Temporal Storm Events

[riotmode]

Howdy, new player here. Temporal storms got me pretty tense the first night they happened, but lost my interest just as quickly when I realized they're just forcing me to engage with the underbaked combat mechanics. Getting focus-fired in my home by a swarm of archers piling its way out of my hobbit-hole closets doesn't feel like a sufficient payoff for that cool visual effect and wonderfully horrid sound design, nor does it really sell me on the "temporal" aspect.

To that end, I'd like to suggest the following ideas:

Work storms into ruins. Ruins being distorted by the temporal storms opens up opportunities like time-limited dungeons, storm-exclusive narrative events, and all kinds of other ideas. It also lets you show players what those ruins might have looked like before falling to rubble, and could even allow interactions with non-trader npcs to give the sense of isolation in the normal gameplay a bit more punch. It would also force me to engage with the mechanic and plan around expeditions into the storms, rather than just hiding in a 2x1 hole until they're over. 

Another thing it could do is introduce paradoxes as a mechanic, something that could tie into the Rifts. Imagine mining out a vein of tin a day or so before a storm. While the storm is active, that mining is undone, letting you mine it again. However, doing so ticks up a corruption counter of some sort that spawns in a rift, which can either remain permanent or fade with time. This would add another reason to engage with it and enable the creation of "farms" for the various beasts you can encounter.

I'm sure there's other things you can do with them, but they really need spicing up, since they're currently just an unskippable time-waste. With the current combat being so basic, there's just not much enjoyment to be had with them.

[EmperorPingu]

Hey, you're not alone - a lot of players have had not the best experiences with temporal storms and the lore side of the game. Personally, I'm all in for the doubling down on the immersive survival experience aspects of the game - the loops are soooo satisfying. If you're looking for something less forced and more focused on the immersive survival aspects of the game, give "homosapiens" mode a try when you start a new world. I play homosapiens and use a bunch of modes to make things more immersive and engaging without the need of fantasy elements. Consider playing homosapiens with mods like primitive survival, hydrate or diedrate, the entire fauna of the stoneage series, tools need rope, and almost every mod by a guy called salty who really excels at making seriously immersive mods (like click to pick among many others).

As for your mod suggestion itself, yeah totally, 100% - perhaps as another form of playstyle option? I've heard a lot of players (including myself...) who didn't like the forced engaging with the mechanoids, so having something where the player can still engage with the mobs in a meaningful way would be a great balance. Using certain commands on an already existing world, or when starting a new world, you can select to turn temporal storms off - you will still get rifts and the mobs will appear underground and such (I think?).

You can also make a hidey hole of 2x2x2 size for when the storms hit - just put stones on ground and torches on all the walls and then the mobs won't be able to spawn - congratulations, you've just unlocked... the waiting game

(With all my love devs, the lore is great, the dude^ has a point).

[riotmode]

I actually quite like the lore, but I'm a staunch anti-authoritarian and hater of monarchies.
There's plenty of super hardcore survival games out there, if I want something grounded I can head for Project Zomboid, haha.

The fantasy elements are actually what make it more interesting to me, so I'd rather they be improved!

[LadyWYT]

First off, welcome to the forums!

On 12/22/2025 at 8:15 PM, riotmode said:

Work storms into ruins. Ruins being distorted by the temporal storms opens up opportunities like time-limited dungeons, storm-exclusive narrative events, and all kinds of other ideas. It also lets you show players what those ruins might have looked like before falling to rubble, and could even allow interactions with non-trader npcs to give the sense of isolation in the normal gameplay a bit more punch. It would also force me to engage with the mechanic and plan around expeditions into the storms, rather than just hiding in a 2x1 hole until they're over. 

I think this is an idea much better suited for procedural dungeons, and not temporal storms. That way, the player can access and complete them at their own leisure. 

I had a taste of time-limited dungeons back when I still played WoW, and it was one of the LEAST FUN things I did in that game, despite being fairly good at it. Just my personal opinion, but I'd rather be able to actually take my time and think things through when it comes to things like dungeons.

On 12/22/2025 at 8:15 PM, riotmode said:

Another thing it could do is introduce paradoxes as a mechanic, something that could tie into the Rifts. Imagine mining out a vein of tin a day or so before a storm. While the storm is active, that mining is undone, letting you mine it again. However, doing so ticks up a corruption counter of some sort that spawns in a rift, which can either remain permanent or fade with time. This would add another reason to engage with it and enable the creation of "farms" for the various beasts you can encounter.

Yeah, no to this one as well. As far as I'm aware, the monsters are meant to serve as hazards that the player needs to figure out how to deal with, and not just things to actively hunt and slaughter for loot. Players have attempted to create various "farms" like what can be created in the other block game, but to my knowledge such farm methods are typically patched rather fast.

Overall, temporal storms are supposed to be an unnatural disaster that the player needs to plan around, as well as being a hazard that helps set the tone of the story. It's rather tough to take the worldbuilding seriously if most NPCs reference horrible monster-spawning storms, but nothing actually happens. I think if temporal storms get tweaked, they need to remain true to that quality in order to preserve the integrity of the story and worldbuilding. Another thing to consider as well is that any changes that are applied to temporal storms shouldn't just force the player into combat every time(if there's no option to hide/work indoors more players will just turn it off), and the mechanic shouldn't be so lucrative that players who hate it feel forced to turn the mechanic on lest they inhibit their own progress.

Personally, I like what williams_482 suggested here: 

The changes he proposed keep temporal storms as the disasters they're meant to be, while making them more approachable/less janky for a variety of players(and players who still decide to turn the storms off won't feel like they're missing something critical). I'll also note here that I suspect temporal storm drops will feel legitimately valuable once late game tech is fully fleshed out as well. Currently, temporal gears and Jonas parts don't feel as valuable as they should, because there's not much for the player to do with them(and it's easy to hoard them as a result).

 

4 hours ago, EmperorPingu said:

As for your mod suggestion itself, yeah totally, 100% - perhaps as another form of playstyle option? I've heard a lot of players (including myself...) who didn't like the forced engaging with the mechanoids, so having something where the player can still engage with the mobs in a meaningful way would be a great balance. Using certain commands on an already existing world, or when starting a new world, you can select to turn temporal storms off - you will still get rifts and the mobs will appear underground and such (I think?).

Honestly, I wouldn't mind this either as a solution. The general impression I get from most of the complaints I see about temporal storms, is that the player's preferred playstyle doesn't really match with the role the storms are designed to play in the world. More passive players who don't enjoy combat aren't going to be happy with a solution that forces them to fight, and players who live for nothing but combat and the spoils of war aren't going to be satisfied by anything less than lots of action and loot drops. The latter is really best solved via mods(tailor the combat to personal taste), while the former can probably be fixed with a new preset game mode similar to Minecraft's "peaceful" difficulty.

[EmperorPingu]

3 hours ago, riotmode said:

I actually quite like the lore, but I'm a staunch anti-authoritarian and hater of monarchies.
There's plenty of super hardcore survival games out there, if I want something grounded I can head for Project Zomboid, haha.

The fantasy elements are actually what make it more interesting to me, so I'd rather they be improved!

To each their own, all playstyles are perfectly valid :v

And love the PZ drop, another S-tier game imo - if it wasn't for the fact I just got back into VS recently I'd be playing multiplayer PZ they finally got back

[Zane Mordien]

8 hours ago, EmperorPingu said:

just put stones on ground

That was patched out 2 years ago. Stones on the ground don't impact spawn anymore. Other things work though.

[CastIronFabric]

1. I think they should go away.

2. I think everyone needs to get more grounded on 'the lore' and stop treating it like its an immutable sacred text written to be handed down to multiple generations, take a breath step back. We do not have to try and interpret every single aspect of the lore as if its a legal State Constitution written 200 years ago.

Edited December 26, 2025 by CastIronFabric

[ifoz]

1 hour ago, CastIronFabric said:

2. I think everyone needs to get more grounded on 'the lore' and stop treating it like its an immutable sacred text written to be handed down to multiple generations, take a breath step back. We do not have to try and interpret every single aspect of the lore as if its a legal State Constitution written 200 years ago.

Storms actually are a decently big part of the general worldbuilding, even if not mentioned much in text. Removing storms entirely would warrant a pretty massive re-write of a lot of content within the game, namely humanity would likely be much more widespread and not confined to the very rare village or outpost, and would also likely be more technologically advanced than we see ingame.

However, at the same time, the storms we see ingame aren't lore accurate. There is dialogue describing them as a raid-like event, though in actual gameplay enemies can spawn wherever they want. It's not a case of lore lazily justifying a bad game mechanic - it's a case of the lore painting a picture of a rather interesting game mechanic, and then that mechanic's actual implementation being much worse and less interesting than the lore tells us it is.

I don't like the current implementation of storms, I think they lean much too far into the category of "mechanic that exists primarily to punish players for playing the game". It's something I'd expect out of RLcraft or the like, not Vintage Story. I do think though that if the storms were actually implemented as the lore states they are, they would be a much more interesting experience and overall integrate into both the game's sandbox aspects and worldbuilding a lot better.

EDIT: If anyone reading this wants to know my personal take on how they could be better implemented, I talked about it in the other recent storm thread. Pretty much it boils down to making the monsters spawn far away from the player, but automatically aggro and attempt to path towards them. That way players can now make a properly defensive base and protect it, players can still choose to go out and fight the monsters directly, and players who dislike combat are now much safer without the threat of bad RNG forcing a monster to spawn right on top of them. This way it isn't a true tower defence scenario, mobs cannot grief your painstakingly chiselled cottage (as a chisel addict I can imagine the pain!), you aren't forced to cheese storms or put up unsightly dirt watchtowers, and storms are better ingrained into the general sandbox gameplay and basebuilding experience. Ideally this would encourage players to make a proper base in the first place, gradually expand their territory and maybe even experiment with things like moats and traps. At least, hopefully. 

Edited December 26, 2025 by ifoz

[aleq]

Those events are sure annoying and pointless. There is no motivation in doing them when you can just:

1). Turn them off with a simple command or

2). Hide in a tight space until they are over.

At least let us make some items or structures that we can place in our base to avoid those events when they happen - or when being near those items or structures, the event won't trigger (begin), at all. 

Also, it would make sense if those events made the monsters spawn outside your base. That way you could reinforce your base to prevent the monsters from getting in. And when the invasion is over you could repair the damages and make necessary upgrades to: doors, traps, spikes, walls, shooting things (like towers), and so on.

And if you absolutely have to keep those events (storms) in the game, as they are, at least go and play some Valheim and learn how it is done properly. Because right now it just sucks big time - world-building / lore or not. Gameplay first, always.

Edited December 29, 2025 by aleq

[CastIronFabric]

1 hour ago, ifoz said:

Storms actually are a decently big part of the general worldbuilding, even if not mentioned much in text. Removing storms entirely would warrant a pretty massive re-write of a lot of content within the game, namely humanity would likely be much more widespread and not confined to the very rare village or outpost, and would also likely be more technologically advanced than we see ingame.

However, at the same time, the storms we see ingame aren't lore accurate. There is dialogue describing them as a raid-like event, though in actual gameplay enemies can spawn wherever they want. It's not a case of lore lazily justifying a bad game mechanic - it's a case of the lore painting a picture of a rather interesting game mechanic, and then that mechanic's actual implementation being much worse and less interesting than the lore tells us it is.

I don't like the current implementation of storms, I think they lean much too far into the category of "mechanic that exists primarily to punish players for playing the game". It's something I'd expect out of RLcraft or the like, not Vintage Story. I do think though that if the storms were actually implemented as the lore states they are, they would be a much more interesting experience and overall integrate into both the game's sandbox aspects and worldbuilding a lot better.

EDIT: If anyone reading this wants to know my personal take on how they could be better implemented, I talked about it in the other recent storm thread. Pretty much it boils down to making the monsters spawn far away from the player, but automatically aggro and attempt to path towards them. That way players can now make a properly defensive base and protect it, players can still choose to go out and fight the monsters directly, and players who dislike combat are now much safer without the threat of bad RNG forcing a monster to spawn right on top of them. This way it isn't a true tower defence scenario, mobs cannot grief your painstakingly chiselled cottage (as a chisel addict I can imagine the pain!), you aren't forced to cheese storms or put up unsightly dirt watchtowers, and storms are better ingrained into the general sandbox gameplay and basebuilding experience. Ideally this would encourage players to make a proper base in the first place, gradually expand their territory and maybe even experiment with things like moats and traps. At least, hopefully. 

I am not convinced that removing storms would really contradict the lore. I do not know the lore but I know how people inject their own interpretation to justify what they THINK they want (and no I am not immune to that). I am willing to be that one could remove the storms and it NOT conflict with the existing lore.

 

Edited December 26, 2025 by CastIronFabric

[LadyWYT]

1 hour ago, aleq said:

at least go and play some Valheim and learn how it is done properly

That is a matter of personal taste. I enjoy Vintage Story's temporal storms, but despise Valheim's raids. Valheim's raids make sense for what Valheim's setting is, however, the entire goal of Valheim is to fight your way to Valhalla. In a game balanced around combat as the core attraction, it works, but for a game like Vintage Story(where combat is decidedly NOT a main selling point) that kind of change would be a massive tonal shift, and not for the better.

 

59 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

I am not convinced that removing storms would really contradict the lore. I do not know the lore but I know how people inject their own interpretation to justify what they THINK they want (and no I am not immune to that). I am willing to be that one could remove the storms and it NOT conflict with the existing lore.

 

With all due respect...if one doesn't know the lore, then it's certainly not wise to say "just remove X, it's not going to affect the story at all".

As already noted by others and I, temporal storms are a major part of VS's worldbuilding, and are referenced directly by many NPCs, not to mention a feature that's prominently advertised in the game's trailer. There's an option for players to turn the mechanic off if they don't enjoy it, but that's up to the player to decide for themselves. If the mechanic is stripped out of the game entirely or otherwise disabled by default, then what happens is a glaring plot hole that's going to leave many players confused(why do NPCs talk about all these terrible things happening if there's no terrible things that actually happen?). It'd be like trying to play Skyrim without dragon attacks--the NPCs still talk about all these dragon attacks that apparently happen, but no dragon is actually gonna swoop down and start pillaging the landscape outside of the couple of fights baked into the script.

[CastIronFabric]

3 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

As already noted by others and I, temporal storms are a major part of VS's worldbuilding, and are referenced directly by many NPCs, not to mention a feature that's prominently advertised in the game's trailer. There's an option for players to turn the mechanic off if they don't enjoy it, but that's up to the player to decide for themselves. If the mechanic is stripped out of the game entirely or otherwise disabled by default, then what happens is a glaring plot hole that's going to leave many players confused(why do NPCs talk about all these terrible things happening if there's no terrible things that actually happen?). It'd be like trying to play Skyrim without dragon attacks--the NPCs still talk about all these dragon attacks that apparently happen, but no dragon is actually gonna swoop down and start pillaging the landscape outside of the couple of fights baked into the script.

people have made the claim without providing evidence in the story text that would show that the storms are basically hard coded into the story and could not be represented in a different way.

and until that evidence is presented I am sticking to my statement. everything I have heard thus far is interpretive conjecture and that is that.

 

Edited December 26, 2025 by CastIronFabric

[LadyWYT]

23 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

people have made the claim without providing evidence in the story text that would show that the storms are basically hard coded into the story and could not be represented in a different way.

and until that evidence is presented I am sticking to my statement. everything I have heard thus far is interpretive conjecture and that is that.

 

Okay, I'll humor you.  Pulling straight from the home page itself:

Quote

A wicked universe backed by original story elements
Take on the role of a lost being in the body of a tall blue creature and discover the remnants of civilization. There is no linear storytelling; it is up to you to piece together who you are and what has happened from the little evidence that remains. During your journey you will encounter wayward creatures, find old stories, battle temporal instability, and endure temporal storms.

Quote

• Vintage Story is an uncompromising wilderness survival sandbox game inspired by eldritch horror themes. Find yourself in a ruined world reclaimed by nature and permeated by unnerving temporal disturbances. Relive the advent of human civilization, or take your own path.

The first 30 seconds of the trailer itself showcase temporal storms and instability, with "Endure temporal storms" itself being showcased at the 1:05 mark: 

All that alone demonstrates that the feature is baked into the game design and intended to be part of the core experience, not to mention that both temporal stability and temporal storms are enabled by default in the Standard game mode(which is listed as the default survival experience). The only game modes that do not have those mechanics enabled by default are Homo Sapiens, Creative, and Exploration. Homo Sapiens skips the lore entirely in order to provide only the realism; Creative is there for full freedom to build and mess around with stuff; Exploration makes it clear that the focus is primarily on exploration and building, not combat and survival.

Getting into specific NPC dialogue(spoilers for obvious reasons):

Spoiler

Tobias references temporal storms directly in some of his dialogue with the player: 

PLAYER: You're quite well known in Nadiya.

TOBIAS: I should think so I was there when it was founded.

TOBIAS: They're kind people. Or so I assume. I haven't visited since their grandparents' time.

PLAYER: You were there when it was founded?

TOBIAS: You think it's bad now you should have seen the world in those days. The storms were worse then. And nobody was prepared for the creatures within let alone the ones peeling out of the rifts.

---

PLAYER: You're expecting others?

TOBIAS: I was delirious by the end but I believe there were many from the underground who were lost but not perished. In recent years I've heard tell of strange figures walking the lands. Seraphs they call you.

TOBIAS: But without seeing one in person I couldn't separate truth from faerie tale. There were stories of twelve foot giants watery ghosts and eyes made of lightning! Who knows how much of that is rampant rumor or vision addled by the storms? Then again given what we've seen from you perhaps we shouldn't rule it out.

---

There's one tapestry that clearly depicts a temporal storm: https://wiki.vintagestory.at/Tapestry#Temporal_Storm

---

At least a few of the Nadiya villagers currently implemented have comments regarding the storms.

Waclaw: "I'm old enough now to do my part. No more cowering in the hall. Next storm, I'm fighting."

Laura: "We tried expanding in the past. Years back, they say. Too risky. Too far from the walls and too much work. Saint Tobias warned us about it, he did. Can't get too large or we start running into new problems. Problems we can't handle. Like other people. When we're too big to come to agreements, the village'll split. And a house with a crack down the middle of it'll never hold up when the true storm blows on through."

Indira: (when the player asks about the storms) "The true storm? We all make our stand together when it comes. That old fortress up the hill has kept us safe for generations. The cursed ones in their revelry make what havoc they can, but they usually leave the crops alone. Same with the livestock. Best to keep the livestock out of the fortress anyway. Don't mention this to Lena, but I don't trust those beasts in the storm."

It's pretty clear that the storms being referenced are temporal storms and not anything natural, since while natural storms do occur frequently they don't require a fortress or armed guards as a solution. The "true storm" remark is the only thing that could be a metaphor for something else(that is also outside the villagers' knowledge), but it seems pretty obvious that the villagers associate the "true storm" with the temporal storms.

Further lore annecdotes:

Spoiler

The "Dangers of Temporality" tapestry warns of there being some drastic side effects to messing with temporal energy, with the present temporal storms and instability being one of the obvious results. In private he spoke of a world unhinged. Unbound by the geas of reality. “It is a place of wonders, my friends. And yet, I ask for caution — lest we see our own world changed in kind.”  https://wiki.vintagestory.at/Tapestry#Dangers_of_Temporality

Likewise, the lore books "Confession" and "Breakdown" provide a glimpse into the life of Jonas Falx himself, who was the architect of the Grand Machine responsible for the state of the world in the present day.

https://wiki.vintagestory.at/Lore_book#Confession

https://wiki.vintagestory.at/Lore_book#Breakdown

"Breakdown" contains the following passage: "I've begun to see things, even when I'm not gazing through the Lens. Walking down the halls, looking at the prints, suddenly my vision shifts and I'm in a world I cannot comprehend. I am in the other world, and it is leaking into this one." While I'm not sure entirely what was happening to Jonas here, the effects described are very similar to what the player experiences during temporal storms or other instances of low temporal stability.

There's probably a detail or two that I missed, but based on the above it's pretty clear to me that temporal storms are a major part of the story and worldbuilding, and I expect there to be more references made as more updates are released. Obviously not everyone enjoys the mechanics hence why there's an option for the player to turn them off if they so choose, but the mechanics themselves can't otherwise be removed without major rewrites to the entire story and setting.

I will also note that players who don't really pay that much attention to the story will probably miss a lot of these details, which is perfectly fine. But I don't think it's a good reason to go removing whole mechanics and forcing major rewrites.

[CastIronFabric]

15 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

Okay, I'll humor you.  Pulling straight from the home page itself:

The first 30 seconds of the trailer itself showcase temporal storms and instability, with "Endure temporal storms" itself being showcased at the 1:05 mark: 

All that alone demonstrates that the feature is baked into the game design and intended to be part of the core experience, not to mention that both temporal stability and temporal storms are enabled by default in the Standard game mode(which is listed as the default survival experience). The only game modes that do not have those mechanics enabled by default are Homo Sapiens, Creative, and Exploration. Homo Sapiens skips the lore entirely in order to provide only the realism; Creative is there for full freedom to build and mess around with stuff; Exploration makes it clear that the focus is primarily on exploration and building, not combat and survival.

Getting into specific NPC dialogue(spoilers for obvious reasons):

  Hide contents

Tobias references temporal storms directly in some of his dialogue with the player: 

PLAYER: You're quite well known in Nadiya.

TOBIAS: I should think so I was there when it was founded.

TOBIAS: They're kind people. Or so I assume. I haven't visited since their grandparents' time.

PLAYER: You were there when it was founded?

TOBIAS: You think it's bad now you should have seen the world in those days. The storms were worse then. And nobody was prepared for the creatures within let alone the ones peeling out of the rifts.

---

PLAYER: You're expecting others?

TOBIAS: I was delirious by the end but I believe there were many from the underground who were lost but not perished. In recent years I've heard tell of strange figures walking the lands. Seraphs they call you.

TOBIAS: But without seeing one in person I couldn't separate truth from faerie tale. There were stories of twelve foot giants watery ghosts and eyes made of lightning! Who knows how much of that is rampant rumor or vision addled by the storms? Then again given what we've seen from you perhaps we shouldn't rule it out.

---

There's one tapestry that clearly depicts a temporal storm: https://wiki.vintagestory.at/Tapestry#Temporal_Storm

---

At least a few of the Nadiya villagers currently implemented have comments regarding the storms.

Waclaw: "I'm old enough now to do my part. No more cowering in the hall. Next storm, I'm fighting."

Laura: "We tried expanding in the past. Years back, they say. Too risky. Too far from the walls and too much work. Saint Tobias warned us about it, he did. Can't get too large or we start running into new problems. Problems we can't handle. Like other people. When we're too big to come to agreements, the village'll split. And a house with a crack down the middle of it'll never hold up when the true storm blows on through."

Indira: (when the player asks about the storms) "The true storm? We all make our stand together when it comes. That old fortress up the hill has kept us safe for generations. The cursed ones in their revelry make what havoc they can, but they usually leave the crops alone. Same with the livestock. Best to keep the livestock out of the fortress anyway. Don't mention this to Lena, but I don't trust those beasts in the storm."

It's pretty clear that the storms being referenced are temporal storms and not anything natural, since while natural storms do occur frequently they don't require a fortress or armed guards as a solution. The "true storm" remark is the only thing that could be a metaphor for something else(that is also outside the villagers' knowledge), but it seems pretty obvious that the villagers associate the "true storm" with the temporal storms.

Further lore annecdotes:

  Hide contents

The "Dangers of Temporality" tapestry warns of there being some drastic side effects to messing with temporal energy, with the present temporal storms and instability being one of the obvious results. In private he spoke of a world unhinged. Unbound by the geas of reality. “It is a place of wonders, my friends. And yet, I ask for caution — lest we see our own world changed in kind.”  https://wiki.vintagestory.at/Tapestry#Dangers_of_Temporality

Likewise, the lore books "Confession" and "Breakdown" provide a glimpse into the life of Jonas Falx himself, who was the architect of the Grand Machine responsible for the state of the world in the present day.

https://wiki.vintagestory.at/Lore_book#Confession

https://wiki.vintagestory.at/Lore_book#Breakdown

"Breakdown" contains the following passage: "I've begun to see things, even when I'm not gazing through the Lens. Walking down the halls, looking at the prints, suddenly my vision shifts and I'm in a world I cannot comprehend. I am in the other world, and it is leaking into this one." While I'm not sure entirely what was happening to Jonas here, the effects described are very similar to what the player experiences during temporal storms or other instances of low temporal stability.

There's probably a detail or two that I missed, but based on the above it's pretty clear to me that temporal storms are a major part of the story and worldbuilding, and I expect there to be more references made as more updates are released. Obviously not everyone enjoys the mechanics hence why there's an option for the player to turn them off if they so choose, but the mechanics themselves can't otherwise be removed without major rewrites to the entire story and setting.

I will also note that players who don't really pay that much attention to the story will probably miss a lot of these details, which is perfectly fine. But I don't think it's a good reason to go removing whole mechanics and forcing major rewrites.

The VAST majority of the things examples you gave are not tightly coupled to storms.

A trailer is not lore. the phrase 'uncompromising' is not a storm. temporal instability is not synonyms with monster storms. Most of the lore examples you gave do not even mention storms and are very vague with many things that could be applied to literally billions of different things.

So the only thing you posted that comes actually close to being tightly coupled with storms at all are some things in your NPC dialogue. Everything else is not remotely related to my request nor remotely tightly coupled with the lore requiring specifically storms. 

In fact, they could remove the dialogue that contains storm, change the name of the tapestry and I can assure you the universe would still operate just fine.

To take that even further, they could make 'the storm' a place you go to (like the Rust area they added) and not change a single line in the dialogue at all.

That was my point, which to glot, I accurately made without even knowing the lore.

Why are we acting like NPC dialogue at end game is some kind of immutable sacred text in the first place? I play along with that parameter but really my opinon is I do not understand why such dialogue can not change as long as it does not affect the overall 'plot' if there even is one.

 

 

 

Edited December 27, 2025 by CastIronFabric

[Bumber]

Asking the developer to change their game to suit you, making bold assumptions from ignorance, being refuted with facts, then doubling down and defiantly proclaiming you were right all along is cringe to watch.

Your next move will be to claim it was actually your immutable opinion, and you aren't interested in discussing it further.

The game with temporal storms is the game that was sold to us. If anyone doesn't like them and isn't satisfied with modding or turning them off in settings, the developer has been clear: If you don't enjoy the game, they don't want your money and will gladly refund your purchase.

Saying they could be better is fine, but suggesting they should just get rid of them is unreasonable.

Edited December 28, 2025 by Bumber

[LadyWYT]

24 minutes ago, Bumber said:

The game with temporal storms is the game that was sold to us.

Not to mention that abruptly removing features that were clearly marketed as a core part of the game is a pretty good way to get sued for false advertising, as well as producing lots of unhappy players and massively eroding customer trust in general. 

[riotmode]

I have to say, I'm a bit startled at how twittery this thread is getting. Is it often like this?

[LadyWYT]

14 minutes ago, riotmode said:

I have to say, I'm a bit startled at how twittery this thread is getting. Is it often like this?

Yes. Most of the time the forums are fine, but there are certain aspects of the game that are quite divisive. Temporal storms and instability are one of them, with combat being a close second.

[Zane Mordien]

6 hours ago, riotmode said:

I have to say, I'm a bit startled at how twittery this thread is getting. Is it often like this?

Don't let it hold you back from posting suggestions. You never know what might stick.

[runnybabbit]

Has the potential for reactive storm intensity been fleshed out?

Maybe if you engage with combat by killing a lot of drifters from rifts, the next storm will be heavier. Lore reasons could be drawing the ire of the rust world or something...

 

Of course heaiver storms would bring mobs that drop a bit more.

 

Also, first lurker post hello people. 

Edited December 29, 2025 by runnybabbit

[riotmode]

7 hours ago, Zane Mordien said:

Don't let it hold you back from posting suggestions. You never know what might stick.

Oh don't worry, I won't lol. I really would like to see the temporal aspect explored more, there's so much that could be done with world state editing to make it feel like the manifest past of your world is attacking you without breaking the game.

5 hours ago, runnybabbit said:

Has the potential for reactive storm intensity been fleshed out?

Maybe if you engage with combat by killing a lot of drifters from rifts, the next storm will be heavier. Lore reasons could be drawing the ire of the rust world or something...

I like this too tbh, the storms seem to mostly disrupt players who are more invested in the survival craft elements getting disrupted. Perhaps giving Storms additional benefits to certain processes would help, eg rapid-aging wines and crops, or causing recently rotted foods to revert, etc.

 

Throwing in some minorly beneficial elements like this might make them feel a bit more chaotic rather than being a strictly negative encounter to stare at a dirt wall through.

[LadyWYT]

8 hours ago, runnybabbit said:

Has the potential for reactive storm intensity been fleshed out?

Maybe if you engage with combat by killing a lot of drifters from rifts, the next storm will be heavier. Lore reasons could be drawing the ire of the rust world or something...

 

Of course heaiver storms would bring mobs that drop a bit more.

 I don't recall seeing this one suggested before, or at least, not quite in this fashion. The usual solution I see for "kill more monsters" is "make the storm shorter".

I'm not sure it really fits the lore all that well as I'm not sure that the Rust really cares about the player's existence, and the player themselves doesn't fit the "chosen one" trope as much as they're fitting a classic "common folk go on a hero's journey" setup. That being said though, it's not a concept that couldn't be fitted in either. I think the main advantage is just on the gameplay side of it, in that it allows the storms to attune to the player's aggression, so that aggressive players will have more to fight(and more loot) while more passive players can enjoy the ambience but not really worry about the fighting. The main weakness I see in the design is that if the player is intending to leave home for an extended time, the optimal strategy becomes to sit and do nothing for one storm before leaving in order to ensure they don't get caught in a serious storm while traveling.

2 hours ago, riotmode said:

I like this too tbh, the storms seem to mostly disrupt players who are more invested in the survival craft elements getting disrupted. Perhaps giving Storms additional benefits to certain processes would help, eg rapid-aging wines and crops, or causing recently rotted foods to revert, etc.

 

Throwing in some minorly beneficial elements like this might make them feel a bit more chaotic rather than being a strictly negative encounter to stare at a dirt wall through.

The main flaw I see here(apologies if I'm repeating myself, as at this point I've lost track of which temporal thread is which) is that if the storms can beneficially rewind time like this, they should also be able to do the opposite, especially since they're portrayed as distinctly negative cataclysmic events. Honestly, it's not a solution I'm in favor of, since it's likely to encourage players to become reliant on storms to speed up processes like crops, steel, and leatherworking, and lead to complaints about the RNG as well as lost progress due to forces beyond the player's control. 

From a lore standpoint, aside from temporal storms being written as a clearly bad thing, I don't think it's ideal to go writing beneficial effects into them as that reduces incentive to try to fix whatever's causing them, both for the player and the denizens of the world at large. Potential spoilers here, but it's also worth noting that:

Spoiler

Temporal storms are a disruption of the flow of time, yes, but rather than one timeline going forwards or backwards it seems to be more a case of two separate realities trying to merge into one--the Rust World merging with our reality. When the barrier between those two realities weakens enough, a temporal storm happens.

 

[Bruno Willis]

On 12/23/2025 at 3:15 PM, riotmode said:

Work storms into ruins. Ruins being distorted by the temporal storms opens up opportunities like time-limited dungeons, storm-exclusive narrative events, and all kinds of other ideas. It also lets you show players what those ruins might have looked like before falling to rubble, and could even allow interactions with non-trader npcs to give the sense of isolation in the normal gameplay a bit more punch. It would also force me to engage with the mechanic and plan around expeditions into the storms, rather than just hiding in a 2x1 hole until they're over. 

Another thing it could do is introduce paradoxes as a mechanic, something that could tie into the Rifts. Imagine mining out a vein of tin a day or so before a storm. While the storm is active, that mining is undone, letting you mine it again. However, doing so ticks up a corruption counter of some sort that spawns in a rift, which can either remain permanent or fade with time. This would add another reason to engage with it and enable the creation of "farms" for the various beasts you can encounter.

I'm sure there's other things you can do with them, but they really need spicing up, since they're currently just an unskippable time-waste. With the current combat being so basic, there's just not much enjoyment to be had with them.

5 hours ago, riotmode said:

I like this too tbh, the storms seem to mostly disrupt players who are more invested in the survival craft elements getting disrupted. Perhaps giving Storms additional benefits to certain processes would help, eg rapid-aging wines and crops, or causing recently rotted foods to revert, etc.

 

Throwing in some minorly beneficial elements like this might make them feel a bit more chaotic rather than being a strictly negative encounter to stare at a dirt wall through.

While I'm hearing the reasons against these ideas, and I get those reasons, I like that you're looking for non-combat game loops which might put people at risk, exploring the storms and experiencing them, not just hiding or fighting. Having a non-combat reason to expose yourself to the temporal storms would make them so much more fun for me. 

I've set up a drifter trap in one world, but I set it out quite a way from any of my other structures. I really enjoyed sprinting for the shelter, but the killing and looting afterwards felt cheesy and not fun.

I love the idea of weird time things happening which you can exploit if you can survive out in the storm long enough (unlike the less hardy humans). I had the same initial thought as riotmode about ruins becoming whole during temporal storms, and seeing it come up again makes me feel there is something in that idea. I know there are story events which play with this concept really well, but I don't think that's a reason not to implement something like it in normal storms. I think it'd be different enough if ruins occasionally flickered into either their rust-world equivalent or their unbroken original forms, and stayed that way for the duration of the storm. Perhaps it would only happen to some ruins, and never to a ruin you're currently very close to.

I also really like the idea of paradox exploitation causing issues too. This is another cool reason to experience the storms instead of just combat.

I've proposed neutral rust beasts before, as a different reason to go out into the storms. I like the thought of seeing some strange beings moving across the twisting landscape in the middle distance, and being stupid enough to run over and interact with them. What they'd be, and what they'd do, I'm less sure...

On a different note, I'd like to see the storms get a bit more of a folk-horror element to line up with the lore: baby animals born during the storm come out as rust-warped monstrosities (that'd be pretty rare, I'd guess). Stored food would appear to be entirely rotten, and taste like it too during the storm, but then revert back afterwards. Wild animals and traders should hunker down and hide, to show you that you would too if you were wise.

3 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

From a lore standpoint, aside from temporal storms being written as a clearly bad thing, I don't think it's ideal to go writing beneficial effects into them as that reduces incentive to try to fix whatever's causing them, both for the player and the denizens of the world at large. Potential spoilers here, but it's also worth noting that:

For sure. But the storms are cool and it'd be good to have a real reason to experience them which isn't combat. The other side to that would also be the much recommended change where rust-foes don't spawn right inside your house, so you have a reason to use high walls, close the storm shutters and bar your doors. If the negative effects were more interestingly implemented, I think we could get away with a couple of niche positive effects that only a foolhardy seraph would even consider exploiting. 

[runnybabbit]

7 hours ago, Bruno Willis said:

I love the idea of weird time things happening which you can exploit if you can survive out in the storm long enough (unlike the less hardy humans). I had the same initial thought as riotmode about ruins becoming whole during temporal storms, and seeing it come up again makes me feel there is something in that idea

This got me thinking about some sort of resource that appears during temporal storms and a short time after. If you don't want to engage with the storm you can just wait for it to pass and rush out to grab the things, but going out into the storm will give you more. It should probably be something that's very useful for a lot of things but mostly not critical to progression, kind of like how Hailite and Saltpeter sit currently.

[LadyWYT]

1 hour ago, runnybabbit said:

If you don't want to engage with the storm you can just wait for it to pass and rush out to grab the things, but going out into the storm will give you more.

I proposed something similar to this quite some time ago, though in many ways it was more just idle rambling and tinkering with the idea than anything super serious. Rather than making some special resource though, the idea was to allow players to freely scavenge current storm loot immediately after a temporal storm has passed, albeit at a much lower drop rate than if they had fought monsters during the storm. That way more cautious players could ease themselves into dealing with the storms, without the need to just jump right in and fight. Or they could otherwise just play with storms turned on for the atmosphere, without feeling like they're missing out by not fighting.

You can find the entire writeup here: 

 

1 hour ago, runnybabbit said:

It should probably be something that's very useful for a lot of things but mostly not critical to progression, kind of like how Hailite and Saltpeter sit currently.

Agreed, though I would also add that I would rather see the current special drops have more uses developed for them and see how that affects the overall balance, before worrying about adding special new drops. I think one of the main reasons that current storms feel disappointing in regards to loot, is that there's really not much you can do with the loot. Flax is more easily had via farming, and rusty gears are more easily acquired via trade or spelunking. Temporal gears and Jonas parts are the main attraction, since storms are the most efficient way to acquire these, but there's little use for the stuff outside of resetting your spawn point or building a couple of devices.