Mongoose Publishing and Twilight 2000

[Chris]

Just read through the "State of the Mongoose 2010" post from their forums.
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/forum.php

They are talking about publishing 2300AD and Twilight 2000 (updated to a new timeline) using their version of the Traveller system. Thought you'd like to know!

Relevant QuoteGoing Back in Time – 2300AD
At the time of writing this, we have just signed a new licence for 2300AD (once called Traveller 2300AD), the science fiction RPG where man is just reaching the nearby stars for the first time and finding his way about the galaxy. This is a much grittier setting than Traveller/The Third Imperium, with heavy cyberpunk and exploration elements.

The lead writer on this project is Colin Dunn, a man who knows the setting inside out and is primarily responsible for motivating us to get the licence!

The new game will build on the core Traveller rulebook, as usual for our Traveller-based games, with suitable additions and tweaks in its own core book. Look for this one to be released around the third quarter of 2011, along with a healthy supporting run of supplements and sourcebooks. The licence will run concurrently with Traveller itself, so there are a great many years for 2300AD to run.

We have also started to discuss the return of Twilight 2000 (likely with another date in mind for it, for obvious reasons), based on a completely different Third World War. However, this is unlikely to appear in 2011, so check back in a year’s time!

Later,
Chris

[HorseSoldier]

Colin Dunn was the writer of the so-so 2320AD update of 2300AD for one of the d20 systems out there. Given how well he 'fixed' the Kafer War in 2320, I can only hope he won't be involved in a T2K update.

[pmulcahy11b]

Maybe people will have a use for all those "not available in the Twilight 2000 timeline" items on my site.

[Fusilier]

Not again....

[Grimace]

Yep, again...and again....and again. :wall:

[Bullet Magnet]

Colin Dunn was the writer of the so-so 2320AD update of 2300AD for one of the d20 systems out there. Given how well he 'fixed' the Kafer War in 2320, I can only hope he won't be involved in a T2K update.

So, what was the "fix"? I've been searching online for a while now and can't find a clear answer.

[Tegyrius]

Not again....

You're not likely to get yet another re-hash of the Cold War going hot. Learn to live with it. Or write your own.

- C.

[kato13]

You're not likely to get yet another re-hash of the Cold War going hot. Learn to live with it. Or write your own.

- C.

Or simply ignore what you don't like, understanding that tastes differ amongst reasonable people.

[Raellus]

You're not likely to get yet another re-hash of the Cold War going hot. Learn to live with it. Or write your own.


I don't like where this is going. We don't need tension and acrimony between us old school fans (or "derelicts" if you prefer) and the Young Turks.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Tegyrius is right however and while his comment was short on words it shouldn't necessarily be taken that he was getting short with other people.
It's far too easy to interpret the wrong tone in something that someone writes as opposed to hearing/seeing them speak and thus is becomes far too easy to read the wrong intent in someones comments.

[Raellus]

Tegyrius is right however and while his comment was short on words it shouldn't necessarily be taken that he was getting short with other people.
It's far too easy to interpret the wrong tone in something that someone writes as opposed to hearing/seeing them speak and thus is becomes far too easy to read the wrong intent in someones comments.

You're right and your points (and Tegyrius') are well taken. The tone of his post, however, was pretty clear. I don't want this to turn into sniping, especially given the posts surrounding the recent demise of 93 Games Studios and the reliscense. For my part, I will choose the high road.

[Tegyrius]

I don't like where this is going. We don't need tension and acrimony between us old school fans (or "derelicts" if you prefer) and the Young Turks.
Something I don't think many members of this forum have ever acknowledged or understood is that most of the so-called Young Turks started out as, and remain, fans of GDW's original game. Keith and the freelance talent he assembled under 93GS' banner were, without any exception of which I'm aware, long-time players or GMs of the first and second editions. I've been playing since I picked up the boxed set sometime in the late eighties. Did I miss the meeting where someone decided that a DD-214 with a 1991 or prior ETS date was a requirement for valid Twilight: 2000 fandom?

Raellus, I think you took my tone exactly as intended. I spent the last four and a half years trying to do my best by the fan base represented here and I'm tired of this forum's members tacitly condoning slams at my work with your (collective) silence. You (again, collective) have been doing it since a certain specific member began issuing unfounded personal attacks and threats of violence against me and Keith. It ceased being tolerable a long time ago. I don't hold any illusions about this community finding my input valuable, but it would be nice to be able to continue reading and occasionally posting here without seeing yet another cheap shot.

SSC, I also think you took my message exactly as intended. I do not believe another treatment of the Cold War would be commercially viable in today's gaming industry. I felt that way when we started planning 2013 in mid-2006 and I stand by that viewpoint, even if I am less than fully satisfied with the final implementation of the 2013 timeline. A "classic" timeline is unlikely to appeal to many gamers outside the remaining Twilight: 2000 fan base. If any established publishing company gets the license, I expect their direction will be another attempted modernization of the property in order to play on contemporary fears and make it more relevant to an audience larger than the ex-GDW fan base. The only way anyone's going to update the Cold War is if a team of fans gets the license themselves and proceeds to publish for love rather than profit. Even if that happens, they're going to be competing with the vast body of fan-written work that many people (chief among them this forum's more ardent contributors) have put out since GDW shut down. What's more, any such publisher's target audience will judge their new products by the standards those fans have set, perhaps even moreso than against GDW's original material.

- C.

[Legbreaker]

I believe there's two equally valid ways of approaching yet another version of T2K.
The first is to leave the timeline basically the same as GDW had it - world political relations fell apart in the late 80s and 90s before turning nuclear in late 1997.
The other is to completely rewrite everything with a point of diversion in 2010 (or thereabouts) and set the game about 10-20 years in the future. Obviously this wouldn't actually be Twilight:2000 anymore, but the general feel would be roughly the same (provided the background was written that way).

[Tegyrius]

This. You can see where Leg's used to saying what he means rather than worrying about getting paid by the word.

- C.

[Panther Al]

I believe there's two equally valid ways of approaching yet another version of T2K.
The first is to leave the timeline basically the same as GDW had it - world political relations fell apart in the late 80s and 90s before turning nuclear in late 1997.
The other is to completely rewrite everything with a point of diversion in 2010 (or thereabouts) and set the game about 10-20 years in the future. Obviously this wouldn't actually be Twilight:2000 anymore, but the general feel would be roughly the same (provided the background was written that way).

I totally agree with the second point being the best of the two in my mind. A 2008 POD is actually quite workable considering you had a US election coupled with a war between russia and a nominal US ally. While I doub't the end result would change a more active US role would poison relations between east and west and could with the right spin slowly lead to a new cold war (military spending to "cure" the recession?).

[Legbreaker]

I believe Russia is making noises at the moment about the European missile shield. I don't know any details but that could be a viable point of conflict.
We've also got the current hostility from North Korea which potentially could lead to some ugliness. I know it's a bit of a stretch (but it is a game afterall) but the north, supported by China and perhaps Russia could invade the south. Given a serious breakdown in western intelligence estimates the north could be given a greater strategic strength than they do IRL and cause a second Korean War which might expand to other regions.
Who knows, Iran might get twitchy and attack the western forces in Afganistan while Iraq rises up as well. We might even see Israel attacked by it's neighbours (again!) and English football fans could go on a rampage across France...

[pmulcahy11b]

At the risk of being heretical...

It might be more viable to have a more Merc 2000 approach, but with regular military troops instead of being focused completely on mercenaries. The game could therefore flow with the real-world news.

[Legbreaker]

I was just thinking a Merc:2000 approach might work better than a total rewrite.

[Snake Eyes]

Why does timeline matter anyway?

[Legbreaker]

That's like asking what's so important about history!
A properly written timeline is a vital foundation for a good game world. If you don't know how the world came to be the way it is, how can it grow and be believable?
Sure the players might not need to know the details, but the GM sure as hell does!

[Tegyrius]

And unless the PCs are going to be transplanted into a world from another reality, they should at least have some personal knowledge of the events that occurred within their own lifetimes. In any setting that includes broadcast communication or reliable and affordable long-distance travel, anyway. Which means the players need to have access to that level of information so they can align their characters' histories (and goals) with the world.

- C.

[pmulcahy11b]

...and English football fans could go on a rampage across France...

The War of the Soccer Hooligans...

Didn't Honduras and El Salvador fight a war over the outcome of a soccer game in the 1960s?

[Raellus]

Something I don't think many members of this forum have ever acknowledged or understood is that most of the so-called Young Turks started out as, and remain, fans of GDW's original game. Keith and the freelance talent he assembled under 93GS' banner were, without any exception of which I'm aware, long-time players or GMs of the first and second editions. I've been playing since I picked up the boxed set sometime in the late eighties. Did I miss the meeting where someone decided that a DD-214 with a 1991 or prior ETS date was a requirement for valid Twilight: 2000 fandom?

No, not at all. My Young Turks label was not meant as an insult at all. By the same token, not all of us "old school T2K'ers" are reactionaries or dinosaurs stuck back in the Cold War, which I felt your post implied.

The game could definitely use a "re-imagining" for the new milenium. I agree whole-heartedly. You and the other 93GS folks put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears into doing just that. For that I must once again commend you. I sympathise with you and the rest of the 93GS team. You've taken a lot of grief here and elsewhere (though, I am not aware of the threats to which you allude) and that's not cool. For my part, I've always tried to keep my criticism of T2013 fair, level headed, constructive, and impersonal. I wasn't aware that it was such a labor of love until quite recently, when the lease expired. Up until that point, I thought that a larger, more "corporate" entity was responsible for the development of T2013.

That said, I was not a fan of T2103. I think it's OK to say that. Honestly, I was turned off right from the beginning when the game was under development and 93GS was soliciting fan/guest contributor input, but limiting said input exclusively to that provided by folks who could prove former military service and/or prior RPG-writing experience. Although I understand that ya'll didn't want unsolicited material from well intentioned teenaged munchkins, wannabe, chairborne rangers, or miopic, hardcore T2K fanboys, to me it smacked of elitism. Especially since a lot of folks in the T2K community- not all of whom are ex-military- have been spending years creating their own websites, databases, fan fiction, etc. It just seemed like 93GS was overlooking such a rich vein of amazing fan-created material, much of which could be easily tweaked to fit into the T2013 vision, to go it alone. 93GS was also writing off a good portion of a built-in market by not being more receptive to this community. I believe that it was stated several times by 93GS folks that T2K had to be updated for a couple of new generations of PnP gamers who knew little, and could care less, about the Cold War milieu. That's fine, but that's not to say that us folks who grew up during the Cold War (i.e. the 50s-80s) don't have valuable input or want a new, updated setting for the basic game concept.

When the T2013 alternate future came out, I was not impressed and a lot of other original T2K fans felt the same. Our argument wasn't "This isn't a retread of the original 1983 version so it's not cool!" but that, based on current geopolitics and recent military history, the T2103 campaign backstory did not ring true. Other much more viable hotspots were suggested by members of this forum and others as being possible tinderboxes for a "new" WWIII scenario: East Asia (Korea-China-Russia-Japan-U.S.) and the Middle East (Iran, Israel, Iraq, U.S.) were then, and still are, likely candidates. That input too was ignored. Once again, the public response from 93GS to "old school" fan reaction smacked of elitism. The message some of us received was, "We don't care what you bitter T2K fans think; this is our baby and this is the way we're going to do it. If you don't like it, don't buy it." Fine. It's your creation, you're in charge. But, I'm not sure it's fair to get upset when some people use this public forum to express their dislike for the end product.

So yeah, some of us old-schoolers also have a bad taste in our mouth and not because T2013 wasn't just a simple update of the original T2K v1.0. Through it all, I've tried my best to be cordial and to couch my constructive criticism with praise for the T2013 team's hard work. I have no beef with any of you 93GS guys. I was genuinely sad to hear that the plug was being pulled on your version. I thought that some of the stuff you guys was putting out was pretty darn cool. I am sorry that some folks here got nasty in their criticism of your product. That was uncalled for. If the main offender is who I think it is, he was banned from this forum for similar behavior towards other forum members. I just sort of resent the implication that us orginal T2K apologists are just a bunch of old, narrow minded, bitter, reactionary neysayers who take great pleasure in cutting down 93GS and T2013. For the most part, I really don't think that is the case at all.

[Tegyrius]

Raellus, you're right. I'm being excessively reactionary (and threadjacking) here. Over to PM.

- C.

[waiting4something]

I don't see the big deal with the timeline, people can make up whatever story they want. There is nothing happening in today's world that is as scary/cool as the cold war going hot. Everything is to flexible now and not as commited. I personally found the 2013 weapons sources books way cooler anyway. If I role played, I would just use source books and make up my own stories. I don't see why everyone hated the 2013 timeline they are made to be altered away.

[Targan]

I spent the last four and a half years trying to do my best by the fan base represented here and I'm tired of this forum's members tacitly condoning slams at my work with your (collective) silence. You (again, collective) have been doing it since a certain specific member began issuing unfounded personal attacks and threats of violence against me and Keith. It ceased being tolerable a long time ago. I don't hold any illusions about this community finding my input valuable, but it would be nice to be able to continue reading and occasionally posting here without seeing yet another cheap shot.

Woah, wait just a second there big fella. I am a founding member of this forum and in the past I've been a strong contributor. I and several other prominent members of this forum have been active on the 93 Games Studio Twilight forums and have actively encouraged interaction between members of the two forums. I think you are being way harsh on those members of this forum who are fans of the work that you, Keith and the other 2013 contributors have done. I own a hardcopy of the T:2013 rules and I think they are excellent. I've done my best to smooth over conflicts between members of the two forums, both in general thread posts and by PM.

I don't recall reading any threats of violence made on this forum towards you or any other members of the T:2013 design team. I certainly would have moved to put a stop to it if I had. Were those threats made in PMs? I have to say that you've hurt my feelings a little Clayton, suggesting that I've tacitly supported criticism of your work through my "silence". I certainly don't see things that way at all.

I've supported and applauded your work many times on this forum. Sure, I don't loudly leap to the defence of T:2013 when it is criticised here but that is mainly because I am waaaaay past the point where I want to get into flame wars with other forum members. I was a bit of a troublemaker in the distant past and I want things to stay nice and calm on this forum nowdays. If others want to criticise others' works that is their business. As moderator I try to keep things civil and as a forum member I choose not to get into arguments that create bad vibes and nothing more.

Clay, I think you may have forgotten along the way that you have friends and admirers here.

[Eddie]

I don't recall reading any threats of violence made on this forum towards you or any other members of the T:2013 design team. I certainly would have moved to put a stop to it if I had. Were those threats made in PMs? I have to say that you've hurt my feelings a little Clayton, suggesting that I've tacitly supported criticism of your work through my "silence". I certainly don't see things that way at all.

He's referring to Law and his thinly veiled and sometimes unveiled threats. For instance, Law's Bigger Man thread from a few years ago. I remember it because I took him up on his offer and met him for lunch after I redeployed from Iraq.

[General Pain]

Why does timeline matter anyway?

I've never used and never will use anyone's but myown and/or the GMs take on timeline....I basically think it's cool that people write this and that and I enjoy tegerious' work and hope you guys continue...

For god's sake no more "this is canon"-discusions-----let's have more that's not a cannon this is a cannon ;)

[helbent4]

I do not believe another treatment of the Cold War would be commercially viable in today's gaming industry.


Tegyrus,

I understand we don't want to get into sniping over T2013, and this is not meant as a flame.

Call of Duty: Black Ops is actually set during the Cold War. It's certainly not a Cold War going hot, but it's success is proof positive that this time period and the conflicts that arose from it can and does bear enormous fruit in terms of commerce. In simple terms, someone is making quite a buck off the Cold War.

Granted, you can very easily argue Black Ops is not T2K (the difference being several decades, a hot war and an established computer game franchise) and there is no way to piggy-back off that success in terms of gamer cross-over. That isn't my point. Professional game designers may never want to revisit T2K's Cold-War based background. Still, maybe someone should because all kinds of people really do seem to like it or at least aren't turned off by it.

Tony

[Eddie]

Call of Duty: Black Ops is actually set during the Cold War. It's certainly not a Cold War going hot, but it's success is proof positive that this time period and the conflicts that arose from it can and does bear enormous fruit in terms of commerce. In simple terms, someone is making quite a buck off the Cold War.

Granted, you can very easily argue Black Ops is not T2K (the difference being several decades, a hot war and an established computer game franchise) and there is no way to piggy-back off that success in terms of gamer cross-over. That isn't my point. Professional game designers may never want to revisit T2K's Cold-War based background. Still, maybe someone should because all kinds of people really do seem to like it or at least aren't turned off by it.


I'd also be willing to wager that most purchasers are like my two teenage sons...skipping the story to get to the shooting or bypassing it altogether with the multiplayer, online combat.

[pmulcahy11b]

The problem with T2K as an MMO is that it would inevitably focus on the firefights -- and those are just a small amount of any proper T2K game. The same thing happened with the T2K computer game.

[LBraden]

Dare I say it, but I have to agree to that, too many games now are just "skip, skip, skip, SHOOT, duck, shoot, call in artillery, skip, skip, skip, shoot, artillery strike here, shoot, skip - credits"

I have to say that I lost all hope in games like that years ago, yet I have to admit that COD 4 Modern Warfare storyline, and the whole USMC surviving to see the nuclear fallout just before dieing, was one HELL of a good bit of gaming.

Now, lets look at Star Trek Online, a nice MMO that has been squeezed to "tie up" a lot of idionims to the older Trek series (seriously, the amount of "hang on, that's from TOS", is silly) has gotten to the point of just skipping everything and shooting, only since they got some of the guys who made Fallout 1 and 2 involved, it has gotten more "read the story" and more "diplomatic approach" than the old "go here, blow this up, shoot this guy, come home" that most "gamers" want today.

Hell, I prefer games with good stories and gameplay, but I NEVER like it when they sacrifice the story for just out and out shooting fest.

[helbent4]

I'd also be willing to wager that most purchasers are like my two teenage sons...skipping the story to get to the shooting or bypassing it altogether with the multiplayer, online combat.

Eddie,

Well sure, like I said there's not necessarily a way to piggy-back off COD:BO's success due to the divergence of that segment of the market from ours. That would be too much to hope for.

Although, even if only 1% or less of the people who bought COD:BO (7 million as of the 10th of November) care about or at least paid attention to the Cold War background then that's hundreds of thousands of gamers right there, along with the 99% for whom it wasn't a turn-off right there. So hey, maybe some of those players are also RPgamers like us, who knows?

Again, that's not my point. (That is, I'm not seriously proposing that there will be any appreciable cross-over; the preceding was more of a thought-experiment than a serious proposition.)

My point is that it's somehow become an article of faith that the Cold War is market poison for gaming. I don't see why that's the case, although I admit I don't have any particular insight into our own slice of the hobby. I can only extrapolate from the world at large, and I just don't believe that most RPgamers are so fundamentally different from other gamers that there's no useful correlations to be drawn!

Personally, getting back to the topic at hand, if Mongoose or someone else gets the T2K licence and changes everything that would be fine, it's an exploration of the game and with tongue-in-cheek I agree that sometimes you have to burn down the ville in order to save it. That said, there's no reason that some kind of sourcebook on the original Cold War background still couldn't be done.

Now that we're on-topic, allow me to get off topic and ask how your interaction with Law went? We generally got along well most of the time in the one game we were in, although we had our differences. PM me if you don't feel like clogging up the thread more.

Tony

[Eddie]

Although, even if only 1% or less of the people who bought COD:BO (7 million as of the 10th of November) care about or at least paid attention to the Cold War background then that's hundreds of thousands of gamers right there,

Actually, that's 70,000 at 1%.

So hey, maybe some of those players are also RPgamers like us, who knows?

Undoubtedly some of them are RPers as well. That is not my point...

Again, that's not my point. (That is, I'm not seriously proposing that there will be any appreciable cross-over; the preceding was more of a thought-experiment than a serious proposition.)

And my point is that it's like comparing oranges to orange juice. They're made out of the same stuff (story) but you choose one because you want to chew the meat, and the other because you want the vitamins and refreshment quickly.

My point is that it's somehow become an article of faith that the Cold War is market poison for gaming.

I never said it was poison, just not financially smart to choose that. There is a smaller and smaller percentage of us that "haven't grown up yet" that remember the Cold War, much less care about it. A game company can appeal to a much larger client base and gain some emotional investment by setting it in a time period that is more contemporary or widespread. You can't blame a company for using that logic to try and make money.

and I don't see why that's the case, although I admit I don't have any particular insight into our own slice of the hobby. I can only extrapolate from the world at large, and I just don't believe that most RPgamers are so fundamentally different from other gamers that there's no useful correlations to be drawn!

Useful correlations. Exactly my point. In lieu of hard statistics, of which I'm almost positive none exist, look at the majority of gamers out there and take admittedly-anecdotal evidence of what they do. Most people skip the story in video games for the instant visual and auditory pleasure and the emotional pleasure of talking smack to your buddies about how you killed them with a knife while they were wielding an M134 minigun in both hands with an invisible-cloaking-antigravity-generator.

YMMV, but mine has been pretty much as written here.

[Chris]

I meant to get back to the thread earlier, but busy, busy weekend.

From what Mongoose wrote, 2300AD and Twilight would be sourcebooks for their new Traveller system. I haven't even seen a copy of the new Trav locally. Has anyone read it and do you think the system is a good take for Twilight?

Thanks,
Chris

[LBraden]

There was a PC game about 10 yrs ago now, that had an interesting comment in the Manual, first line went

"Thank you for being one of the 10% of people who buy our game and read the manual, and not be like the other 90% who clog up our forums asking for advice that we give here"

[Adm.Lee]

I meant to get back to the thread earlier, but busy, busy weekend.

From what Mongoose wrote, 2300AD and Twilight would be sourcebooks for their new Traveller system. I haven't even seen a copy of the new Trav locally. Has anyone read it and do you think the system is a good take for Twilight?

I have it and I've read it, but I haven't done a lot of playing with it.

It's very similar to Classic Traveller:
- nearly all die rolls are 2d6, beat a 7 with modifiers, of course.
- semi-random lifepath character generation. That is, you pick a career and roll to see how you do, and what skills and goodies you pick up. With very few adjustments, this could be made to fit the T2k background.

I don't feel confident to comment on how the combat works, the few times I tried playing with it, the GM was house-ruling a lot of it. Reading through it, it seemed to cover a lot of similar ground. It's supposed to be somewhat deadly, so that's somewhat a plus in T2k.

I'm intrigued by the concept, and wouldn't mind messing with it, if I had a group. To be honest, the 2300AD setting applied to this ruleset appeals to me more than T2k.

[Legbreaker]

Hmmm, I'm not too keen on the 2D6 mechanics. Not really enough variation for my liking.

[helbent4]

Actually, that's 70,000 at 1%.



Eddie,

Ha, yep, MATH FAIL! :o

Still, tens of thousands in one day alone are nothing to sneeze at. That's taking the number at 1%, but it's without a doubt much higher. Reviewers have given their thumb's up to the Cold War campaign, which tends to prove my point that the Cold War scenario turns people off or isn't a significant drag on sales or interest.

Two things which are different can still be enough to draw useful comparisons, which is sometimes all we can do in our imperfect world. (You can also "slice the pie" narrow enough to exclude any comparison you don't agree with, to mangle a business metaphor to suit my purposes.) Gamers are gamers, even if there is no cross-over. The larger game world seems to disagree with you that a background that makes use of the Cold War is not financially smart, and there it is.

On the topic of Mongoose Traveller, I've bought it and had a look, it's basically a cleaned-up version of Classic Traveller without being on steroids (MegaTraveller). I'm in agreement that the rules (especially combat) don't seem crunchy enough to do T2K justice, but I don't have access to Mercenary at this time. There could also be a lot more chrome added in the sourcebook, and at least you're not stuck in one career!

Tony

[Eddie]

Still, tens of thousands in one day alone are nothing to sneeze at. That's taking the number at 1%, but it's without a doubt much higher. Reviewers have given their thumb's up to the Cold War campaign, which tends to prove my point that the Cold War scenario turns people off or isn't a significant drag on sales or interest.

I haven't read any reviews, but I work around 18-42 year old military men every day. The office talk hasn't been that great about COD:BO. I'm running into the "don't waste your money" line quite frequently. It may or may not, but like I said, I haven't seen any hard statistics one way or the other.

I know that personally, I don't listen to formal reviewers or critics nine times out of ten. My tastes are usually pretty diametrically opposed to the mainstream. I'll go for informal reviewers on the web and forums more times than not. I have no interest in COD:BO though, so I haven't put forth the effort for it.

Two things which are different can still be enough to draw useful comparisons, which is sometimes all we can do in our imperfect world.

I didn't say apples to oranges. I said oranges to orange juice. Two versions of the same fruit. I used it as an analogy for pen and paper communal storytelling to individual video gaming storytelling.

Gamers are gamers, and at least there is cross-over.

Not necessarily. The only video games I play are UFO: Extraterrestrials because X-Com was the greatest game I ever played and Command and Conquer.

The larger game world seems to disagree with you that a background that makes use of the Cold War is not financially smart, and there it is.

This is a misleading statement. Of the seven million people you quoted that bought the game, how many of them paid attention to the story vice how many skipped the story parts to get to the shooting? Then we delve into the ones who paid attention to the story, how many cared? How many knew what the Cold War was? I'd wager the kids in the US public education system have no clue that the Iron Curtain wasn't a cover band of Iron Maiden. Because remember, video games aren't given the same social stigma that D&D and other role-playing games are; jocks, band geeks, gamer nerds, alpha male boneheads, O. G. gangsta rap stars, and 45-year-old virgins all talk about and play video games to be cool. You don't get the same response when you talk about Magic Missiles or your latest dungeon crawl in most social circles.

We can agree to disagree, I'm sure.

Tony[/QUOTE]

[Raellus]

I think it might be fun to create T2K characters with the Mongoose Traveller system. On the other hand, if you're shooting for a particular type of character, it might be very frustrating. In particular, it might be a lot harder to roll up SF-type characters. IMHO, that might not be such a bad thing.

I don't think the Traveller combat system is going to work very well for T2K.

I wish there could be a hybrid- The original T2K timeline (v1.0, of course); the T2013 Relfex combat system (with some slight mods), and the Traveller char-gen system.

[helbent4]

This is a misleading statement.

We can agree to disagree, I'm sure.


Eddie,

As a point of fact, we may be coming from different points of view when it comes to education, as I can only say what I know locally (Vancouver BC). I've run post-apoc RPGs that use a Cold War background (WWIII involving the Soviet Union; in this case, The Morrow Project). The younger players (who are also not hardcore gamers) in their teens and twenties had learned about it school and were interested in the same way presumably we were about historical conflicts and periods we didn't live through, either. I mean, I was never around for WWII nor to any great extent the American-Vietnamese war but that didn't compromise my enjoyment RPGs and wargames based on these themes!

Agreed, if we don't like it, we can always draw the line to exclude any fact or comparison that doesn't fit our preferences. At this point, I think we're certainly agreeing to disagree. :cool:


Tony

[helbent4]

I wish there could be a hybrid- The original T2K timeline (v1.0, of course); the T2013 Relfex combat system (with some slight mods), and the Traveller char-gen system.

Rae,

You and me both, obviously.

I'll have a look at M:T Mercenary when I can, see if the character generation allows for more flexibility. Presumably any T2K sourcebooks might add detail as well. A 2d6-based system seems to conform to a gaming industry belief that simplicity and ease of play are paramount, a view that has a lot to recommend it even if I don't personally agree.

Tony

[Eddie]

As a point of fact, we may be coming from different points of view when it comes to education, as I can only say what I know locally (Vancouver BC).

I've had more than my share of spats with people like Leg and others on here for slights or perceived slights to my country, and God knows I'm proud to be an American; but I absolutely despise our public education system. I was lucky and overcame the hurdle, but since my three kids got into school, I've been nothing but disappointed. I know Webstral is a teacher, and I hope he does his best to fight the system, but I firmly believe it's broken in this nation. I give kudos to nations that have broken the code and managed to actually educate their people.

I've run post-apoc RPGs that use a Cold War background (WWIII involving the Soviet Union; in this case, The Morrow Project).

Morrow is kind of a special case though. Just the premise of cryogenic stasis in the boltholes lends a certain fantastical aspect to it that appeals across a broad range. Big fan of Morrow here...

The younger players (who are also not hardcore gamers) in their teens and twenties had learned about it school and were interested in the same way presumably we were about historical conflicts and periods we didn't live through, either. I mean, I was never around for WWII nor to any great extent the American-Vietnamese war but that didn't compromise my enjoyment RPGs and wargames on these themes!

Please bear in mind that this has progressed past "I'm proving my point, I'm countering your point" and has gone into simple conversation that presumably could move to PM and no interest. However, the fact that we're discussing the post-apoc/Cold War/gaming industry, I feel warrants staying open in this thread.

That said, they did turn me off from many of those games. Granted, some GMs really ran great games, but being locked into historical certainties of knowing what really happened or what was going to happen if the game didn't diverge from reality really irked me. That's part of why I like futuristic/post-apoc games so much, I think. It's not written and there isn't a historical fact-check book to bounce my adventures off of. I've never been accused of following the mainstream in any of my hobbies though...

[Snake Eyes]

I didn't even know CoD: Black Ops was set in the Cold War until I actually installed it and started playing through the first single-player scenario. I actually found it kind of confusing and thought it might be some trippy time-travel/flashback hoax, like an old episode of Mission:Impossible.

What that "proves" to me is not so much that there is some huge untapped market for Cold War era pen & paper tabletop roleplaying games as it does that they could have set the latest game in the CoD franchise during the War of 1812 and it still would have sold a million copies. I don't think any other causal linkage has been established.

I really do think that if the part of the RPG industry can be called mainstream as a whole thought there was some unfilled cold-war-gone-hot-whoops-gritty-simulationist-apocalypse niche to be exploited they'd be filling it.

With d20.

[Legbreaker]

I've had more than my share of spats with people like Leg and others on here for slights or perceived slights to my country, and God knows I'm proud to be an American.

All water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned. As for you being an American, well we all have our crosses to bear*... :cool:

* If anyone reads that as other than tongue in cheek, then they seriously need to grow a sense of humour!

[Chris]

I have it and I've read it, but I haven't done a lot of playing with it.

It's very similar to Classic Traveller:
- nearly all die rolls are 2d6, beat a 7 with modifiers, of course.
- semi-random lifepath character generation. That is, you pick a career and roll to see how you do, and what skills and goodies you pick up. With very few adjustments, this could be made to fit the T2k background.



I knew they were trying for the "Classic" feel, but it sounds like I should just dig out my little black books again instead of looking at the core. That is if (I mean when, honest) they actually get it out in 2011 or so.

I'm going to cross my fingers on this.

Did they keep the hard-core survival role in each term? I remember going seven terms in the scouts, getting a mandatory re-enlistment, and dieing in the eighth.

[helbent4]

I've had more than my share of spats with people like Leg and others on here for slights or perceived slights to my country, and God knows I'm proud to be an American; but I absolutely despise our public education system. I was lucky and overcame the hurdle, but since my three kids got into school, I've been nothing but disappointed. I know Webstral is a teacher, and I hope he does his best to fight the system, but I firmly believe it's broken in this nation. I give kudos to nations that have broken the code and managed to actually educate their people.


Eddie,

I wish to make clear, I can't speak for the Canadian educational system in general, and for all I know the players in my group may be a statistical blip!

As for the comparison between T2K and TMP, if I may quote Reagan, "there you go again!" (I don't mean that as a slam, but more in the sense that it's not often I can quote Ronald Reagan and I feel I must do so when relevant... I MUST!). I somewhat agree with your point about the fantastical elements, but as my campaign was based on Final Watch the Cold War-esque elements were in full force.

Hey, a "classic" T2K background isn't going to attract everyone. V2+ seemed to get around this problem of historicity (that is, how it's placed within the stream of history) by making it counterfactual. This maintains the existential horror of the Cold War by making the setting part of an alternative timeline. To some players, the knowledge that the Cold War is over might impair their suspension of disbelief, but then re-imagining a global conventional/nuclear war (a classic Cold War trope) is also difficult for some people to credit, not to mention introducing a generic nature to the background.

I'm reminded of a friend who could never get into Call of Cthulhu. Having read Lovecraft, his knowledge of the bigger picture (humanity was essentially doomed) meant he couldn't really enjoy any adventure because it was ultimately hopeless. While probably true within the context of the Cthulhu Mythos, the key to enjoyment would seem to be to "forget" the overall historical/global picture and concentrate on what your character can accomplish, within the bounds of the scenario.

I guess the elephant in the room in this discussion is there was an RPG that tried to update T2K to something more modern. While it succeeded on some levels I sincerely hope any additional kicks at that can (by Mongoose or anyone) will do a lot better.

Tony

[helbent4]

I really do think that if the part of the RPG industry can be called mainstream as a whole thought there was some unfilled cold-war-gone-hot-whoops-gritty-simulationist-apocalypse niche to be exploited they'd be filling it.

With d20.

Snake Eyes,

Hey, the Cold War background didn't make you pitch it across the room, did it? That's presumably the same for anyone that played the single-player campaign.

I fully admit that I'm setting the bar as low as I can get away with. I'll take a "lack of disgust" as proof-positive! :D

As recent history has conclusively proven, the invisible hand of the market isn't perfect! Tastes can change over time; themes can get played out, what are once considered narrow niches can become widely popular (in fact, this can be cyclical). If professional game designers and the individuals who run the companies that make RPGs sincerely believe something isn't profitable they simply won't waste what little time or resources they have in exploring blind avenues. (I don't mean to imply there's some kind of evil cartel or conspiracy to suppress Cold War games, merely that if no one tries then we'll never know.)

In fact, sometimes the players themselves don't know what they want. SPI almost produced historical wargames because of the feedback from their players indicated what they wanted, and nothing more. Someone faked or massaged player feedback (which was solicited on a regular basis) to get the green light for the "Star Force: Alpha Centauri" wargame and it turned out to be wildly successful and basically ushered in hard science fiction wargaming.

That said, there are recent RPGs that make use of Cold War themed games out there (GURPS: SEALs in Vietnam, the RPGs "Cold City" and "Hot War" to name a few off the top of my head) so it's not been completely neglected. For that matter, Decision Games (the sort-of successor to SPI) has published a line of games using the Cold War Battles system: Wurzburg Pentomic, the NATO intervention scenario in Hungary '56 (both hypothetical WWIII-based scenarios) and Kabul '79/Angola '87. (Cold War Battles seem to be related to the SPI Modern Battle series of the '70s.) They also recently produced GSFG, an update and homage to "NATO: Operational Combat in Europe in the 1970's".

Tony

[Raellus]

I've had more than my share of spats with people like Leg and others on here for slights or perceived slights to my country, and God knows I'm proud to be an American; but I absolutely despise our public education system. I was lucky and overcame the hurdle, but since my three kids got into school, I've been nothing but disappointed. I know Webstral is a teacher, and I hope he does his best to fight the system, but I firmly believe it's broken in this nation. I give kudos to nations that have broken the code and managed to actually educate their people.

Wow. As someone who's taken offense at digs against the U.S. military made on this forum, I'm surprised to see you taking pot shots at another honorable and patriotic but often misunderstood and sometimes thankless profession. The system aint all that great, but most of us do the best with what we're given. In my experience, the issue is not so much with the public education system as it is with parents and the media teaching kids that they don't have to take responsibility for their own futures. Hey, who needs to try to get a good education when they can become a rapper or reality TV "personality"? We're all victims, anyway, right? The hardest part of my job is trying to teach kids who don't want to learn. They expect to be entertained more than educated. I do my best but I'm no Youtube. Public education is a convenient scapegoat for the nation's ills. Why blame absentee parents and a souless entertainment industry when we've got public school teachers to kick around? Open fire.

[helbent4]

Regarding Mongoose Traveller's Book 1: Mercenary:

There is a "Survival" roll, but it's more like the "you must leave the service". You can still continue, but in another career.

I agree with Raellus in that SF characters are so common as to make their "special" nature almost commonplace. Still, in Mercenary there are careers loosely based on the classic Mercenary tickets: "Cadre, Commando, Guerrilla, Security, Striker and Warmonger". "Commando" would naturally work for special ops PCs, but pretty much most of the rest would apply with some imagination.

The combat rules seem to add some nice chrome, although the weapons by their nature are generic, of course.

Tony

[natehale1971]

I still think you could do the Cold War feel with the creation of an Alternate Timeline that continues the Cold War into the 21st Century... The biggest way to have done that is have the USSR and it's satellite states doing what the Chinese Communists have done with their 'State Controlled Capitalism' (ie 'national' socialism)...

Having someone replace Gorby (ie Danilov) who has the appearence of a hardliner, but in reality is the reformer.. who turns Eastern Europe into a rapidly growing economic powerhouse. The USSR had more resources than the USA has, and SHOULD HAVE been able to overcome us... but it was the mismanagement of those resources that saw their downfall.

The PRC saw this, and has been doing everything they can to NOT repeat those mistakes. And as we are seeing now, they are becoming a major economic & political powerhouse.

Just think of what the Cold War could have turned into if the USSR did that instead. They honestly believed that SDI was a real project and not just something that the Reagan Administration wanted to use as a GOAL to inspire the US... just like JFK did with his famous "put a man on the moon" speech.

It was this that caused Gorby to blink... But what IF someone like Danilov came to power, and saw it for what it was. Something to aspire too, and used that to do a major overhaul of the Soviet Bloc... and overhaul like what the PRC has done.

Thus allowing the Cold War to continue on... and then we have the cold war slowly going HOT in the year 2000 with the growth of Islamic fundamentalism (ie the west having originally had used it against the Soviets in Afghanistan and the Central Asian Republics) into a threat than anyone could have ever thought possible (but we in our world know to be true).

And these Islamic fundamentalists are the ones who triggered the Cold War going hot... Be it with terrorist attacks like 11 September 2001, or something as benign as triggering a border dispute between the PRC and USSR.

Thus you can keep the "Twilight: 2000" title for the game, and use the thoughts of importing OUR world into their world... having parallel development of technology (or even an acceleration of technology showing up sooner) allowing for a wide deal of things as well.

Having a slow build-up for the HOT War... allows for the war to become more pronounced and a truly GLOBAL war. And has the bonus of having the major powers being played by the Terrorists.

Something that many of the more popular techno-thriller novels of today are using, and might be a way that the game could use to get new blood into it!

[Eddie]

Wow. As someone who's taken offense at digs against the U.S. military made on this forum, I'm surprised to see you taking pot shots at another honorable and patriotic but often misunderstood and sometimes thankless profession. The system aint all that great, but most of us do the best with what we're given. In my experience, the issue is not so much with the public education system as it is with parents and the media teaching kids that they don't have to take responsibility for their own futures. Hey, who needs to try to get a good education when they can become a successful rapper or reality TV "personality"? We're all victims, anyway, right? Public education is a convenient scapegoat for the nation's ills. Why blame absentee parents and a souless entertainment industry when we've got public school teachers to kick around?

Yuck. Phew. Pfft.

Those are some yucky words you're putting in my mouth, Rae.

Before I go any further, I just want to go on record as stating that my wife and I are not absentee parents. My wife drives my oldest son to school every day so he can go to tutoring early morning and then gets tutoring in the evening. She or I sit with our 8-year-old daughter and help her with her homework every day. My middle child is pretty smart and we never have any troubles with him. We maintain close contact with all of their teachers and my wife goes so far as to sit and make them do any assignment that they "forget about" and turn it in for even a marginal grade. I've gone so far as to shadow my son throughout the day to make sure that he wasn't goofing off and not doing his homework. So yeah, I have a right to talk about the system. Nevermind the fact that I pay my taxes which gives me a right.

I didn't say anything about teachers. I said the system is screwed. Funding priorities in the government are all kinds of messed up. Fuel costs are mandating that districts are charging bus fees. How many school systems are going bankrupt? How poorly are teachers paid? How many school districts have furlough Fridays (or the like)? I said that I know that Web is a teacher and that I hope he fights the system. I meant in the respect that he does the best he can. Not that he's lazy and not doing anything. But I don't know the man. Maybe he is. Maybe you are. But I DID NOT SAY THAT.

Contrary to what you and about five other core members of this board think, I'm not always out to say that you guys suck, my shit doesn't stink, and you are all retarded for not liking 2013. You guys don't like me? That's fine. Don't assume that I'm just trying to argue and accuse everyone else of everything.

You guys have a nice night.

[Raellus]

Wait, aren't you the same guy that gets incensed when anyone mentions anything negative about anything regarding or related to U.S. army "officers"? I don't recall anyone ever mentioned you personally, but you seem to take great offense anyway. Now you're using the cop out of saying that you were slagging the education "system" and not me personally so I shouldn't be upset. I didn't call you an absentee parent did I? You seem to be taking my comments to say that. That's putting words in my mouth. Why are you the only one who can take pride in his profession and get upset when people throw stones? Must be because I don't like the T2013 timeline.

That's called hypocricy.

You have a nice night.

[natehale1971]

Yuck. Phew. Pfft.

Those are some yucky words you're putting in my mouth, Rae.

Before I go any further, I just want to go on record as stating that my wife and I are not absentee parents. My wife drives my oldest son to school every day so he can go to tutoring early morning and then gets tutoring in the evening. She or I sit with our 8-year-old daughter and help her with her homework every day. My middle child is pretty smart and we never have any troubles with him. We maintain close contact with all of their teachers and my wife goes so far as to sit and make them do any assignment that they "forget about" and turn it in for even a marginal grade. I've gone so far as to shadow my son throughout the day to make sure that he wasn't goofing off and not doing his homework. So yeah, I have a right to talk about the system. Nevermind the fact that I pay my taxes which gives me a right.

I didn't say anything about teachers. I said the system is screwed. Funding priorities in the government are all kinds of messed up. Fuel costs are mandating that districts are charging bus fees. How many school systems are going bankrupt? How poorly are teachers paid? How many school districts have furlough Fridays (or the like)? I said that I know that Web is a teacher and that I hope he fights the system. I meant in the respect that he does the best he can. Not that he's lazy and not doing anything. But I don't know the man. Maybe he is. Maybe you are. But I DID NOT SAY THAT.

Contrary to what you and about five other core members of this board think, I'm not always out to say that you guys suck, my shit doesn't stink, and you are all retarded for not liking 2013. You guys don't like me? That's fine. Don't assume that I'm just trying to argue and accuse everyone else of everything.

You guys have a nice night.

Eddie you sound like how things are with my nephew when it comes to helping your children. My sister and brother-in-law does the same thing..

The biggest problem with our education system has been the teachers unions. I know that sounds like talking points, but it's not. To many bad teachers are allowed to stay in the classrooms because they are tenured.

Yes, absentee parents are a problem. and that comes from the fact we have become such a materialistic society that it takes two (or more) income households to 'buy all of the crap' that they think they need. This not only has the problem of there not being a parent in the home when kids get home to help them with their homework (or just MAKE them do the homework), many times those two incomes are being brought in by ONE parent... and that's usually a single mother.

WHY?

Because our society has made marriage just as disposable as diapers. Look at how things are in England.. fathers don't have any rights. it's easy to end a marriage, and yes.. i know this from first hand experience. My wife is British, and took my sons to the UK when she abandoned me after the wreck. She's been shacked up with some guy since then and has a child by him, and we are still legally married. She's living on the dole there, getting all kinds of money from the government.

We don't have that here in the states YET... and in all honesty, i hope that the UK will change that. Because they don't have the money for that kind of crap anymore. But we are seeing how that's going over... all over the European Union we are seeing the nanny state countries collapsing because they don't have the money anymore, and to many of the "Dolists" are too self-centred to see that the free-ride they've gotten has to end because the saying of "there is no such thing as a free lunch" is way to true. Because someone has to pay for that lunch, and when you end up "Robbing Peter to Pay Paul"... Peter will one day get so tired of that, he's going to LEAVE.

I'm not saying that we don't need a safety net, but turning it into a hammock is just to screwed up.

While I didn't like the background of T2013, i've never complained about you and find you to be one of my favorite people to talk with and read on here.

[helbent4]

I still think you could do the Cold War feel with the creation of an Alternate Timeline that continues the Cold War into the 21st Century... The biggest way to have done that is have the USSR and it's satellite states doing what the Chinese Communists have done with their 'State Controlled Capitalism' (ie 'national' socialism)...

Something that many of the more popular techno-thriller novels of today are using, and might be a way that the game could use to get new blood into it!

Nate,

Hey, this is awesome! I've thought along these lines, that the Soviets might have taken a page from the Chinese and introduced economic reforms without loosening the CPSU's grip on power. (I assume this happened to a degree in T2K anyways to explain the USSR's longevity.) Increased economic engagement with western Europe could lead to the fragmentation of the NATO alliance, as in T2K.

Some further changes might include a still-separate East Germany, whereupon West Germany has the resources to field the G11 and LMG11. If a non-nuclear or less-nuclear scenario is desired, then Gorbachev may well have accepted Reagan's offer of complete nuclear disarmament at Reykjavik, thus leading to smaller arsenals when war does break out (less time to rearm).

Tony

[Eddie]

Wait, aren't you the same guy that gets incensed when anyone mentions anything negative about anything regarding or related to U.S. army "officers"? I don't recall anyone ever mentioned you personally, but you seem to take great offense anyway. Now you're using the cop out of saying that you were slagging the education "system" and not me personally so I shouldn't be upset. I didn't call you an absentee parent did I? Must be because I don't like the T2013 timeline.

What's the average reading grade level of an American, Rae? How do we rank internationally? How do we rank on standardized tests?

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/11/19/US-slipping-in-education-rankings/UPI-90221227104776/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/04/AR2007120400730.html

Those are just two quick searches.

I'm not trying to make cheap shots. I'm not trying to make this personal between you and me. If you want to, we can go to PM and waste our time.

[Panther Al]

Nate,

Hey, this is awesome! I've thought along these lines, that the Soviets might have taken a page from the Chinese and introduced economic reforms without loosening the CPSU's grip on power. (I assume this happened to a degree in T2K anyways to explain the USSR's longevity.) Increased economic engagement with western Europe could lead to the fragmentation of the NATO alliance, as in T2K.

Some further changes might include a still-separate East Germany, whereupon West Germany has the resources to field the G11 and LMG11. If a non-nuclear or less-nuclear scenario is desired, then Gorbachev may well have accepted Reagan's offer of complete nuclear disarmament at Reykjavik, thus leading to smaller arsenals when war does break out (less time to rearm).

Tony

An outstanding idea, and best yet if you did want to use current RL history you could easily say that the party returned to power. I recall reading that to this day there is still amazingly enough a sort of fondness for the "good old days" amongst russians.

[natehale1971]

Nate,

Hey, this is awesome! I've thought along these lines, that the Soviets might have taken a page from the Chinese and introduced economic reforms without loosening the CPSU's grip on power. (I assume this happened to a degree in T2K anyways to explain the USSR's longevity.) Increased economic engagement with western Europe could lead to the fragmentation of the NATO alliance, as in T2K.

Some further changes might include a still-separate East Germany, whereupon West Germany has the resources to field the G11 and LMG11. If a non-nuclear or less-nuclear scenario is desired, then Gorbachev may well have accepted Reagan's offer of complete nuclear disarmament at Reykjavik, thus leading to smaller arsenals when war does break out (less time to rearm).

Tony

Actually Tony... it was Gorby who volunteered total nuclear disarmament, but ONLY if the US abandoned SDI. And as much as Reagan hated Nuclear weapons... he didn't want to abandon the idea of SDI because to many OTHERS in the world had gotten the nuclear bomb genie to visit them.

I've always thought of a separate DDR & Poland having been a very important part of the growing economic powerhouse behind the Iron Curtain. While DDR might be slow at implementing the economic reforms (and their leadership would have helped depose Gorby so someone like Danilov to take over)...

Having a much more limited Nuclear exchange would be perfect for a good gaming universe.... a cross between Twilight 2000 and Merc 2000 setting would be alot of fun, and have civilian as well as military role-playing opportunities to shake a stick at. I've been reading Brad Thor novels, and they've got some really interesting plot ideas (i had read The Athena project in 24 hours and the technology stuff in there was very... interesting).

[Raellus]

What's the average reading grade level of an American, Rae? How do we rank internationally? How do we rank on standardized tests?


The system is broken. I can't deny that. Let's slash some more of its funding and see if that helps. All I can do is keep busting my ass to try to help my students learn something while they're in my classroom. If I work hard enough, maybe our nation's standardized test score will go up a little and my pay won't be cut again this year. I should be thankful I haven't been permanently RIF'ed yet. Thanks for the morale boost, Ed.

[Legbreaker]

This approach is exactly how I'd like to see a new version of T2K come out. Leave the time at the year 2000 just tweak the game materials to include some IRL events.
One thing that I personally think is becoming more and more of a problem as time rolls on is the "retrofitting" of technology into the classic T2K timeline. How many times have we seen items only available in the 21st century being trotted out by players in a game?
I mean feel free to pull in whatever you want in a game set in say 2010, but items not even thought of until 2000+ in classic T2K? :confused:

[natehale1971]

The system is broken. I can't deny that. Let's slash some more of its funding and see if that helps. All I can do is keep busting my ass to try to help my students learn something while they're in my classroom. If I work hard enough, maybe our nation's standardized test score will go up a little and my pay won't be cut again this year. I should be thankful I haven't been permanently RIF'ed yet. Thanks for the morale boost, Ed.

And TEACHER'S pay shouldn't be cut. It's the pay of the administrators and Union Bosses who are taking all the funding AWAY from class rooms... all the while claiming to be getting more funding for those classrooms.

They cut the pay or fire the teachers doing the jobs they are suppose to do, while they are living the fat life.

Like you said.. the system is broken. And that's what Eddie had said. Not that individual teachers are the problem. It's the teachers unions and Education Departments MISMANAGEMENT that is the problem.

Look at my post up a few, about how the USSR SHOULD have been one of the most prosperous countries in history thanks to the massive amounts of resources at their fingertips. But proper management of resources can make even someone who is skint live like a king within their means, but improper management can turn a king into a pauper.

[natehale1971]

This approach is exactly how I'd like to see a new version of T2K come out. Leave the time at the year 2000 just tweak the game materials to include some IRL events.
One thing that I personally think is becoming more and more of a problem as time rolls on is the "retrofitting" of technology into the classic T2K timeline. How many times have we seen items only available in the 21st century being trotted out by players in a game?
I mean feel free to pull in whatever you want in a game set in say 2010, but items not even thought of until 2000+ in classic T2K? :confused:

If we extend the timeline past 2000, there are a lot of things we have now that would have still be developed. Having the slow build up of a hot war starting in the year 2000, would definitely work... and allow new blood to want to get involved in the game because it's all new take on the Cold War.

Think of our world right now if the Cold War had continued in the manner we've been discussing here. Think of what we would have today if the Cold War was still going on. Yes we'd still be posed at the swordpoint with the Soviets with alot of the same technology we have right now. hell, we might have been able to develop that technology earlier.

[Raellus]

A lot of the criticisms posted here are valid. But it's hard to hear. I take pride in my work and it's tough to detach myself as an individual from the institution of which I am a part. It's a really hard job. Have you ever tried to motivate, inspire, and educate 150 15-18 year-olds on a daily basis? It's rough sometimes. It can feel like a thankless job when I see my paycheck shrink on an annual basis while the public pins most of American society's on my employer. If only they knew what it was like...

[helbent4]

Actually Tony... it was Gorby who volunteered total nuclear disarmament, but ONLY if the US abandoned SDI. And as much as Reagan hated Nuclear weapons... he didn't want to abandon the idea of SDI because to many OTHERS in the world had gotten the nuclear bomb genie to visit them.


Nate,

By gosh, I never knew that! Apparently it was complicated; the Soviets first proposed eliminating INF weapons systems in Europe and reducing Strategic missiles by 50%, the US countered with all ballistic missiles eliminated within 10 years but retaining SDI (and sharing research), the counter-counter offer was no out-of-lab SDI research within those 10 years, and there things fell apart due to slight miscalculations on both sides.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reykjav%C3%ADk_Summit

Either way, both sides at that time seemed to accept in principle almost complete disarmament and it could have happened. In fact, such a concession could have eventually cost Gorbachev his job before he let the Iron Curtain drop, or at least tied his hands so that (say) he didn't have the latitude to let the Soviet client states go their own ways.

Regarding current technology and T2K, it mainly takes some spine on the part of the GM to make sure things are Jake and consistant. Much of what we use now was available in embryonic form in the 90's and the buildup to war would have accelerated weapons technology considerably. Most of the time the difference would be in advanced information technology and networking (not generally an issue due to battlefield attrition and EMP) and weapons/vehicles, mainly an issue of numbers. (What is generally reflected on Paul's site.)

Tony

[pmulcahy11b]

And TEACHER'S pay shouldn't be cut. It's the pay of the administrators and Union Bosses who are taking all the funding AWAY from class rooms... all the while claiming to be getting more funding for those classrooms.

Teachers should be be highly-paid -- at least four to five times what they are paid now, if not more. Their job is hard, our educational system sucks, and we'd attract more and better teachers if they were paid in accordance to the difficulties of their job. And in accordance to the importance of their job.

[Legbreaker]

If we extend the timeline past 2000, there are a lot of things we have now that would have still be developed.
Very true. What I'm getting at is the apparently growing habit of pulling what is available now back to a game (versions 1.0 and 2.x) set almost a generation ago*. It's a bit like trying to justify M-48 tanks being involved in D-Day....

*That makes me feel soooo old!

[natehale1971]

A lot of the criticisms posted here are valid. But it's hard to hear. I take pride in my work and it's tough to detach myself as an individual from the institution of which I am a part. It's a really hard job. Have you ever tried to motivate, inspire, and educate 150 15-18 year-olds on a daily basis? It's rough sometimes. It can feel like a thankless job when I see my paycheck shrink on an annual basis while the public pins most of American society's on my employer. If only they knew what it was like...

Yes... I have. I REALLY wanted to be a history and art teacher. I have helped motivate and inspire kids to actually look things up when i start talking about the founding of this Republic. yes it does feel like a thankless job. but you also hold the future in your hands when you are teaching those children. Some teachers take that HONOR and trust so seriously as you do, but there are alot of teachers who don't. Who are simply bad teachers, who should have NEVER been given teaching certification. You know that better than we do, because you've had to work with some of them.

Hell, most of us only have knowledge of this from either being parents or having sat in a classroom. And most of us on this forum haven't been in a classroom in 20+ years. I've been going to college and discovered that most of the recent graduates are so.... behind it's not even funny.

They don't know HALF of what we did when we graduated. And it's only been 20 years since i graduated. they aren't even getting civics lessons in class, just indoctrination into 'nanny state' is good and Republicans/Conservatives are all racists who want you to die (yes i can say this because my youngest sister had to put up with a teacher trying to push that on her when she was in school).

We're not attacking YOU or your profession... we're attacking those who have ABUSED their positions, and made your job such the thankless and hard job it's become.

[Fusilier]

It's a really hard job. Have you ever tried to motivate, inspire, and educate 150 15-18 year-olds on a daily basis? It's rough sometimes.

Sure is. Sometimes more so than when I was in the infantry.

[natehale1971]

Very true. What I'm getting at is the apparently growing habit of pulling what is available now back to a game (versions 1.0 and 2.x) set almost a generation ago*. It's a bit like trying to justify M-48 tanks being involved in D-Day....

*That makes me feel soooo old!

Thanks not what I'm talking about. :)

I'm talking about a new game with a slower build up to the nuclear exchanges and game time occurring. Bascily have the Sino-Soviet border war slowly build up to the DDR finding their best troops being used as cannon fodder by the soviet war machine and deciding they want out (along with several other of the satellite states)... have the build up of the war simmer and build up.. a limited nuclear exchange that doesn't knock everyone back to the stone age, but the war is continuing with everyone having to deal with the EMP effects (admit it... EMP with today's tech would really FUCK everything up) as well as protecting the nation form outside forces.

but having the war hit EVERY part of the Globe (including our Aussie and Kiwi friends) is what i'm talking about.

[natehale1971]

Nate,

By gosh, I never knew that! Apparently it was complicated; the Soviets first proposed eliminating INF weapons systems in Europe and reducing Strategic missiles by 50%, the US countered with all ballistic missiles eliminated within 10 years but retaining SDI (and sharing research), the counter-counter offer was no out-of-lab SDI research within those 10 years, and there things fell apart due to slight miscalculations on both sides.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reykjav%C3%ADk_Summit

Either way, both sides at that time seemed to accept in principle almost complete disarmament and it could have happened. In fact, such a concession could have eventually cost Gorbachev his job before he let the Iron Curtain drop, or at least tied his hands so that (say) he didn't have the latitude to let the Soviet client states go their own ways.

Regarding current technology and T2K, it mainly takes some spine on the part of the GM to make sure things are Jake and consistant. Much of what we use now was available in embryonic form in the 90's and the buildup to war would have accelerated weapons technology considerably. Most of the time the difference would be in advanced information technology and networking (not generally an issue due to battlefield attrition and EMP) and weapons/vehicles, mainly an issue of numbers. (What is generally reflected on Paul's site.)

Tony

Exactly... that would allow alot of things to get into. Having that slow build-up with alot of simmering brushfires all around the world all flaring up during the time the campaign setting would start.

My idea for an RP (World War IV: A World in Flames) allowed for Role-play during the Flashpoints period (right before the war starts), during the Brushfires period (alot of little conflicts and low intensity wars all around the globe) to Firestorm period (the entire world is involved in a massive multifront war were some fronts you're fighting against someone, but in another your fighting along side them).

[Raellus]

I like your phased approach, Nate.

In addition to something like that, I'd like to see the next T2K itteration come with more or less generic templates for various apocalyptic event horizons. There'd be one for a global pandemic of sort (reducing the population dramatically but leaving infrastructure largely untouched), one for global climate change (food and water shortages, rising see levels, etc.), one for something that would destroy most electronics (EMP, solar flares), and one for your good old fashioned global thermonuclear war. Hell, you could even throw in an alien invasion or zombie rising. I'm thinking of a tool kit for the creative GM to use in fashioning a near future of his liking. Of course, exhaustive current/near future gear lists are a must as well.

[natehale1971]

I like your phased approach, Nate.

In addition to something like that, I'd like to see the next T2K itteration come with more or less generic templates for various apocalyptic event horizons. There'd be one for a global pandemic of sort (reducing the population dramatically but leaving infrastructure largely untouched), one for global climate change (food and water shortages, rising see levels, etc.), one for something that would destroy most electronics (EMP, solar flares), and one for your good old fashioned global thermonuclear war. Hell, you could even throw in an alien invasion or zombie rising. I'm thinking of a tool kit for the creative GM to use in fashioning a near future of his liking. Of course, exhaustive current/near future gear lists are a must as well.

You bet. and there was a really good RP that took that approach called "Freedom Fighters"... it allowed the GM and players build their own world. :)

[Snake Eyes]

In addition to something like that, I'd like to see the next T2K itteration come with more or less generic templates for various apocalyptic event horizons. There'd be one for a global pandemic of sort (reducing the population dramatically but leaving infrastructure largely untouched), one for global climate change (food and water shortages, rising see levels, etc.), one for something that would destroy most electronics (EMP, solar flares), and one for your good old fashioned global thermonuclear war. Hell, you could even throw in an alien invasion or zombie rising. I'm thinking of a tool kit for the creative GM to use in fashioning a near future of his liking. Of course, exhaustive current/near future gear lists are a must as well.

Wow, that's really spooky. I was just getting ready to post that in a future revision of the Twilight franchise I wouldn't include a timeline at all, rather a comprehensive pile of resources for a GM to roll-your-own apocalypse with rules and tips for including nukes, pandemic/zombies, asteroid/comet strike, new ice age, economic collapse or a Chinese menu to incorporate elements of all of them. But I hit the back button instead of preview and there your post was.

[Snake Eyes]

Why does timeline matter anyway?

Seriously, I ask not only since timeline angst is a recurring centerpoint of conversation around here but also because I played OG 1st ed/ Twilight for years before I ever bothered reading Countdown to Armageddon. It was an entertaining read but not particularly germane to the core concept of "You're soldiers caught behind the lines of a nuclear war." All that stuff with Italy pulling out of NATO is interesting but it just ... didn't ... matter. Deep background, yeah. But it had nothing to do with why the characters were in Poland or solving the immediate problem of whether and how to get out of it. The 2.0/2.2 updates were just as entertaining and ultimately just as irrelevant to actual gameplay.

I understand players want to be able to integrate their characters into the story and the GM needs to know what's what but folks make it sound like opting not to include a detailed orbat and accounting for the month-by-month disposition of every brigade in the global arsenal is some kind of failure. And yeah, I want my guy to be a part of the story, but I can make him a farmboy from Iowa without having to pull out an almanac to research the average rainfall, mean low temperature and consumer price index in order to determine whether his parents could have plausibly produced the crop yield required to afford any siblings.

[Legbreaker]

It's mainly important to the GM rather than the players. Just think how different it would be if France and Italy remained in Nato and fought alongside the Germans, Americans, British and others during 1996-97? Just think what the addition of another couple of armies on the western side would have allowed Nato to do to the Pact....
Given those additional forces I think it's safe to say there would be no reason for anyone to be in Poland. The world might in fact be a glowing cinder as the Soviets opened up with everything they had rather than limited strikes, just in an effort to survive - victory against those odds would have been extremely unlikely.

Remember, nothing happens in isolation. Change something in one place and the ripples will be felt halfway across the world.

As another example, what if India and Pakistan didn't go to war? What if they sided with the Soviets? How would that alter deployments in the middle east?

Understanding the background is vital to running a believable world.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I have a few thoughts here, so bear with me as I wander from topic to topic...

Tegyrius (Clayton) and Eddie are both correct when they say that the Cold War setting isn't much of a drawcard for many gamers these days. Okay, I'm not doing market research on it or anything but I'm involved with RPGs, console games & computer games and participating in a few blogs/forums that deal with all three of them and with a range of participant ages. I base my statements on the comments made by people in those forums and some of them are not big thinkers (when you have 20-yr olds thinking that if the apocalypse comes then they should stockpile bottlecaps because obviously that will be useful as a form of money...)

The games that are produced by people with big budgets obviously will get more fans and those companies tend to focus on fantasy or horror genres so the big RPGs these days are obviously fantasy or horror, military sims are still a niche market just like post-apoc games are.
The military and post-apoc genres don't sell RPGs as well as fantasy does even when they do have a big budget. It doesn't matter how good your game might be, the market for those types of games is too small for most big publishers to bother with these days.

While a Cold War setting is an interesting aside for some console/computer gamers, it's largely irrelevant to their game play - most of them just want to "blow shit up". When it comes to console games, there is a very strong tendency to choose old (as in a generation past or more) enemies because they aren't seen as potentially offensive or politically incorrect - hence why many games feature Nazis, easy to hate so therefore nobody will object to the game player destroying them in the hundreds.
It's the same reason why zombies feature in so many movies this decade, they're a faceless enemy and thereby
1. avoid the labels the media uses to demonize any current enemy we may have and
2. avoids offending anyone from the relevant group if the game treats them in a derogatory manner. We've all heard someone somewhere say that because the terrorists are Muslim, then all Muslims are terrorists - which is a patently absurd statement for many reasons but the "little thinkers" like their sound bites.

What does all that really mean? That console games are driven by the 'best formula' for making money, money gets put into flashy graphics and sexy guns because they draw the crowd - offend nobody but appeal to everybody. If they made Twilight: 2000 as a computer game these days, they'd remove everything that makes the RPG interesting and it would be just the same as every other 'shooter' military game out there because of that mentality.
Story telling is an aside in most console & computer games because at the end of the day "BOOM - headshot" is more interesting for many players than the actual background (except in the most general terms). You won't appeal to many younger gamers unless you can draw them in with something that appears relevant to their idea of entertainment as it is today.

As for education, it is the cure to many ills but most corporations don't like people being too well educated because then they might make an informed choice instead of just buying the crap that the corps want to sell you. Governments avoid education for exactly the same reason but in the sense that they don't want people making an informed vote.

And finally my waffling comes to end...
It sounds to me that some of you are talking about Aftermath... build your own end of the world and then play through the ruins. :p :D
Ultimately, a remake of Twilight: 2000 is not going to be commercially successful, not because the Cold War will or won't sell but because the game itself is based in the two genres that are just not big sellers with today's audience.

[Snake Eyes]

It's mainly important to the GM rather than the players. Just think how different it would be if France and Italy remained in Nato and fought alongside the Germans, Americans, British and others during 1996-97? Just think what the addition of another couple of armies on the western side would have allowed Nato to do to the Pact....
Given those additional forces I think it's safe to say there would be no reason for anyone to be in Poland. The world might in fact be a glowing cinder as the Soviets openned up with everything they had rather than limited strikes, just in an effort to survive - victory against those odds would have been extremely unlikely.

Remember, nothing happens in islolation. Change something in one place and the ripples will be felt halfway across the world.

As another example, what if India and Pakistan didn't go to war? What if they sided with the Soviets? How would that alter deployments in the middle east?

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I see where you're going but I read all of that and all I can muster is "Who cares?" Though I guess it might more correctly be, "So what?" - since so many of you obviously care.



Understanding the background is vital to running a believable world.

I think folks confuse background with setting. Setting is where you are. Background is the universe of events that had to transpire before you got there. Setting is of paramount importance. Background is not. Players need a detailed setting in order to understand their situation and gauge its gravity. Beyond a little immediate local history, they don't really need much in the way of background at all in order to play (and enjoy) a game. I contest the same is true of the GM, especially in that he needs to be focused on looking forward, not back.

I mean not to diminish your cogent analysis or geopolitical acumen, but it seems I may be tilting at a windmill and this is clearly a case where I expect to remain the sole voice of dissent.

[helbent4]

I mean not to diminish your cogent analysis or geopolitical acumen, but it seems I may be tilting at a windmill and this is clearly a case where I expect to remain the sole voice of dissent.

Snake Eyes,

Don't worry, we still like you anyways!

Ride on into the sunset, lonely yet noble cowboy...


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_lj6qOBNMJsk/RvwgMUuKeOI/AAAAAAAAACs/Sewo8jtknf0/s320/1067934632_cowboy.jpg

(My wife's response to this post was, "you're an ass!")


Tony

[Legbreaker]

(My wife's response to this post was, "you're an ass!")

I think she may be the one person on the planet who truly knows you! :p

[Targan]

Wow. So many posts in one thread in one day. Took me more than a quarter of an hour to read them all.

Fellas, lets try to reduce the acrimony a little eh? Lets all try to take a step back and a deep breath before we reply to posts that we take personally. And yes, I accept that I may sound like a hypocrite saying that because yes, in the past I have over-reacted to posts that were not necessarily aimed at me. Do as I say not as I do :D

For the record:

1) I regard teaching as being one of the most important careers in western societies. I have nothing but respect and admiration for good teachers. I think public school systems in every western society could probably do with more funding.

2) I always have some level of respect for those who have served or are serving as commissioned officers. I can't speak for other militaries but you don't get to be an officer in a Commonwealth military service if you are an idiot. I got into a long and interesting conversation recently with my fiance's great uncle and he mentioned that he had been a senior commissioned officer in the Australian Army. At first I thought he had retired as a lt colonel or colonel, then on further questioning I discovered he had been a brigadier general! A really interesting chap he is, very, very intelligent.

3) I was following the development (on the 93 Games forum) of T:2013 before it was published and I bought a hard copy at the first opportunity once my local gaming store shipped copies in. I love the system (char gen and combat especially) but didn't like the back story. I still regard it as an amazing body of work however and admire and respect the effort and talent that went into it.

4) It is an unfortunate fact (in my opinion) that I have learned to keep many of my opinions to myself on this forum as a direct result of what I consider to have been extreme over-reactions to my and others' posts in the past. I think it is natural for people to defend their own countries from perceived criticism. I think that as a result of the great majority of members of this forum being Americans, non-Americans who dare to make statements even remotely derogatory about the USA on this forum are risking long and loud reprisal posts. I think many of us (myself included) sometimes have a hard time in stepping back and reading critical posts objectively.

5) We are all gamers, and even more pertinently we are all fans of Twilight:2000 in its various iterations. Maybe we should spend more time focusing on the things we have in common than the things we do not?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

2) I always have some level of respect for those who have served or are serving as commissioned officers. I can't speak for other militaries but you don't get to be an officer in a Commonwealth military service if you are an idiot.
I'm not seeking to dispute what you've said but I do wish to add that there are always exceptions to the rules.
I had a Platoon Leader at one time who insisted that we dig Section/Squad trenches, no problem with that except he wanted two people at the same time to do it to speed things up. Even that wouldn't have been so bad but it was two people with pickaxes in the dark of night.
One of the Section Leaders performed an act to voice his supreme displeasure at said officers lack of common sense - true it was only on an exercise and even though the enemy were only firing blanks but it's the only time I've witnessed an officer being saluted under tactical conditions in the field.

[Adm.Lee]

I knew they were trying for the "Classic" feel, but it sounds like I should just dig out my little black books again instead of looking at the core. That is if (I mean when, honest) they actually get it out in 2011 or so.

I'm going to cross my fingers on this.

Did they keep the hard-core survival role in each term? I remember going seven terms in the scouts, getting a mandatory re-enlistment, and dieing in the eighth.

I like the more detailed chargen of MongTrav over Classic, more things you can weave into a background.

Hard-core Survival is an option, but the standard rule is that you are forced out of the career, possibly with an injury.

Mercenary does have more career options (Wet Navy, Air Force, training cadre, etc.), and mass-combat rules and mercenary ticket generation. There are more weapons & gear (esp. heavy ordnance), of course.

[enrious]

I mean not to diminish your cogent analysis or geopolitical acumen, but it seems I may be tilting at a windmill and this is clearly a case where I expect to remain the sole voice of dissent.

No, I'm at the same spot myself.

I'm starting up a new campaign myself and basically I only have the situation around the party.

The players don't even need to know that...they just need to have an awareness of an even smaller world - roughly 500m around them (and yes, some back story).

All that aside, that's me.

A lot of people seem to have a lot of fun making the world and I have fun reading it.

It's just not for me though.

[Dog 6]

Or simply ignore what you don't like, understanding that tastes differ amongst reasonable people.

i'll buy it as long as the back story is good and they don't kill off 90% of the world like in 2013k. 2013k sucked so bad i wish i had my money back for it.

[Targan]

i'll buy it as long as the back story is good and they don't kill off 90% of the world like in 2013k. 2013k sucked so bad i wish i had my money back for it.

Many, many people don't like the backstory in T:2013. What do you think of the Reflex system? I really like it.

[Tegyrius]

i'll buy it as long as the back story is good and they don't kill off 90% of the world like in 2013k. 2013k sucked so bad i wish i had my money back for it.
I'm curious. Exactly what casualty rate would you consider acceptable for a modern WWIII scenario? FYI, GDW's figures in the 2.0 timeline were 52% in the United States and 45% in Canada, and those numbers were exclusive to primary and secondary casualties from the 1997 nuclear strikes over the 1997-2000 period (pp. 234-236).

To put it another way, what survival rate would you consider plausible for a global conflict producing near-complete disruption of the medical and agricultural industries that enable the current population density in developed nations?

- C.

[cavtroop]

i'll buy it as long as the back story is good and they don't kill off 90% of the world like in 2013k. 2013k sucked so bad i wish i had my money back for it.

Wow, that's pretty opinionated. I loved the reflex system, and thought the background was pretty well done, and very well researched. I had a group put together (it fell through, oh well), and we were going to use the Reflex System, but the orig. Twilight 2000 1.0 background - not because we thought the 2013 background stunk, but for nostalgia reasons.

I never understood why some people are so quick to throw out the baby with the bathwater - not just here, but in all the RPG industry. If someone doesn't like the setting, but the rules are just fine, why not use them, and make your own background? Excepting for T:2000, I don't know of a system that I ever ran where I used the background as presented. At best I tweaked it a bit, at worst I chucked it out completely and wrote my own, or took another background for the game.

[Raellus]

I never understood why some people are so quick to throw out the baby with the bathwater - not just here, but in all the RPG industry. If someone doesn't like the setting, but the rules are just fine, why not use them, and make your own background? Excepting for T:2000, I don't know of a system that I ever ran where I used the background as presented. At best I tweaked it a bit, at worst I chucked it out completely and wrote my own, or took another background for the game.

That's a good question. I think it's because a lot of would-be GMs don't have the creativity or time to create their own background. I was 11 when I picked up T2K v1.0 and I don't think I could have come up with better at that age. A lot of more mature GMs still don't have the wherewithall to create a believable background/setting. They rely on the published materials.

Also, I think most people are drawn to a game system precisely because of the background. "I like Fantasy and Cyberpunk lit so I'm going to check out Shadowrun..." or whatever. I've seen lots of online GMs who use different rules for a game but only a few examples of GMs who create new backgrounds/settings for use with an existing rules system.

Lastly, it's a question of cost. Nowadays, most PnP RPG core books are pretty expensive. I think most people will balk if presented with only half a useable product. Although I heard a lot of good things about the Reflex system, and was curious to try it out for myself, I didn't fork over the cash for T2103 bacause I didn't like the background. Now that the producer's kaput, I wish I'd gone ahead and picked up a copy. But, at the time, I didn't want to pay just for a new rules system.

[cavtroop]

Lastly, it's a question of cost. Nowadays, most PnP RPG core books are pretty expensive. I think most people will balk if presented with only half a useable product. Although I heard a lot of good things about the Reflex system, and was curious to try it out for myself, I didn't fork over the cash for T2103 bacause I didn't like the background. Now that the producer's kaput, I wish I'd gone ahead and picked up a copy. But, at the time, I didn't want to pay just for a new rules system.

I've always wondered how 93GS would have done, had they released the Reflex System standalone, and then T:2013 as a setting - that's how alot of game systems are doing it nowadays. Take Savage Worlds for instance - the 'Explorers Edition' - essentially just the base rules - sells for $10. Then you can buy setting books. They have everything from WWII, to High Fantasy, Steampunk, Wild West, dozens more. That way as a GM or group, you get the core rules, and plug-in the settings you want, or simply create your own.

No idea if that would have worked for 93GS or not however. I do know I still plan on getting a 2013 game going as soon as I can :)

[Eddie]

Although I heard a lot of good things about the Reflex system, and was curious to try it out for myself, I didn't fork over the cash for T2103 bacause I didn't like the background. Now that the producer's kaput, I wish I'd gone ahead and picked up a copy. But, at the time, I didn't want to pay just for a new rules system.

Keith still has books for sale and there is always the .pdf on DTRPG.

[Fusilier]

i'll buy it as long as the back story is good and they don't kill off 90% of the world like in 2013k. 2013k sucked so bad i wish i had my money back for it.

The weak backstory was one of the reasons I didn't bother with it myself. As Raellus mentioned, I didn't want to pay for something that wasn't sitting well with me with what I saw. I later got a free copy, and granted I only skimmed through it, I'm still satisfied with sticking with the original.

Perhaps there should have been a separate rules book from the game book.

[Legbreaker]

One of the MAJOR reasons I haven't picked it up is that I've never been able to lay my eyes on it. Personally I don't like buying sight unseen, I prefer to pick it up in the shop, flick through the pages and get a general feel for the work first.
Down in this part of the world that simply wasn't possible - it was either order it from O/S or fork out for the PDF after a brief look at the promo material. The local stores hadn't even heard of it.

[helbent4]

Lastly, it's a question of cost. Nowadays, most PnP RPG core books are pretty expensive. I think most people will balk if presented with only half a useable product.

Rae,

One problem with T2013 was that it wasn't even half a usable product.

From what I gathered, there were serious issues in parts of the vehicle combat system where it tried to mesh with the Reflex system in different ways relating to small arms and light cannon penetration vs light armoured vehicles and initiative. I think there are new rules (linked-to elsewhere in this forum) that iron out these inconsistencies a long time after I bought the main rules.

Tony

[cavtroop]

Pretty rough crowd here :)

The fact of the matter, this is the way the industry is going, except for maybe the big publishing houses. Mongoose may be able to get stock in stores around the world, but the majority of purchases are done via the internet, or even .pdf sales.

Trust me, I'd rather have it like the good ol' days of the 80's, where I could go to the hobby store, flip through the books for hours and hours, but those days are mostly gone excepting for the more mainstream stuff.

[helbent4]

Pretty rough crowd here :)



Cav,

Agreed, we do have to be realistic.

Sure, gone are the days when a gaming company could push any POS game out the door and sell them in a game store around the world. Those days are gone!

Still, I don't think it's unrealistic to expect games that are complete and playable. ;)

Tony

[Dog 6]

Many, many people don't like the backstory in T:2013. What do you think of the Reflex system? I really like it.

never used it, the back story made me sick so i shoved it to the floor where it sits to this day

[Dog 6]

I'm curious. Exactly what casualty rate would you consider acceptable for a modern WWIII scenario? FYI, GDW's figures in the 2.0 timeline were 52% in the United States and 45% in Canada, and those numbers were exclusive to primary and secondary casualties from the 1997 nuclear strikes over the 1997-2000 period (pp. 234-236).

To put it another way, what survival rate would you consider plausible for a global conflict producing near-complete disruption of the medical and agricultural industries that enable the current population density in developed nations?

- C.

40-60% would be in the range

[Dog 6]

Wow, that's pretty opinionated. I loved the reflex system, and thought the background was pretty well done, and very well researched. I had a group put together (it fell through, oh well), and we were going to use the Reflex System, but the orig. Twilight 2000 1.0 background - not because we thought the 2013 background stunk, but for nostalgia reasons.

I never understood why some people are so quick to throw out the baby with the bathwater - not just here, but in all the RPG industry. If someone doesn't like the setting, but the rules are just fine, why not use them, and make your own background? Excepting for T:2000, I don't know of a system that I ever ran where I used the background as presented. At best I tweaked it a bit, at worst I chucked it out completely and wrote my own, or took another background for the game.

my money, my opinion.......

[Dog 6]

One of the MAJOR reasons I haven't picked it up is that I've never been able to lay my eyes on it. Personally I don't like buying sight unseen, I prefer to pick it up in the shop, flick through the pages and get a general feel for the work first.
Down in this part of the world that simply wasn't possible - it was either order it from O/S or fork out for the PDF after a brief look at the promo material. The local stores hadn't even heard of it.

pm me if you want my copy............

[Eddie]

40-60% would be in the range

JFTR, this survival rate would equate roughly to the global population of the 1960s, give or take 10 years.

A 10% survival rate would equate to the global population of roughly 1700 or so.

If we use the 2006 world population that we had when we were working on the book.

[cavtroop]

my money, my opinion.......

Absolutely, I'm not trying to take it away from you. But you and others haven't even *played* the game, and are panning it, which doesn't make sense to me.

Nothing I say is going to make you pick it up and give it a whirl, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Raellus]

One of the MAJOR reasons I haven't picked it up is that I've never been able to lay my eyes on it. Personally I don't like buying sight unseen, I prefer to pick it up in the shop, flick through the pages and get a general feel for the work first.
Down in this part of the world that simply wasn't possible - it was either order it from O/S or fork out for the PDF after a brief look at the promo material. The local stores hadn't even heard of it.

I was in a similar position here in the more civilized north. ;) I much prefer PnP materials over PDFs and the like. Call me old fashioned. The few gaming stores up here in my neck of the woods (S. Arizona) didn't carry T2103 ("Twilight what?")- at least when I checked- and refused to order it if I didn't pre-pay. Based on what I'd heard and seen to that point, I wasn't willing to jump through the hoops.

It must be hard for a small gaming company to get its product out there among the masses in this day and age. I don't fault 93GS for this situation. I'm sure they were doing the best they could with the resources they had. I think it's symptomatic of the PnP RPG industry as a whole.

[Adm.Lee]

I never understood why some people are so quick to throw out the baby with the bathwater - not just here, but in all the RPG industry. If someone doesn't like the setting, but the rules are just fine, why not use them, and make your own background? Excepting for T:2000, I don't know of a system that I ever ran where I used the background as presented. At best I tweaked it a bit, at worst I chucked it out completely and wrote my own, or took another background for the game.

Anymore for me, the answer is because I have multiple rules-sets that I can adapt to a setting that interests me. Off the top of my head, I can think of 3 "generic" or "basic" rules in my possession-- Cortex, Traveller, and Savage Worlds. In the time it took me to type that sentence, I remembered I also have GURPS and generic D6.

T2k is one of the few games I have that I would run without shifting to another system,* and one of the few rules-that-came-with-settings that I might try to adapt to another setting.**

* Of the above, SW or Cortex would work for me in a T2k setting game. Or Trav, since that's where this thread started.
** I think v2.2 would work great in an espionage game, modern or historical.

[Targan]

never used it, the back story made me sick so i shoved it to the floor where it sits to this day

Ah well, your money, your opinion as you say. Just seems strange to me that you have no interest in assessing the Reflex rules at all. You don't have to read those parts of the rule book dealing with T:2013's backstory. Heck, you could even cut that stuff out with a box cutter!

If I was going to start a new T2K campaign with players other than those I have been gaming with for the past 2 decades I would probably use the Reflex system over Gunmaster, that's how good I think it is.

[cavtroop]

If I was going to start a new T2K campaign with players other than those I have been gaming with for the past 2 decades I would probably use the Reflex system over Gunmaster, that's how good I think it is.

I second this. I seriously like the Reflex system. I don't think any of the generic systems will work well. The one I am most familiar with - Savage Worlds - is exactly the opposite of what I think would work well with this setting. You have one skill for shooting - 'Shooting' that handles all firearms - rifles, pistols, smg, mg, etc. etc. SW lacks the crunch that this setting needs I think.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Rae,

One problem with T2013 was that it wasn't even half a usable product.

From what I gathered, there were serious issues in parts of the vehicle combat system where it tried to mesh with the Reflex system in different ways relating to small arms and light cannon penetration vs light armoured vehicles and initiative. I think there are new rules (linked-to elsewhere in this forum) that iron out these inconsistencies a long time after I bought the main rules.

Tony

I didn't think I was going to be one to defend 2013 but, here goes nothing...

In my opinion this is an unnecessarily harsh criticism of the entire product because you can't really judge the rules if you're simply taking other people's comments on them and haven't actually read them yourself. :(

The Reflex system is a good solid set of rules that you can scale up or down as needed. Sure it had issues at the start with integration of vehicles but then so did Twilight: 2000 in at least 2nd ed. There's not a lot of new RPGs released in the last 10 years that didn't have minor rules issues here and there.

Just in case anyone sees more here than what I actually mean, I'm not seeking to attack anyone's opinion here, I'm not a fan of the 2013 timeline myself but geez talk about harsh crowd.
The guys did put out a decent stand-alone military RPG, something that very few (if any) other companies are even interested in doing.

Perhaps they should have called it 'Apocalypse: 2013' or called it 'End Date: 2013' or 'Alpha & Omega 2013' or just '2013' or any-damned-thing else - I think the biggest problem here is nostalgia. With the Twilight name attached to it, perhaps some people where expecting it to be exactly like T2k which it could never hope to be simply because the world has changed too much and as I mentioned before, military & post-apoc RPGs are now a minor market in the grand scheme of things.

It needed to be more current so as to attract the next generation of gamers because in reality, the only real market for Twilight: 2000 these days is with older gamers who already have most of what they need to run it. So the company would be reduced to making new adventure modules and with a product that has an appeal to a relatively small audience, you aint gonna make much money out of that.

[Jason]

I have run a T2013 campaign. I have said it before and I will repeat it here; T2013 has the best mechanic for small-unit conflict of any rpg I have ever played. I love T2k 2.2 ed., but T2013 blows that system out of the water. I never had a problem with any of the other rules including vehicle combat (which is admittedly rare).

The creators of T2013 made a serious tactical error when they marginalized the background. The background is weak enough to throw some people, adding a few tweaks made it work for me.

RPG publishing must be an enormous headache. I cannot imagine trying something on that scale.

[helbent4]

I didn't think I was going to be one to defend 2013 but, here goes nothing...

In my opinion this is an unnecessarily harsh criticism of the entire product because you can't really judge the rules if you're simply taking other people's comments on them and haven't actually read them yourself. :(


SSC,

I think you are mistaken, I bought a copy of the rules and have "actually read them" myself. You are thinking of someone else? :confused:

As for who I listened to, I had some questions with the rules and figured I should go directly to the horse's mouth. These problems were posted there. In fact, I found a mea culpa from I what i believe were the game designers themselves, about how they tried to adapt T2Ks vehicle combat rules to Reflex and this created unexpected rules conflicts. (Like many things in life, I could be mistaken.) I don't think I'm being unnecessarily harsh if I'm simply agreeing with openly acknowledged flaws.

I agree, perhaps T2013 should have been called something else and therefore it could have been judged on its own terms, instead of using a licence that mostly ended up being ignored. A lot of effort is made in attracting a "new crowd", but my experience with newer gamers is they tend to expect simpler, quicker, more abstract rules and games, even when relating to combat and warfare. Pretty much the opposite of T2013 in general and Reflex in particular, whether or not you think this is good or bad. (Personally, I think there is a lot to recommend Reflex and while I've played and run Dogs in the Vineyard, Shock: Social Science Fiction, Unsung and other indie/avant-garde systems I still prefer a good crunchy game.)

Bringing this back to Mongoose, updating T2013 had demonstrably mixed results. Arguably, some gamers were at least a little alienated while the hoped-for breakthrough with younger gamers that was apparently the whole point of the exercise wasn't altogether achieved. It's not clear to me why if Mongoose were to take a kick at the can they would want to do it in the same way and expect different results.

Tony

[Tegyrius]

It must be hard for a small gaming company to get its product out there among the masses in this day and age. I don't fault 93GS for this situation. I'm sure they were doing the best they could with the resources they had. I think it's symptomatic of the PnP RPG industry as a whole.
I've never been in a position to deal with the business side of operations (always been freelance writing talent, never a "captive" employee), but my understanding is that the game distribution channels have radically contracted over the past decade. I can recall at least three major closures - one that outright destroyed several small publishers whose sole distributor went out of business.

As for who I listened to, I had some questions with the rules and figured I should go directly to the horse's mouth. These problems were posted there. In fact, I found a mea culpa from I what i believe were the game designers themselves, about how they tried to adapt T2Ks vehicle combat rules to Reflex and this created unexpected rules conflicts. (Like many things in life, I could be mistaken.) I don't think I'm being unnecessarily harsh if I'm simply agreeing with openly acknowledged flaws.
I'll own that particular cock-up. This was the intersection of two separate design efforts that I didn't fully test in conjunction with one another before we released.

First was small arms effects on personnel. When we designed this, we went with an all-new damage and penetration formula based on a combination of kinetic energy and cross-sectional area. We calibrated the baseline numbers for a key set of calibers against the expected range of character wound thresholds. Then we set the numbers for body armor so it would equal real-world performance as per NIJ standards. So far, so good.

The problems came when, rather than doing the same thing for heavy weapons and vehicle armor, I tried to keep GDW's 2.0/2.2 values intact to allow easy adaptation of the vehicle guides. Unfortunately, because GDW's small arms damage and armor equivalency scales were different, this created situations where assault rifles could damage, if not outright kill, some AFVs - and a PC wearing Level IV trauma plates had better protection than a Stryker.

If anyone still cares at this point, here's the thread on the 93GS forum where I posted the complete fix (http://www.93gamesstudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=2820). It's also in the Driver's Guide: Czech Your Engine (http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=2361) manuscript I released in July.

That's certainly not the only rules hole in Reflex. It's far from perfect and I have a laundry list of things I'd change if I had the opportunity to do a second edition of it.

Bringing this back to Mongoose, updating T2013 had demonstrably mixed results. Arguably, some gamers were at least a little alienated while the hoped-for breakthrough with younger gamers that was apparently the whole point of the exercise wasn't altogether achieved. It's not clear to me why if Mongoose were to take a kick at the can they would want to do it in the same way and expect different results.
The more I think about this, the more I expect Mongoose is going to attempt to cash in on the nostalgia market and apply their existing Trav rules set to a 1.0 or 2.0 timeline. I have no evidence for this belief beyond the fact that I don't think they did a reboot of the Trav timeline. I doubt it'll be successful, but niche products have surprised me before.

- C.

[helbent4]

I'll own that particular cock-up. This was the intersection of two separate design efforts that I didn't fully test in conjunction with one another before we released.

The more I think about this, the more I expect Mongoose is going to attempt to cash in on the nostalgia market and apply their existing Trav rules set to a 1.0 or 2.0 timeline. I have no evidence for this belief beyond the fact that I don't think they did a reboot of the Trav timeline. I doubt it'll be successful, but niche products have surprised me before.

Tegyrus,

Please accept my apologies, I don't want to stir up any more ragging on you or 93SG. Thanks for including the link!

Regarding Mongoose, I think it's a little optimistic to hope that any game based on T2K (pretty much the definition of a realistic, crunchy, detailed military RPG) would somehow appeal to any untapped demographic segment of the market. Mongoose may as well go back to the well if niches are the dominant market reality.

Tony

[Morthrai]

Sure, gone are the days when a gaming company could push any POS game out the door and sell them in a game store around the world. Those days are gone!

Still, I don't think it's unrealistic to expect games that are complete and playable. ;)

I agree wholeheartedly with that statement helbent. Mind you, I am seeing it from the other side for the first time at the moment and man it is hard to get everything right!

[Tegyrius]

Please accept my apologies, I don't want to stir up any more ragging on you or 93SG. Thanks for including the link!
No, you're good. Pointing out that particular issue was a valid criticism of the system and it's a hole I should have plugged shortly after release. Keeping up with errata (http://www.93gamesstudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1988) is part of the job. Or was. Whichever.

Anyway. I'm unlikely to take exception to people pointing out errata issues unless they do it with significantly less tact than you did. My main issue is with people arbitrarily dismissing the system, unplayed and sometimes even unread, because something in the setting beat up their honor students or shaved their dogs.

Regarding Mongoose, I think it's a little optimistic to hope that any game based on T2K (pretty much the definition of a realistic, crunchy, detailed military RPG) would somehow appeal to any untapped demographic segment of the market. Mongoose may as well go back to the well if niches are the dominant market reality.
This entire industry is a niche. No one does this to get rich. Well, some people get in thinking they will and learn painful lessons about the tiny and fickle nature of their target markets. But most of us do it because we're gamers and we have a burning drive to create, not just follow.

Now... from what Matt Sprange has said, Mongoose tends not to go after licenses unless someone on staff is passionate enough about the property to champion its acquisition and drive the subsequent projects. So there may be someone in their shop who'd fit in well here (if he isn't already lurking) and whose vision matches this community's more than the 2013 team's did. I suspect they have a business plan that they think they can make work. I just don't know that I share their optimism right now.

- C.

[Legbreaker]

I suppose the demise of T:2013 must be somewhat like loosing a child. You put a lot of love and effort into raising it the best you can and then, after a short illness you try to stay positive through, it's all over and you find yourself shovelling dirt into it's grave.
:(

[helbent4]

Now... from what Matt Sprange has said, Mongoose tends not to go after licenses unless someone on staff is passionate enough about the property to champion its acquisition and drive the subsequent projects. So there may be someone in their shop who'd fit in well here (if he isn't already lurking) and whose vision matches this community's more than the 2013 team's did. I suspect they have a business plan that they think they can make work. I just don't know that I share their optimism right now.


Tegyrus,

Hey, I would imagine that if Mongoose had someone who went to bat for Traveller, there is someone who likes T2K due to the natural cross-over between the games. There may or may not be cause for optimism, I think there is enough of an established market to break even. We can only hope!

Tony

[helbent4]

I suppose the demise of T:2013 must be somewhat like loosing a child. You put a lot of love and effort into raising it the best you can and then, after a short illness you try to stay positive through, it's all over and you find yourself shovelling dirt into it's grave.
:(

Leg,

Bloody hell, now I want to kill myself.

Worst. Metaphor. Ever. :p

Tony

[StainlessSteelCynic]

SSC,

I think you are mistaken, I bought a copy of the rules and have "actually read them" myself. You are thinking of someone else? :confused:

...Tony

Sorry, my mistake. When you used the phrase "From what I gathered...", I understood it as not "I've read it and these are my thoughts..." but as "I've heard this about it..."

[helbent4]

Sorry, my mistake. When you used the phrase "From what I gathered...", I understood it as not "I've read it and these are my thoughts..." but as "I've heard this about it..."

SSC,

Sure, but even if I was going off secondhand knowledge you really took me to task for bringing up known problems that 93GS already publicly copped to themselves (insofar as Tegyrus was speaking for them). If that's "unnecessarily harsh criticism" to you, what, if anything, could possibly constitute fair criticism of T2013? :rolleyes:

I mean, you know, I implicitly understand the main problem is T2013 was just too awesome and I'm not worthy. Let's just accept that, and move on. ;)

Tony

[Dog 6]

Ah well, your money, your opinion as you say. Just seems strange to me that you have no interest in assessing the Reflex rules at all. You don't have to read those parts of the rule book dealing with T:2013's backstory. Heck, you could even cut that stuff out with a box cutter!

If I was going to start a new T2K campaign with players other than those I have been gaming with for the past 2 decades I would probably use the Reflex system over Gunmaster, that's how good I think it is.

I got around to reading the Reflex rules and I must say I'm very impressed, if its not "the best" its damn close......... :)