Skip to main content

Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
Tags

Your condition has changed 'doubledildoass' to only be able to grant Enjoys Anal for the giver and not the taker.

If a single line is too complicated you can break it down into nested if statements.

Also, if that condition works for the cowgirl anal positions, but my code did not then I suspect that those action codes are not included in analcategories, as that is the difference between those two conditions(besides double dildo). While you have explicitly checked for the member being apart of the givers group, it is redundant as the first part already handles that condition with the expectation that the code will be in analcategories. The reason for that is simple, a person cannot orgasm outside of an action so the person must either be a giver or a taker in the last processed action. Thus the != handles both the givers for the cowgirl actions and takers for all the rest of the actions. 

This is how my var analcategories looks like, see for yourself.

var analcategories = ['assfingering','rimjob','missionaryanal','doggyanal','lotusanal','revlotusanal','doubledildoass','inserttaila','analvibrator','enemaplug','insertinturnsass','cowgirlanal','revcowgirlanal']

My code is a mess, I know, but it works. With it implemented, I had two slaves have sex in Cowgirl Anal position while entranced. As result, the slave who was riding did get the trait but the slave being ridden did not. Just how I wanted it to be and exact opposite to how it originally worked. 

In my code the slave getting the orgasm gets the trait IF they are the receiving party of any anal activity EXCEPT in Cowgirl Anal or Rev. Cowgirl Anal, OR if they are the performing party in Double Dildo Anal, Cowgirl Anal or Rev. Cowgirl Anal. Double Dildo Anal is already included in analcategories, so it's on both sides of the line. So, just like it's supposed to be.

Indeed I overlooked that 'doubleanaldildo' was in anal categories already. I guess that's what I get for constructing code based on truth tables but not ever testing it.