Twilight: 2000 d20 Supplement

[kato13]

Snake Eyes 06-10-2003, 05:33 AM Howdy folks. I've been mostly out of the loop in terms of online discussion of Twilight: 2000 since right around the time the first reprints arrived in my mailbox back earlier in the spring. I was getting caught up over the weekend, both here and elsewhere -- and this little nugget (http://www.travellerrpg.com/cgi-bin/...;f=29;t=000018) over on the CotI boards caught my eye.


When I saw that Twilight: 2000 was going d20, my immediate response was to cry "BLASPHEMY!" gouge out my eyes, dip my hard drive in Lysol, and spend the next 48 hours under my bed rocking back and forth curled up in the fetal postion, clutching my shotgun, drooling and mumbling to myself like a maniac.


When I came to my senses late this afternoon, I did some more digging around and discovered this call for authors (http://www.travellerrpg.com/authorcall.html) elsewhere on the TravellerRPG site.


To summarize: Twilight: 2000 is being reprinted as an "alternate universe" supplement to T20, Martin J. Dougherty's licensed d20 conversion of GDW's Traveller. From what I understand, T20 is a quality item that has been well-received by the Traveller community as a whole. They intend to preserve the original timeline, as well as propose two new ones.


This will evidently be more background and campaign info than actual d20 game mechanics, so it could be worth taking a look at. They are also doing one for 2300AD. Oh, and this one is official, unlike the one that Sans-Pariel dude tried getting away with a while back.


Anyway, I've given it some thought, and worked through the initial shock and denial. I can now accept the inevitability that the only way to get a game supplement published these days is to coat it with a thin d20 taint. If swearing allegience, however loose, to the Anti-Christ of Gaming (http://www.wizards.com) is what it takes for new Twilight: 2000 material to see the light of day, then so be it. For what it's worth, I had a long conversation with an associate at Wizards who did a pretty good job of convincing me that d20 Modern might actually be a workable system -- but that was back around Labor Day, and I was howling drunk.


I don't see where this has come up on this board before, and I don't think I've seen it anywhere on any of the five or six Yahoo! groups for Twilight: 2000 stuff that I'm subscribed to, either. If this has already been beaten to death, please accept my humble apologies and pardon my waste of bandwidth. This seems like potentially much huger news than the reprints were.


Any opinions?

********************

TiggerCCW UK 06-11-2003, 04:48 AM Although I have had a quick look at D20 modern I am by no way an expert on it. However, my main reason for thinking that a D20 system would be a good thing is that it would bring more players to the game and maybe mean we could get some new material published. I know that the group that I play with are very into the D20 system and that it took me a lot of coaxing to bring them round to the idea of Twilight. If it had been D20 too that would have been a lot easier. Also, if it comes out in D20 it'll maybe stop them nagging me to convert the game myself

********************

Hawkwood 06-11-2003, 10:22 AM I'm not a real fan of the d20 system. However, I would like to see T2K updated with more realistic skill packages, advancement orders and weapons.


NT

********************

ed 06-12-2003, 11:50 AM i can't wait for evilmike to return and render an opinion on this development...


ed

********************

Aaron 06-21-2003, 08:08 PM WHO SAID THAT...


Nobody.....


I'll bet it was the freaking fairy godmother....


Unless somebody speaks up I will PT you all until you die!!!!



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Well it may not be the best thing to come along but I think d20 is going to be with us for awhile. I guess to find the positive side of things it might bring in new players and new material. If the new material and players materialize it shouldn't be too hard to convert both to the original

********************

Grimace 06-22-2003, 03:09 PM D20 Twilight....AAAAuuuuugh!


Twilight 2000 has a specific feel, and D20 (as the system exists) will NOT carry on that feel. Now some of the books like D20 modern may be decent for conversions or ideas, but Twilight should NEVER fall into the clutches of the D20 system that so permeates the roleplaying society nowadays.

********************

Ed the Coastie 06-26-2003, 10:17 PM As much as I like T2K, I have more or less resigned myself to the idea that I may need to play it under the d20 system. While all of my current group possess at least basic familiarity with d20 (thanks to a currently-running D&D game), and most of them would be more than happy to try a different setting, I know that many of them would be uncomfortable learning a different rule set.


Still, it's not all THAT bad. After all, d20 is a pretty generic system...so it should be fairly easy to convert an adventure written for one d20 game setting into a cross-genre romp that will throw the PCs for a MAJOR loop. I had a GM in college who converted some D&D and AD&D adventures ("The Isle of Dread", "Castle Amber", and "Expedition to the Barrier Peaks") into T2K compatability...and he would have had to have done it the hard way, since this in the days before Cadillacs & Dinosaurs and Dark Conspiracy, much less d20.


So yeah, I can see the d20 Modern system being used to drive a T2K setting. I don't necessarily LIKE it; for all of my cross-genre adventures, I am something of a purist when it comes to the rule systems. But for our hobby to grow, to expand, we need to bring in new blood...and the d20 system will allow that.


Besides, conversion works both ways; we can always later wean the new players away from the d20 version as we convert the new material back to the original T2K system that we all know and love. *wicked grin*

********************

ed 06-28-2003, 09:12 AM man, how is it that evilmike hasn't commented on this thread yet? guess he's sleeping off a hangover or something...


anyway, ed the coastie quoth: "d20 is a pretty generic system"


frankly, i disagree. d20 has an increase in power scale as a character progresses from level 1-20. in twilight, you get shot by someone who's really good, you're likely to die. in d20, even if you use the vitality/wound points system, that just won't happen, and absolutely won't if they use the standard HP system.


mechanics should flow from the material, not vice versa, which is what i feel a d20 twilight game would be.


honestly, i can't help feeling that GURPS is much better suited to twilight than d20.


ed

********************

Ed the Coastie 06-28-2003, 12:00 PM Arrgghh...I have been quoted out of context!


Or maybe I just misspoke myself (always a possibility).


I have no intention of running a full-length T2K campaign under d20, for the very reason that ed outlined...it would quickly become unrealistic. Rather, I plan on using the d20 system to introduce the T2K setting...then, if there is sufficient interest, switch the campaign over to either the T2K rule system or the GURPS rules. Pretty much everything I have winds up converted into GURPS anyway, so that wouldn't be too hard.


Actually, though, I may not need to bother...since my last posting on this thread, I did a quick survey of my gaming group and enough of them are interested in T2K that I may run a campaign.

********************

QLI/RPGRealms 06-28-2003, 06:42 PM Originally posted by ed

frankly, i disagree. d20 has an increase in power scale as a character progresses from level 1-20. in twilight, you get shot by someone who's really good, you're likely to die. in d20, even if you use the vitality/wound points system, that just won't happen, and absolutely won't if they use the standard HP system.


Which is why we are using the T20 rules for combat. You get shot, you likely die...


Note that Twilight will be written using T20 not the base d20 System rules or the d20 Modern rules.


Hunter

QLI/RPGRealms

http://www.TravellerRPG.com

********************

ed 06-29-2003, 07:10 AM sorry about that, gentlemen; my bad.


ed

********************