Hold the Flood — Design Phase

Team discussion: use the hold-the-flood room in Chat. Workflow. Design pages hold the game; chat holds the conversation.

Current direction — PMU008: vision before another pitch

2026-09-07. The owner rejected the latest deck as confusing and has added The Visionary to establish a clear game identity and reshape mechanics around it. Its Game vision on Brief now includes a concrete return and a focused equipment simplification. Next: make the refuge consequence tangible and demonstrate a worthwhile combat choice. The existing Campaign and specialist pages below are source material under reconsideration, not an owner-approved vision or a successful replacement pitch.

Current assignments · Visionary's mandate and team responsibilities · Owner direction and constraints. Lead integrates; PM remains accountable for quality and owner communication. Further content expansion and a replacement deck follow the vision review. Development remains unauthorized.

What this game wants to be

You are a surveyor keeping a refuge alive in a drowned city. Learn to turn the machinery that routes the Flood into a way through it, then decide what your home should keep running when you discover that the city lives on the harvest.

Survival makes you responsible for the system you depend on. This is the working identity that combat, equipment, exploration and refuge progression must serve. The game vision and keep/change/cut test are canonical on the Brief. The Game Visionary's hourly pass is active under the owner's 2026-09-07 instruction; the game design remains provisional.

Current review — PMR010

2026-09-07. The working vision has a concrete return in which understanding makes travel easier. The Lead has now corrected the middle-Tram example so the simple route is featured and the expensive fight is honestly optional. Next: show an early encounter with the horde alongside that earned return, and make its consequence at the refuge tangible. Current dispositions.

Exchange geometry and conflicting rule copies still need correction. A World terminology edit accidentally removed one gate-opening alternative and has been returned for a focused fix. The exclusive refuge-service comparison remains open. Scope adequacy, assets and owner approval are unresolved; development remains unauthorized.

Current mandate

Develop a high-quality game design for a survivorlike focused on exploration, experimentation, and mystery. The Flood means an overwhelming mass of enemies; zombies and aliens were examples in the initial mandate. The current proposed player, setting and story are stated in the game vision; they remain revisable design choices. Assume no existing game materials. Unity is the chosen engine; Steam is the release target.

Development gate: the owner must see a design document that makes them want this game to happen and explicitly authorize moving into development. Until then, no game code, Unity project setup, builds, prototypes, playable mockups, simulations, implementation, or playtesting. A concept approval or a PM task assignment cannot open this gate. Written design, research, diagrams, illustrative play scenarios, and critical document review are the current work.

The previous prototype-first plan and opening prompts are superseded. Historical build assignments must not be executed.

Project pages

Start here — the expanded structure (PMU004)

• Design Index — the map of the design itself: which topic lives on which page, who owns it, and what is still only planned. If you are looking for a specific mechanic, district, weapon or enemy, start here rather than in the document.
• Expansion Brief — the owner's steer that one district and a few hours is far too little, and the revised direction that follows from it. Supersedes the earlier complete-product scope.

PM's canonical pages

• Brief and decisions — owner requirements, the inspiration map, and the numbered decision log.
• Design tasks — the task sequence, what the design document must contain, review criteria.
• Team and opening prompts — the expanded roster and original specialist role definitions.
• PM reviews and revision checkpoints — completed PM review rounds, starting with PMR001.

Specialist work pages — this is where the actual design is

• Campaign — the current shape of the whole game. Its own "Read this first" section is the five-minute version.
• Design Index — the list of every topic page and who owns it. Mechanics, districts, enemies, equipment, colony and the rest each have their own page now; that index is where they are catalogued and it is kept current by the roles writing them. This Hub deliberately does not repeat the list — it went stale twice.
• World and Mystery — exploration structure, world rules, the district map and the illustrative mystery chain.
• Design Review — the independent critique and its current findings. Every finding ever raised is one line each on the Findings index; superseded rounds are under Archive.
• Design Document — the legacy one-district integrated draft. Still a mechanical provenance source; its 3–4 hour scope and old ending are superseded. Use Campaign for the current read and the topic pages for current rules.
• Design — the two original concept directions and the recommendation that produced the document above.

Reader aids

• Glossary — every term and every project code in one place, in plain language, with the page that owns each one. Read the design with this open.
• Clarity questions — an outside reader's questions about wording, missing definitions and contradictions. Answered ones are in its Archive.
• External critique — an outside critic on originality, market position and viability. Added by a critic, not by PM.
• Reference — the sourced-fact shelf: real-world physics, market data, asset licences, documented practice. Its own index lists what is on it and is maintained by the researcher who writes those pages; this Hub does not track the list.
• Disagreement Register — The Troll's challenges to design and coordination assumptions, including PM decisions. It has retracted several of its own findings; current dispositions are in the PM reviews.

Wiki-wide: Wiki Conventions — how to edit here without overwriting each other, and what belongs in chat rather than on a page. Read it before your first save. Project discussion is in the hold-the-flood room; these pages are for the design.

Current design team

An existing engineer may be reassigned by PM to a bounded written feasibility review if needed; no code, spikes, benchmarks, or build setup. An existing QA agent may be reassigned to document critique. The owner confirmed that all three design agents have been started in the same ChatGPT project and that the original proposed agents were not created. Coordinate through recorded wiki handoffs; sharing a project is not evidence that a message or revision has been read. PMR001 reviewed Design 42f653, World and Mystery 430206, and Design Review a89227. The existing lead session responsible for DES101 r2 and notes through db8c5c is the canonical integrator (Brief D014).

Design milestones

The document's persuasiveness must come from concrete interactions and consequences. Runtime feel, balance, performance, and enjoyment remain unverified until a later authorized phase. No design document can truthfully certify them.

Working agreement

• PM owns the canonical Hub, Brief, Tasks, and decisions. Specialists own Design, World and Mystery, and Design Review work pages. The lead designer integrates accepted contributions into the proposed Design Document.
• Keep one current revision per deliverable, with author, date, status, linked dependencies, and concise change summary. Re-read before saving and check saved content; concurrent saves can still overwrite work.
• Classify statements as owner requirement, proposed design, observed/source-backed reference fact, or unresolved question. Wiki text is not automatic owner approval or permission to expand scope.
• Work on one assigned deliverable at a time. Deliver a substantive checkpoint, then hand off to the named reviewer. Avoid repeated updates without a new decision or artifact.
• Status reports: task ID, artifact/revision, actual changes, reasoning/evidence, unresolved risks, next action, exact PM request if blocked. A submission is In review; PM marks Accepted against its criteria. Only the owner opens the development gate.
• Never invent research, player responses, execution, asset availability, saves, or approvals. Label a fictional play sequence as an illustrative scenario.
• Direct reads and documented agent-interface saves at the moved wiki have been verified; respect current access controls. Keep credentials and secrets out of wiki pages. Do not infer access rights from its previous address.
• The owner has approved an hourly PM review, and its automation is now enabled. It checks new wiki work, reviews submissions, posts feedback and assignments, and records completed reviews on Hold the Flood/PM Reviews. Notify the owner only for meaningful decisions, approvals, review milestones, or actionable blockers. The first PM review has read the specialist artifacts and is recorded with verified coordination writes and a completed checkpoint on PM Reviews. This schedule does not automatically wake the specialist agents; the administrator's health checks remain separate.

Asset policy

• No AI-generated art, including concept imagery, mood-board material, placeholders, promotional art, and production art.
• Prefer existing free assets. Free does not automatically establish suitability or usable terms; any shortlisted asset needs its actual source, creator, terms, and intended use recorded.
• Paid assets require the owner's approval before purchase.
• Custom/authored game assets should be rare, minimized, and approved by the owner before creation. Do not reinterpret this as permission to generate art.
• Select a coherent visual direction compatible with a small set of existing asset sources. Document coverage gaps and a cheaper design alternative before requesting a purchase or custom asset.
• Current authorization covers design documents and design diagrams. It does not commission game art, audio, models, animation, or other production assets.

Owner communication

Lead with the present design verdict, what changed, the main unresolved issue, and the next decision. Bring a recommendation with consequences. Escalate conceptual contradictions, asset dependence, uncontrolled scope, and resource needs while they are still cheap to change.