VN Ren'Py Where the Heart Is [S1 Rev1] [CheekyGimp]

[Smarmint]

The only ones I can think of is if he means Bella or Wanda....for some reason

I could also see someone who was all in on Bella (or possibly Elaine) now worrying that she is just a scheming traitor waiting to break the player's heart. That seems a little extreme to me until we actually learn more, but I suppose if someone was really worried about now would be the time to start panicking.

Good points. I didn't think of Wanda. I am not really invested in her character much compared to the others.

Bella, could be. I didn't think she said anything really incriminating. I for one am holding out hope that Bella isn't trying to harm the MC, but who knows. I kind of think Bella or Elaine being the guilty party is too obvious. We are supposed to suspect them, but I think the actual culprit will be more surprising. I tend to be most suspicious of Jolina, Monica, or Lily, in that order.

 

[felicemastronzo]

there is an aspect of the will that I am not sure I understand (my linguistic problem ...)

initially it seems that the money will be divided by the heirs who have met the conditions, then a third, or half or all.

but then, the second time MC talks to the lawyer, reference is made to associations for animals.

the distinction is all in whether or not you signed the agreement, correct? but why should an heir not sign? why should he favor one of the other two heirs?

and to this situation that Elaine's outlandish words refer to? (I know that on this last point no one can answer me)

 

[Maviarab]

there is an aspect of the will that I am not sure I understand (my linguistic problem ...)

initially it seems that the money will be divided by the heirs who have met the conditions, then a third, or half or all.

but then, the second time MC talks to the lawyer, reference is made to associations for animals.

the distinction is all in whether or not you signed the agreement, correct? but why should an heir not sign? why should he favor one of the other two heirs?

and to this situation that Elaine's outlandish words refer to? (I know that on this last point no one can answer me)

Not agreeing, completing the conditions, being unable to means the other two will split the full amount (or one ends up with everything).

If no one manages to complete their will conditions (potential given what an ass Donald is), then the money is sent to various (undisclosed) animal centers/shelters/organisations etc.

 

[felicemastronzo]

Not agreeing, completing the conditions, being unable to means the other two will split the full amount (or one ends up with everything).

If no one manages to complete their will conditions (potential given what an ass Donald is), then the money is sent to various (undisclosed) animal centers/shelters/organisations etc.

are you sure? I also thought so at first, but here, if I understand correctly, it seems to me to say otherwise

 

[ename144]

are you sure? I also thought so at first, but here, if I understand correctly, it seems to me to say otherwise
View attachment 1023703 View attachment 1023704

You are correct.

The game is a bit ambiguous, but the distinction seems to be that if a would-be heir fails to sign and agree to the conditions, their share is divided between the remaining heirs (or the animals, if all three refuse). If an heir accepts the terms but later defaults, their share then goes straight to the animals.

It's not clear what stops us from just signing and then instantly defaulting, however. My guess is that since the first installment of the inheritance is paid out after a year, that's when the animals come into play. Anyone who makes it a year gets 10% of their money, and then locks in the rest for either themselves or the animals. Anyone who defaults before then is treated as if they never signed the deal.

Hopefully it will be clarified some day, preferably before the final reading!

 

[Crippy]

You are correct.

The game is a bit ambiguous, but the distinction seems to be that if a would-be heir fails to sign and agree to the conditions, their share is divided between the remaining heirs (or the animals, if all three refuse). If an heir accepts the terms but later defaults, their share then goes straight to the animals.

It's not clear what stops us from just signing and then instantly defaulting, however. My guess is that since the first installment of the inheritance is paid out after a year, that's when the animals come into play. Anyone who makes it a year gets 10% of their money, and then locks in the rest for either themselves or the animals. Anyone who defaults before then is treated as if they never signed the deal.

Hopefully it will be clarified some day, preferably before the final reading!

There is one other aspect...there is a 10 year statue of limitations. Meaning, there could be a default after 10 years and there would be no forfeit because all of the money would have been paid out by that time.

 

[felicemastronzo]

You are correct.

The game is a bit ambiguous, but the distinction seems to be that if a would-be heir fails to sign and agree to the conditions, their share is divided between the remaining heirs (or the animals, if all three refuse). If an heir accepts the terms but later defaults, their share then goes straight to the animals.

It's not clear what stops us from just signing and then instantly defaulting, however. My guess is that since the first installment of the inheritance is paid out after a year, that's when the animals come into play. Anyone who makes it a year gets 10% of their money, and then locks in the rest for either themselves or the animals. Anyone who defaults before then is treated as if they never signed the deal.

Hopefully it will be clarified some day, preferably before the final reading!

that would make sense

otherwise MC would have no reason not to sign and immediately make out with Katie on Greg's table. and even the theories about the third heir trying to put MC (and / or Elaine) out of the way wouldn't make much sense

 

[Maviarab]

are you sure? I also thought so at first, but here, if I understand correctly, it seems to me to say otherwise
View attachment 1023703 View attachment 1023704

That is a separate condition upon fulfilling the conditions in order to pass the requrements to get your will. Once that has been completed and the will reading is complete and final, should you then fail to keep up with your specific and personal conditions...

 

[Avaron1974]

Sounds like they get 10% a year over 10 years so anyone wanting the full amount needs to keep up with the conditions for the full 10 years.

Basically for the MC to keep his share of the money he needs to stop all contact with Monica, Katie and Jenna for 10 years.

 

[HornyyPussy]

That is a separate condition upon fulfilling the conditions in order to pass the requrements to get your will. Once that has been completed and the will reading is complete and final, should you then fail to keep up with your specific and personal conditions...

I think i'm getting tired, when i read your post my eyes crossed in to each others sockets Damn lawyer talk....

 

[cakeny]

Sounds like they get 10% a year over 10 years so anyone wanting the full amount needs to keep up with the conditions for the full 10 years.

Basically for the MC to keep his share of the money he needs to stop all contact with Monica, Katie and Jenna for 10 years.

Then they do full will reading and it totally changes everything.

 

[Dr.Jan Itor]

@
CheekyGimp

I think you really should give the crowd what they are asking for

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[linkinn]

I'll start saying that i know when i'am wrong and i want to apologise for my comment earlier about destroying a character, it was 4am after playing a few hours of the game and i let my childish frustration comment here, we all have that moment that we don't agree with something in some games but it doesn't make it wrong to be that way. I won't share what the frustration is because is quite childish and let's leave at that.

CheekyGimp, yes sometimes i can be a monkey throwing shit and my last comment was a good example, it still means something to me but it doesn't matter, i love your game and keep doing what you are doing.

 

[CheekyGimp]

Sounds like they get 10% a year over 10 years so anyone wanting the full amount needs to keep up with the conditions for the full 10 years.

Basically for the MC to keep his share of the money he needs to stop all contact with Monica, Katie and Jenna for 10 years.

Yep, that's it.

 

[ename144]

Yep, that's it.

Thanks, Cheeky, but I think the questions was about the situations in which one of the heirs DOESN'T fulfill the conditions for the full 10 years.

In Episode 9, we are told that the estate will be divided between whichever of the three heirs fulfill their conditions:


In Episode 15, we get more details. We learn that the money will be given to adorable little animals if none of the heirs meet their conditions. But we also learn that if the MC defaults "after a year or two," the money goes to the animals not the two gold-diggers.



So the question is what stops the MC from agreeing to the terms to deny his share to the gold-diggers, then just defaulting immediately?

My guess is that the first year is the tipping point: if the MC gets the first payment, any future payments he forfeits go to the animals. If he defaults in the first year, then his share would be split by the two gold diggers (unless both of them also forfeited).

Is that correct?

 

[CheekyGimp]

Thanks, Cheeky, but I think the questions was about the situations in which one of the heirs DOESN'T fulfill the conditions for the full 10 years.

In Episode 9, we are told that the estate will be divided between whichever of the three heirs fulfill their conditions:
View attachment 1024205

In Episode 15, we get more details. We learn that the money will be given to adorable little animals if none of the heirs meet their conditions. But we also learn that if the MC defaults "after a year or two," the money goes to the animals not the two gold-diggers.

View attachment 1024232 View attachment 1024233 View attachment 1024234 View attachment 1024235 View attachment 1024236 View attachment 1024237

So the question is what stops the MC from agreeing to the terms to deny his share to the gold-diggers, then just defaulting immediately?

My guess is that the first year is the tipping point: if the MC gets the first payment, any future payments he forfeits go to the animals. If he defaults in the first year, then his share would be split by the two gold diggers (unless both of them also forfeited).

Is that correct?

On deadline day ....It will be determined which recipients have met their criteria. And the money gets allocated per successful recipient (100% if only one recipient, 50% each for two, etc....And goes to animal charities if no recipients). If MC meets his criteria, then other two recipients will never get their hands on his share. However...MC's share is spread out over annual payments. If he defaults on his conditions...payment stops. (No clawback of previously paid money would be expected)

 

[CheekyGimp]

Hey All - We're looking to expand the team. So for any budding artists, writers, programmers, hoppyists, general helpers, interns, slaves, etc. please hit me up.
Or even if you're a shit-slinger that feels they can do better than current WTHI quality...here's a chance to prove it (and you'll get paid!)

https://f95zone.to/threads/where-the-heart-is-expanding-the-team.73670/

 

[ename144]

On deadline day ....It will be determined which recipients have met their criteria. And the money gets allocated per successful recipient (100% if only one recipient, 50% each for two, etc....And goes to animal charities if no recipients). If MC meets his criteria, then other two recipients will never get their hands on his share. However...MC's share is spread out over annual payments. If he defaults on his conditions...payment stops. (No clawback of previously paid money would be expected)

I get that, but is "deadline day" the final will reading, or the 1 year mark?

 

[CheekyGimp]

I get that, but is "deadline day" the final will reading, or the 1 year mark?

Will reading! ...Sort of....Cannot really give any more details as there's another condition that may....(Pen got swiped out of my hand before I give away too much)

 

[ename144]

Will reading! ...Sort of....Cannot really give any more details as there's another condition that may....(Pen got swiped out of my hand before I give away too much)

Thanks for the info, it clarifies a few things.

For example, I can now safely say the MC really should have hired his own lawyer. There are clearly important questions he doesn't realize he should be asking.