque/church and demand a religious service that goes against the teachings of that establishment. You are right in that sense. The problem is that religious establishments are challenging what it means to be married and get 'lumped into' the GLBT community. Liberal elitists don't recognize the protections of religion. They attempted to vote GOD out of the affairs of the Democratic party. They now are associated with the GLBT community. I don't take their stance either way. I just wan't people to have rights in public venues and not be singled out because of religion. The threshold of this debate is based on how society as a whole recognizes PUBLIC and PRIVATE entities and how the rights differ. Most people will argue that churches are 'private property' and can invite anyone they want to into their buildings. They then have the right to discriminate against transgender people because of their faith. I try to let that go and concentrate on other truths that can be debated. So I can agree with you that some of churchs' rights are being infringed upon. The problem is that when a government institution or an institution of faith, tells 'a singled out group' that they are not like the others and will pass a law to segregate them in PUBLIC venues, the law is wrong. You can't quietly live your life, if you are being targeted for persecution for the sins another person can possibly make. The mistakes that the GLBT community make, is that they don't differentiate between church, public, private rights and neither does the majority of people either. I have seen people of faith, 'froth from the mouth like a rabid dog' because of their hate, I have seen members of the GLBT community do the same. I ignore them. So should you. I hear that even in the religious crowd, they don't believe marrying same sex couples violates the All Mighty's will. Religion doesn't have to be bad. That is a religious argument and I stay clear of direct interpretations of a complex faith derived from ancient people. Its my concern to separate the arguments so they are all represented and not confuse them as ONE ARGUMENT. I took your joke in kind spirit. I always give my heart to those that try to make sense of this even when I disagree. Let your heart not be troubled. binary bathrooms are okay. Its okay to have guns. Its okay to have writing utensils. Its okay to have genitals. ITS NOT OKAY if you choose any of them to commit a crime to benefit your greed. Each one of them can be used for assault. Gay women will not assault your daughter. Neither will male to female (FTM) women are are just women. Don't push them out of society for an unfounded fear.

Exactly. So you should now see how it helps soothe your fears and apply the same argument. Just like the gun laws, the bathroom law is used to attack innocent people and put unneccessary burdens on their rights instead of prosecuting the pervert/perp/criminal.

You and I agree with many things. The sad part is you have not responded at all with any counterpoint. I have articulated clearly to you that your argument does not work, it has already been tried and failed in the past. I most definitely responded to you. Your argument singles out innocent people and does not solve your problem of protecting your children. But oh well......

1. Its not a sacrifice. 2. Protection of the minority from the majority, transgendrs are fluid, binary and include women and men that deserve the very same rights. 3. Why should they be discriminated against because of some fear of a predator. Predators get dealt with by society anyways. Why should THEY be 'sacrificed' ? Using your example. I would have to have laws that tell gay men they can't use the bathrooms. I would have to say that gay woman can't use the bathroom, after all your daughter is there. They didn't 'hide' their gender selves. Most perversions come from Heterosexual encounters. Gay folk make up a larger percentage than 1.5 percent. You don't claim to be scared of them molesting your children. Why are they different? Its a bad argument. The fact is, that you are mixing up sex and predators, with people who are gender challenged. They should NOT be lumped into that category. Keep in mind, again, you are dealing with predators who DON'T NEED TO PRETEND. Those predators are in a category MUCH higher than 1.5 percent. If you heard American news recently. You might have heard that the Subway promoter who 'lost weight because of his product' was put in jail for being a child predator. Could you just look at him and 'know' that he's a child predator? He did not even have to camouflage or pretend. The hunting grounds as you define them are wherever the predator chooses. They want power/control/sexual gratification. So now a transgender person comes along and wants to be protected from the same predator, but instead gets rewarded for having more prejudists laws against the person who has not committed a crime? That is a bad argument. 4. Why are you protecting haters? You state you are not against transgenders, but the bill was BORN solely to discriminate AGAINST transgenders and its design is from religious folk who say transgenders are 'unnatural' and a 'disease' and will 'go to hell'. You can not segregate the small transgender population. 5. Transgender folks 'bloom' later in life. It is not a 'feeling' or an option for them. There is enough science to prove this. The press doesn't attempt to call it for what it is because truth isn't sensational. Women/men who bloomed, actually RESENT being called 'transgender' because they fit the 'binary' and figured out their identity. 6. Why should less than 1.5 percent of a population, be a threat? Do they all live in your town? I believe thats not true. 7. Why is it that I have stated many items already yet; you don't give any counter point to any of them? Your only argument is to keep the freaks and predators away from your daughter? You unfairly lump the transgender into that category and expect THEM to carry the burden. You don't have the right. Conservative values include not having a populist state who will erradicate those who think differently from the so called 'norm'. You are proposing this. Your argument is based on a small population should not have the right to hold the larger population 'hostage' or dictate law. My argument is based that they are NOT holding anyone hostage. They are simply demanding to be counted in the same rights category everyone else shares. The same arguments for segration were made for 'separate but equal'. Ask people who are not caucasian, if that argument holds water.. Its a mistake people make. I forgive them.