Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Frame of reference

Caldeathe Baequiannia
It's been a bewildering week for me. I confess to being quite angry when I got the message through Jonah that something I'd been promising the Ozem's and Alderwag folks since the beginning of July was turned over, not because it was too much work, but because it was perceived as unfair to older settlements. But mostly I felt tired. Tired and sad. I've put a lot of energy into PFO in the last 16 months, and I want it to happen and I felt like I was just draining money into a bottomless pit that didn't care if I was around. Right up until the moment the post appeared on the forums and ended the possibility of any further private discussion about the choice, I kept hoping that we could come to some agreement. But then the post appeared, and discussion was finished. So I decided to quit. I said so, ignored the boards for the next couple of days and spent some time compiling a list of accounts and how much XP and remaining time they had. All of this comes down to asking people to consider that, just maybe, you've been reading something into a message that was never there. Below is what I wrote. I'll ask you to look at what I said, rather than what you think I was saying, before you post messages about me "Rage Quitting" (here or elsewhere)

Caldeathe Baequiannia
That's the last commitment I'm interested in letting you all break. I and my nine subscriptions are out. Good luck, everybody.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Giorgio
Cal,

Why not wait to see if the game gets funded or not before quitting?

Have you considered/debated a "wait and see" approach as an alternative?
First Elder Durin Steelforge; Leader of Forgeholm; Founder of Steelforge Engineering Company

PM Giorgo on Paizo Forums
PM Admin George on Commonwealth of the Free Highlands
Baron Malthius
I get your message. You felt that something you had believed to be a promise was broken and thus are no longer willing to support a game as a result. I get it.

Do you mind me asking for more details on what this promise actually was and what went into making said promise though? I don't think I ever fully understood what the promise was that you felt was broken in the first place. I also don't seem to get how big of an impact this really has either. Is it an inconvenience or is this something that'll completely ruin everything?

Second, keep in mind the following items:

- We are dealing with a game that has a small enough population as is, which does necessitate some concessions, even if they are only temporary.
- At this point we're dealing with a dev group that's down to three people
- Most importantly, even when that wasn't the case, in earlier Keepside Chats it was made very clear that not all the features regarding settlement templates and customizations were going to put in at once. They were going to be put in piecemeal, balanced, and tweaked over several patches.

The game is incomplete, not all the mechanics are meshing well and some of them may need to be changed for the greater good of the game itself. It is up to them to decide what they want to do regarding all of this and possibly up to an investor as well depending on the terms of the agreement.

The resulting system in the end may actually be better than what may have been originally promised (again, I'm not sure if these statements were the intended interpretation of said promise in the first place so I can't say more on that). You don't know right now, none of us do, cause the whole thing is still in flux.

So the decision to stay or leave is up to you of course. No one here will force you either way and the decision will be respected. However, let's not make a huge scene over this either, cause that won't help anyone either.
Zax
Baron Malthius
So the decision to stay or leave is up to you of course. No one here will force you either way and the decision will be respected. However, let's not make a huge scene over this either, cause that won't help anyone either.

+1
You are a Troll
I do not think Cal was saying he was quitting (again). I think he was just trying to give people a frame of reference for the post he had made. Cal and all the other vocal leaders (including the missing Golgathans) are an integral part of this game and make it much more fun and interesting than it would be otherwise.
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Baron Malthius
Do you mind me asking for more details on what this promise actually was and what went into making said promise though? I don't think I ever fully understood what the promise was that you felt was broken in the first place.
That companies which conquered abandoned settlements would be able to select a new template when EE11 was deployed.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Bringslite
Cal,

Thanks for "The Reference". It puts things into context a bit more clearly.

Your post did not look at all (to me) to be any kind of attempt at blackmail or ransom. That is funny because blackmail/ransom usually goes along the lines of "if you don't deliver X, I will do Y".

What I took away was that you have put a lot of work into the recent HRC expansion of settlements, including the former Guardhiem, that was not easy stuff and included some hard worked for loss of materials/time. That impression is easier for me to grok because I have knowledge of the process.

Still your post was written like a statement, not a threat as some others seem to want to believe. When I think about all of the times that I have been angry in situations (in games or out), I see a few patterns that most people share.

1. Lots of work based on a mutual understanding turns on it's head as one party changes the agreement (or seems to) right before the fulfillment.

2. I, of course, get pissed and want them to know that.

3. I deliver a message, so that they know I am really disappointed. Usually along the lines of "OK, that's it! I'm done with you!"

4. To make it more impactful, I add something to my farewell message that (hopefully) shows them that they are losing something of value as I leave.

In a nutshell: Your post was about par for the course when you made it from the info you had at that moment. I think it was fine.

I'm glad that it got resolved in a way that has you still around and posting.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Baron Malthius
Edit: After reading Bringlite's post, what I had said previously no longer applies.

I still maintain though that given the amount of customization, the fact that we knew for some time now that we were only gonna have one template initially and more were going to be on the way, and the recent changes which have allowed us to be more easily transitioned into the new system, I think they've kept their word. All settlements are going to work like this.
Bringslite
Baron,

The issue was (drum roll) that these settlements had templates when they were taken over. Before they made their move to capture these settlements, the HRC asked if the templates could be switched to ones that they wanted instead of what they were. I believe that part of the rub was that the HRC may not have proceeded without that "yes" answer. I don't know that for sure, though.

Previously, the templates that we had were in fact going to limit all of us to choices from those templates. I believe that HRC (at least) had finally been told that "sure, why not. You can change a template for kit choices after you take the settlement over."
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Baron Malthius
Ok, perhaps there was some communication error.

Well, I think what we've gotten here is, IMO, more or less like that, except in a somewhat roundabout way. I still don't get what about this current implementation does not in essence accomplish the same goal. We seem to be able now to choose kits individually and will in the end still create the custom settlement we want to make. I just don't get it. Both implementations essentially are doing the same thing, it is just two different ways of accomplishing it. The promise hasn't been broken, just implemented in a somewhat different manner.

Is it better? Well, that's a matter of opinion, but I personally think it is. Either way, like I said earlier, this way may turn out to be SUPERIOR to whatever impression HRC had, so it is far too early to jump to conclusions.

Also, I am curious as to what other groups who have taken over settlements feel about this. I know HRC is not the only one.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post