Announcement from Free League Publishing

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Chris Lites officially stated on facebook about sixteen hours ago Poland is NOT part of the Warsaw Pact in 4th ed.

Thoughts?

This feels like a bait & switch to me, one of the reasons I backed it was the assurance that the timeline would match v1's history. Now that they have my money, "Oh, just a few touch-ups..."

It also feels like a needless and spiteful change, such as when the Confederacy re-appeared in the 3rd edition of Space:1889, after being safely dead in the first two editions. A lot of people didn't buy that edition for that reason.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Adm.Lee

This feels like a bait & switch to me, one of the reasons I backed it was the assurance that the timeline would match v1's history. Now that they have my money, "Oh, just a few touch-ups..."

I'm not keen on the idea of T2k Poland being in the NATO camp either but, to be fair, AFAIK, FL never said v4 would align with the v1 timeline. They were pretty clear from pretty early on (pre-KS launch, at least) that v4 would lean closer to the v2 timeline (of which I am not a fan).

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I'm not keen on the idea of T2k Poland being in the NATO camp either but, to be fair, AFAIK, FL never said v4 would align with the v1 timeline. They were pretty clear from pretty early on (pre-KS launch, at least) that v4 would lean closer to the v2 timeline (of which I am not a fan).

You're right, v2 was what I understood.

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I'm not keen on the idea of T2k Poland being in the NATO camp either but, to be fair, AFAIK, FL never said v4 would align with the v1 timeline. They were pretty clear from pretty early on (pre-KS launch, at least) that v4 would lean closer to the v2 timeline (of which I am not a fan).

You're right, v2 was what I understood. I'm not particularly wedded to either timeline, I'm just put out that I (felt like I was, anyway) promised one thing before giving them money, and now they're changing something pretty major.

[Fallenkezef]

Originally Posted by Adm.Lee

You're right, v2 was what I understood. I'm not particularly wedded to either timeline, I'm just put out that I (felt like I was, anyway) promised one thing before giving them money, and now they're changing something pretty major.

The whole thing feels a bit off to me. Zero effort seems to be put into forward momentum post-launch such as sourcebooks and modules with shaky strecthgoals.

My gut says they are milking the fanbase to put out the bare minimum. I mean, ignoring all the resources they have available from such a vast fanbase?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Fallenkezef

The whole thing feels a bit off to me. Zero effort seems to be put into forward momentum post-launch such as sourcebooks and modules with shaky strecthgoals.

My gut says they are milking the fanbase to put out the bare minimum. I mean, ignoring all the resources they have available from such a vast fanbase?

Well, you are not the only who feels that way...
I own Free League's Tales From the Loop because I love the premise of the game and also the artwork that inspired the game but I find the rules system very average and it seems to be slanted toward episodic play rather than long-term campaigns (I'll relate why I think this is important down below).
I also backed this kickstarter for a few reasons even though I had some doubts about the rules system they wanted to use.

Looking at some of the other Free League products and their release schedules, it does not appear to me as though they have much (if any) interest in long term development or support of their games. They seem to be sticking pretty close to the current mentality (and this is not just Free League but most RPG producers lately) of Core +1
That is to say, the company produces the Core books and then only 1 other book to support it. If they produce another book in the future, it's meant to update or replace that +1 from before.

It also seems to me that quite a few players of Year Zero games, don't actually stick with any YZ game for a long campaign. They play a few sessions, or even a lot of sessions and then they stop and jump ship to another YZ game.
Then they play that for a while and when it's no longer fresh, they jump to another YZ game until they have done a complete circle back to the first game.
Now, I am NOT saying they all do that but I have encountered quite a few that do and I believe a number of modern rules systems encourage that sort of play - straight into the action for some quick satisfaction, no long term plans necessary or desired.
Given that design philosophy, I will not be at all surprised if the entire 4th edition product line consists of what was offered on the kickstarter and then just one or two more books and then they will be off designing some new game.

[Raellus]

Hm.

Based on the response to the Kickstarter, it appears that FL has a cash cow just asking to be milked. They stand to make a lot by producing follow-on products, but their track record seems to indicate that's not something that they normally do. It seems strange that they wouldn't try to capitalize on the success of an existing property.

Hopefully, they change their minds. Perhaps the response to the Kickstarter will inspire them to switch it up and actually produce adventure modules and source books for T2k v4. Heaven knows there's already a market for it, and if v4 is any good, that market is likely going to grow.

-

[Olefin]

Considering that they have me, Raellus and Legbreaker ready and willing to write new material and so far have managed to not have any of us writing for V4 I have to agree with you. Its great that Frank is writing the new Madonna book - but you have three writers ready to go that could have multiple sourcebooks or modules ready in very little time - and who would love to be part of the V4 effort.

To me that smacks of not really supporting the V4 game.

And that fact that they waited till the very end after a tidal wave of support - and a tidal wave of where the heck is it - to go "oh yea we might want to have the details of what is happening world wide in the initial release" shows that what they had in mind was a game centered in Poland and Sweden that lasts a few months and then on to the next game

[Adm.Lee]

A little more on Poland not being in the WPact, and the Pact not existing.

Originally Posted by Adm.Lee

This feels like a bait & switch to me, one of the reasons I backed it was the assurance that the timeline would match ... the earlier history. Now that they have my money, "Oh, just a few touch-ups..."

... I'm not particularly wedded to either timeline, I'm just put out that I (felt like I was, anyway) promised one thing before giving them money, and now they're changing something pretty major.

I've been thinking about this occasionally over the weekend, and I feel now that I may have reacted too strongly. I'm not going to demand a refund, I will attempt to give the game a fair shot when I get to see it. It's still a little bitter, but I'm not going to spend the time to try and track down where and when "I was lied to". After all, I know my memory is shoddy enough that I need to take notes where it's important!

After all, as a GM, when it arrives I can always deep-six the pieces I don't like and swap in my preferences, as seen in multiple posts on this forum just recently.

Having said that, so far, it stretches my credulity that the reviving USSR, alone, could take on NATO (possibly expanded with Poland and others?) and hold on for years. Speculation: is there still a Soviet war with the PRC? That might work to the Soviet's benefit, if there isn't.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Adm.Lee

Having said that, so far, it stretches my credulity that the reviving USSR, alone, could take on NATO (possibly expanded with Poland and others?) and hold on for years. Speculation: is there still a Soviet war with the PRC? That might work to the Soviet's benefit, if there isn't.

I agree with this 100%. IIRC, someone in the know mentioned that FL has the PRC allied with the USSR in v4. That evens the odds just a bit. My memory could be faulty on this point, though.

-

[Adm.Lee]

OK, 'cause a neutral PRC would be in a lot better shape to dominate the 21st century than a neutral France. IMO.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Adm.Lee

OK, 'cause a neutral PRC would be in a lot better shape to dominate the 21st century than a neutral France. IMO.

And without strong international powers to hold them in check, dominate they would. China has long been known to have expansionist aspirations. With the US, UK, etc tied down elsewhere, what's to stop them rolling through south east asia and beyond? Harsh language and disapproving looks?