OTish - the current situation on the board

[B.T.]

During the last few days, the tone on the board really went into a direction, that the majority of us seem not to favor. And I personally think, we should actively search for a solution. Espacially those "canon vs. non-canon" discussions don't lead to anything positive. Legbreaker mentioned in another thread, that e-mails and personal messages are flying around. As I am PMing for myself, I know, that several members are annoyed, dislike the situation in the moment, and considering to leave the board. And that cannot be the right way! .
Olefin said, he's not here to find new friends, but to discuss the game (and game related background). And he said, he has the approval from one of the moderators, that his approach is okay with the boards policy.
Maybe there is a way, where everybody can put his thoughts to the public, but avoid all the "drama". Just as Webstral said: "I have a wife and two young children, so I get plenty of drama at home. When I’m teaching, I have classrooms filled with tweens, so I get plenty of drama at work. I keep the company of men on the Internet to avoid the drama. Let’s not get spun up over whose ideas are more logically consistent or more likely to win favor from Frank Frey. In all likelihood, Frank is steering clear of us because he doesn’t need the drama, either". Although not all of us are married and have children, I think, most of us think along similar lines, as Web put it! I don't need that kind of drama, either! If we look at the last few threads, it is obvious, that some of the regular posters (I mean the posters, that were regularly posting during the last month, like Medic, just to grab one example.) did not post during the last week (s). Others have spoken up again, like LAW.
I can't speak for others, but if you click to the statistics of several members, there seems to be some kind of scheme: Some people did not log in for quite some time. Maybe those members don't log in but just read the threads as "guests". Or, and that's what I fear, they don't visit us, at least at the moment. Maybe I'm all wrong with that assumption, but the very hot-blooded discussions of recent days seem to have distracted some members.
Don't get me wrong: Everybody should have the chance, to present his personal approach to the game. And everybody should have the chance to comment or ignore those approaches. But keeping it friendly and civilized would be a benefit to the majority.

Now, what follows is my personal view and I adress you personally, Olefin. But I want to do this in public, to make my view and my standing point very clear: Some of your observations are pretty cool. I don't have the patience, nor have I the articles or modules in my posession. But I would prefer, if you would not start that many threads. Maybe one wider-themed thread would be a better idea. Something like: "Olefins T2k version - the changes I've made and why"
I can see some of your points. But sometimes I wonder: What is your intend? If canon suits you and your interpretation, you discuss with the info, taken from canon. But on the other hand: If you think, canon should be altered, you fight canon with canon, so to speak. The question, if a game is still supported or not, has nothing to do with parts of the background being canon. And to be honest: Whenever I see a new post from you, I can see what happens: You say something. And you come around like "the new Encyclopaedia Twilight", as Medic put it at one time. Legbreaker reacts. You react to the reaction. Someone of the more moderate members tries to keep it calm. You both, Legbreaker and Olefin, go for one another. This is boring. It brings bad blood. There is no benefit for anyone. And, frankly speaking, I have the suspicion, that some of the threats suite another purpose: Further provoking Legbreaker. (And by the way: On several occasions you've mentioned, that you would not get personal first hand. That is not true. You are permanently adressing Legbreaker, and on at least one occasion Targan, without any reason. Some of the tension could be avoided, if you would stop that.)

Now, if there would be a thread (or two or three), that are clearly marked as "Olefin's T2k universe", there would be less fighting. Members, who would like to ignore your way, could easily stay away. And all those needless "canon vs. non-canon"-discussions could find an end! And: The input of others might be more constructive.

This board has been a very important source for me. I had the chance, to ask questions. And reading all those older threads gave me inspiration and helped to fix things for my game. It would be very sad, if the momentary situation would make members leave the board. After all (and yes, this has been said by several members on numerous situations!) we, as a community, belong to a dying breed. We are playing a "niche-within-a-niche-within-a-niche game", as Raketenjagdpanzer said, very on point!

I, for myself, would be glad, if all these "pissing contests" (Thank you, Raellus. It was one of the English terms I learned on this board and this term just seems to be nicely fitting here!) could be surmounted. I don't want to read this whole "But it is canon"-"No it is not"-stuff anymore.

One last thing, more true than ever: I've tried to put this post in a civilized manner. I'm aware, that I've criticized Olefin, but I hope, it was in an acceptable manner. Read my sig! If I came on to strong or to offensive, please contact me. I'm trying to find a solution, that works for the majority of the members. Let's keep calm! It is not my intend, to slap someone's face more, than he deserves!

Phhh ... Over and Out!

[mikeo80]

I would like to add my two cents to this discussion.

AS a "newbe", I am not as aware of the differences between one person's interpretation of "canon" and another's. I have only played T2k once or twice. I do not own most of the modules that are discussed on the board.

I do enjoy reading the different opinions that are expressed in these different threads. Open and honest discussion has always been part of who I am and how I learn about different things.

I am NOT going to point fingers. I do not know enough to have an educated thought on most of the issues that are raised here in the forum. But I do not want to see the board destroyed by those who have strong opinions one way or another on the different modules from the game system.

I look at this issue this way. It's a game. I have played a lot of TMP. Do I follow "canon" every time? Heck no. If I want to change something for this scenario or that gaming session, I do. I think that T2K is a very robust and flexible system. Enought so that IF you want to run "Pirates of the Vestula" one way, and someone else has a diffent view on how the scenario "should" go, then DO IT!!

It seems to me that most of the contributing authors on this board do not play T2K in ongoing groups. Most of us have contracted that dread disease "RL" (real life) that prevents us from sitting down with some friends and rolling some dice.

Anywho....enough of me on my soapbox. It's time for someone else to step up here and share their views.

My $0.02

Mike

[Legbreaker]

My only comment is that the issue is in hand.

[Targan]

As I've said in the Operation Proud Lion thread, the recent unpleasantness really isn't canon vs non-canon at it's core. It's about the way that opinions and even facts are delivered, and it's the result of a deliberate campaign of slowly building irritation. It's basically underhanded, but admittedly quite clever, mood manipulation for the purposes of one member's enjoyment. It's about a lack of respect for the existing vibe of this forum. IMO.

[B.T.]

This is exactly, what I think, Targan!

[Mahatatain]

My own take on this (from someone who is an erratic poster anyway) is that this forum used to have a friendly and cooperative atmosphere to it and that that has changed in recent months and I believe that that is putting people off posting. It has become much more confrontational environment where people aren't really willing to listen to other people's opinions and just want to scream and yell that they're right and the other person is wrong. In other words it has changed to being like much of the rest of the internet!

Hopefully if people can calm down a bit and be a lot more respectful of other people's opinions then this forum can return to something like how it once was. You don't have to agree with someone else's opinions but clearly stating why you disagree in a friendly and constructive manner is much more likely to get them to change their mind and agree with you that simply turning it into an argument.

It is also extremely arrogant to assume that you're always right - if you're going to start a discussion or express a point of view on something then you should be prepared to read other people's responses with an open mind as they might just have a good point! If you're not doing that then you will rapidly gain a reputation as an arrogant person and that will damage the credibility of anything further that you write! If you want to be an accepted expert on something then you need to gain the respect from your audience and ignoring their points of view instantly destroys that respect and your own credibility!

[Adm.Lee]

"Let's agree to disagree" should probably be our watch-word. So far, I think I've kept from losing my temper on any argument around here.

[Olefin]

Board status quo is also another word for stagnation by the way. Why not look at it another way - in the past few weeks several members have started an on line game here and are now playing again, with some having not played for several years before.

New ideas and discussions have been started both with good and bad effects.

And we have had posts again by Chico as well as other new people.

New people always bring a new dynamic to any board as they do to any family relationship. Try marrying into a tight family sometime and see how much fun you have at the beginning.

You can either go around talking about how the status quo was upset and get into a pisssing contest if the new member doesnt think like you do and thus chase off new members or you can realize that things will be rough for a while and then settle down again as the new member gets his sea legs and figures out the board dynamic.

So you need to make a decision - do you want a static board that wont embrace new members and ideas and eventually stagnates and dies or are you prepared to accept a dynamic board and the frictions that such a board will have, especially if new members and some old members rub each other wrong way?

As for my saying I wasnt here to make new friends but discuss the game - that means specifically that if what I say isnt universally accepted that I will still make a reasoned argument for it instead of just going along with some of the more established vocal members so I can fit in - and thus continue a stagnation of new ideas.

Hopefully some of what I say will provide new inspiration and challenges that will make people want to get into the game more.

And if I challenge canon its because we are dealing with a game that died a long time ago as to new material and could use a "shaking" up to start it up again. Canon is what the players make of it - and talking about old modules and sourcebooks is a great way to get people to pull them out again, take a look at them and maybe think of new ways to look at them and maybe just maybe start new campaigns.

Or better yet issue new material like James, Chico, Raellus and others have done and thus provide new inspiration for the remaining players and new ones as well.

And challenging pre-conceptions is what a good member does in a discussion forum. As to my tone - I may be abrasive and for that I apologize. I tend to be blunt and I will endeavor to not be so blunt in the future.

But I will say this to those who have called me an idiot or make insulting comments about my motivations in public comments here.

That kind of behavior demeans any board and isnt one that will attract new members of any type and will make people who want to post decide that maybe this board isnt what they want to partipate in. I dont do that to others here because thats how you have a board that chases off new members and discourage existing ones.

I also dont do that because frankly that is attempted brow beating and bullying. And the last time I looked at the board policy that Kato set up bullying is against the rules here.

Frankly it doesnt matter if you are a brand new member or have been here since day one or if you are a moderator. Attacking a member, no matter how new or old they are, in a blatant attempt to silence them or drive them off the board is bad behavior no longer how long you have been here. If you dont like what they have to say then you have a simple solution - hit the ignore button on his posts.

[Olefin]

as for my starting new threads - new threads are how boards continue to thrive. That is a sign of a new member having enthusiasm for the board. I havent noticed you saying the same thing to James or others with new threads.

look at the one on the French - Stainless Steel just gave a great idea that frankly could make for a terrific scenario based on the discussion there

without that thread that idea would not have been posted

I do have threads where I specifically have addressed and am addressing my T2K campaign that we played while I was in college.

If you want to talk to me do it by email privately. You will do a lot more to influence me that way then any public posting.

You will find that trying to publicy say personal things about me is actually the best way to not influence me.

Oh and yes - I have followed moderator policy in all that I have posted including editing posts when I was asked to by the moderator I am referring to.

Now frankly lets get back to discussing the T2 universe.

[Raellus]

Here's my take on canon, folks:


Canon is the sum of the published T2K modules.

Canon provides a framework for the game master.

Therefore, canon may be altered to suit the GM's vision of the universe that he or she is creating for his/her T2K campaign.

Canon thus altered does not, in and of itself, become canon.



I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Everyone has their own T2KU. Everyone is free to pick and choose what to include, omit, or change for their own T2KU. This freedom to modify extends both to canon (1) and to fan created materials (4).

I think the issue that quite a few folks are having right now is that some posters are more or less stating that their own interpretations of canon (4) are indeed becoming a sort of neo-canon (1) and that all other interpretations are more or less rubbish. This has recently extended to official published canon materials (1) such as Howling Wilderness. I too have problems with HW, but I am not going to go so far as to declare it non-canonical. That, to me, would be extremely arrogant.

Since these debates about canon are really putting people off, I suggest we start a thread solely devoted to this issue and let anyone who's interested in "discussing" the matter do so there. Canon debates will be off limits in all other threads. As mod, I am willing to merge several of the recent threads that have devolved into canon debates so that there is less noise and clutter on the board.

I also like B.T.'s idea about a thread devoted to a particular member's vision of T2K. Olefin, you could start an Olefin's T2KU thread in which you could present your vision of what the T2KU is. Fans could enjoy it, foes could ignore it.

I just think that when people seem to push their own vision as being more valid or proper or true or "canonical", other people are going to take offense. It causes drama that most of us don't want or need. T2K is for EVERYONE. No one should try to dictate what T2K should be. It's not seemly.

[Olefin]

Canon is the sum of the published materials - but many of them conflict or have holes in them big enough to drive the not mentioned French Fleet in the RDF, the 140th Russian Motorized Division at Riga (which is in the Soviet Vehicle Guide in the front and then not detailed in the division by division break down), etc.. ;thru them.

If you are going to put all that either off limits or into one super thread then it will be one massive thread indeed or one very squelched board.

So what will discussing canon be then - does that mean that James's thread on the 49th Armored Division, which is canonically based, now has to be in the super thread? Or the French casualties as indicated in the RDF? Or where the tanks that appeared in the RDF that werent there six months earlier came from? Or any discussion of the canon as the Tarawa's fate?

Will Chico's earlier posts be moved there as well about the US Recovery Plan that was in opposition to HW and Kidnapped?

Thats one big thread indeed, one that will be too unwieldy. You may want to have it be in a new section of the board, similiar to the 2300 AD or Morrow areas.

[Olefin]

and by the way on the other side of the coin its also just as pushy to say canon canon canon in response as if the canon was the Holy Bible that cannot be challenged - when almost every source book and module has multiple statements about how the referree can change the canon as he or she sees fit for their particular campaign

So that ability to modify canon as the referee sees fit is also canon according to GDW.

[Raellus]

Canon is the sum of the published materials - but many of them conflict or have holes in them big enough to drive the not mentioned French Fleet in the RDF, the 140th Russian Motorized Division at Riga (which is in the Soviet Vehicle Guide in the front and then not detailed in the division by division break down), etc.. ;thru them.

You are correct. There are some massive contridictions, inconsistencies, and omissions in the sum of the published materials. Some modules are definitely "buggier" than others.

You are, of course, free to make alterations, adjustments, and/or additions as you see fit.

What I don't think you should do is declare that your personal vision/version is canon. You have at least strongly implied this several times, in several threads, in this forum. In some cases, other members have supported your vision. In many others, members have not. Without some common understanding of what canon is, this debate is going to keep reigniting. It is getting old, though, and a lot of forum members would like to moot it and move on.

It doesn't seem that people here are interested in coming up with an updated, revised version of canon. That would require consensus. Since this debate keeps coming up and getting heated, it doesn't seem like coming to such a consensus is a realistic or achievable goal. We are all going to have to agree to disagree. I just want to come to an understanding so that we can all move forward.

and by the way on the other side of the coin its also just as pushy to say canon canon canon in response as if the canon was the Holy Bible that cannot be challenged - when almost every source book and module has multiple statements about how the referree can change the canon as he or she sees fit for their particular campaign

So that ability to modify canon as the referee sees fit is also canon according to GDW.

Right. And by this logic, everything is canon. So we don't need to keep using the word. Or we can agree that canon is a baseline reference point. I think that's how most people would like to keep it.

James' and Chico's work are fine examples of how fans can play with canon and produce some stellar supplemental material. They, however, as far as I can recall, have never declared their work to be, or to supercede, canon. They've simply presented their material to the other forumites as a gift to do with as they see fit. They've never tried to dictate what is and what is not canon.

That is the key point that I am trying to make. Everyone is free to share their vision of the T2KU, but I don't think that anyone should try to tell others what the best vision is.

[James Langham]

I find it quite interesting that BOTH sides seem to respect my work. As a result I hope that I can appeal to both sides.

* What is canon is clearly set out in Far Futures Guide to TW2000 - listed as non-canon but apocryphal are City of Angels and the Finnish Supplements. Not listed anywhere is the cross-over Paranoia adventure.

* Far Future therefore see HW as canon. We may not like this but there it is.

* It also means only Far Future can decide what is canon. It is their game after all...

* However we all have our own TW2000 universe in this we can decide what we regard as canon (admittedly our own heretical canon! :-) ). We can not however impose this vision on others. We can suggest and they can then decide IF they wish to add it.

* I have major issues with certain aspects of canon myself (in particular the UK). Generally I play this down to make my articles more usable by others.

* Interestingly when MINOR changes in canon are proposed we generally all agree (e.g. changing Finnish assault rifles to the correct R62). Errors do get made and remember GDW were working this all out pre-internet. Interestingly when I made a note re the changes to the 49th Armoured Division sub-units nobody complained.

* I tend to write my articles as historical documents - this then allows me to say that any errors are historian's mistakes. If we apply this approach to GDW's works this will allow a much broader acceptance of canon (e.g. the proposed date changes in HW).

* Read any real history books (especially those written just after an event), look at the contradictions in these. As an example I am currently reading the excellent "Horse Soldiers" that has the Taliban using T52 tanks (probably a typing error) and BMPs which from the description are BMP3s! (probably an error when the author was adding the details to what was described as BMPs in the accounts).

* I personally prefer canon articles but I tend to read non-canon too as nobody has a monopoly on good ideas.

* A debate on what is or appears to be wrong in canon is fine as long as it is not personal. Sometimes interesting facts can come from this.

* When we post our ideas we automatically open ourselves up to criticism. We can all make mistakes (I certainly have - see the first draft of the 29th Infantry Division). In return we should be able to expect constructive criticism. I am fortunate that the criticism I have had has always been constructive and this has encouraged me to write more.

* If we depart from canon in what we post we should state that it has departed and ideally say why. If this is done we can hardly be criticized for departing from canon although the reasoning could reasonably be.

* I would hate this forum to dissolve into chaos and anarchy, I have gained much from here, much of which I have then incorporated and shared with other members. This has then inspired others. Having Rainbow Six (and others) then start putting up their own works referencing mine is a great honour. We are greater than the sum of the parts.

[95th Rifleman]

I must admit that current events have put me off posting.

I run my game based on an 80's timeline in which the entire 1st ed timeline is set back a decade. Thus we sidestep real history such as the gulf war and the ww3 scenario is actualy far more realistic.

I've been tempted to post threads discussing this but in the current climate I'm just not prepared for flame wars and negative attitudes.

[James Langham]

I must admit that current events have put me off posting.

I run my game based on an 80's timeline in which the entire 1st ed timeline is set back a decade. Thus we sidestep real history such as the gulf war and the ww3 scenario is actualy far more realistic.

I've been tempted to post threads discussing this but in the current climate I'm just not prepared for flame wars and negative attitudes.

I have to say, I for one would like to see your work.

[Webstral]

Well said, James.

I will add to his observations that I have posted a fair amount of material that is non-canonical without inspiring anything like the turbulence and rancor that have appeared here of late. I’ve even had to make modest changes to the published material to make things work without drawing strong reactions from folks who are strong supporters of a) the published materials and b) a different vision of Twilight: 2000 beyond the material already in print.

As with all things, the benefits must outweigh the costs. New certainly can be a benefit. Not all new ideas are good by dint of being new. The Soviets got rid of the trappings of military professionalism in the 1930’s, then restored them after discovering that soldiers like formal ranks, medals, and the other old-school aspects disparaged by communism. The Israelis concluded after the Six Day War that tanks could operate independently of infantry to achieve decisive results. They had to go back to the standard way of doing business during the Yom Kippur War. The new has to prove itself based on merit, not force of personality.

[Panther Al]

I've stayed out of it because while I agree the HW is a debacle at best, and also I have posted my thoughts on the 49th elsewhere, and don't see the need to beat more upon it.

Besides, its better to bite the tongue and walk away than argue over what we are allowed to talk about or not- just because it might have been talked about before and therefor not allowed to bring it back up according to some being something that has done serious damage to my tongue... and the same goes for the beating of a dead horse by others.

;)


Anyways: 95th: I would love to see the stuff on the 80's. Personally, I agree: That time frame is perfect for the cold war going hot scenario: The tech levels are about as equal as they are ever going to be, so having WW3 devolve into a 30 Year's War style mess is much more probable then than it was in the late 90's.

[oldschoolgm]

I haven't posted here in a long while, but thought I might add something here.

The beauty of this site is that there is a good community supporting a game I fell in love with in the 80's. I come to this site to gather info and ask questions of people who have a far better grasp of the big picture of this game than I do. I've received a lot of good answers and support here. I truly appreciate everyones time and energy that they have put into this site and game.

Regardless of all the canon/non-canon debates this game ultimately boils down to what the players in my game decide to do in the telling of their own story amid the backdrop of this games larger story. When I read the modules and supplements and such I really am looking to ferret out more flavor and realism for the players in my game. What units have what and their exact locations at any point of the timeline has very little relevance to what happens.

That being said, since it's been a long while since I ran a T2K game, I really like using the books and this site to put together ideas to build around short stories that I write for my own amusement. Again this is about the survival of a small handful of people in the larger scope of the game.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is that I truly hope everyone can find a happy medium here and continue to work together. I for one benefit from such dedication to this community and I hope to continue to benefit from all this. My hat is off to all of you for what you have brought here.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

I just want to say, for myself, if I am discussing non-canon/my campaign material (which will always be non-canon, for I dislike HW and some other US modules), I will preface that post with [NC].

[weswood]

I usually zone out when threads turn into the canon/non canon or real/unreal argument. But one thing no one has said, at least I haven't read is

IT"S A FREAKIN GAME, PEOPLE!.

Who cares if someone literally halfway across the world disagrees with your version of the game???? Does it stop your fun???? I have my own house rules but if I'm not running the game, I don't get pissed if they're not used. We, as a group, got into role playing games in general and T2K because out own personal bent to have fun.

[Jason Weiser]

Gentlemen,
I've had discussions with many of the moderators as well as Olefin. Granted, I am neither a mod, nor the most prolific of posters to this forum. (RL has been a nasty b#$&h of late).

I am getting irritated with the need of some to say that because a sentence is written in a published Twilight 2000 adventure a certain way then that's the way it is, end of discussion.

Considering the game is:

1) Been out of print since 2010 and the demise of 93 Games's latest incarnation, then there is no NEW material to be discussed and/or dissected. In short, we want anything T2K? We gotta do it ourselves. So canon interpretations are going to get spun, folded and mutilated.

2) Accusations being made that the creators of said material are "forcing" their take on the T2K universe on them. Know what? I'm waving the BS flag here. Sorry, not buying. Unless I have come to your home with a loaded gun, put it to your head and demanded you accept my version of T2K or else, then there is nothing preventing you from acting like an adult I presume you to be and simply just going your own way. When I did my stuff for Etranger, we had an unspoken rule, if stuff contradicted, so long as it made some sort of sense, then leave it up to those using it to do what they will with it. I am still proud people there build on my US Army articles. Folks, this game was written by a dozen designers in the 80s on a killer production schedule. Unless you had a line editor with near-dictatorial powers and the ability to retcon at will (For those in the know, it's begun to fracture Classic Battletech to some extent), errors and all kinds of nuttiness was going to sneak in. I know something about that as I am doing contract work for a going concern myself. I am also doing a fan project linking the Force on Force miniatures rules and RDF Sourcebook in a fan scenario pack (Yes, I sent Frank Frey a copy to read). I had to do a lot of interpretation of several sentences of canon to get 11 gameable scenarios out of it. My take on canon may not match somebody else's. So what. YMMV. Really folks, we're going to treat Twilight 2000 like holy writ? If so, then who's being named the high priests? Sorry, I am Jewish enough and not looking to switch religions.

3) Finally? We come here to have fun, not to piss in other people's ponds. I certainly do. I have loved this game since 1984 when I read an Analog review and a voice in my head said "I must have this game." This game has influenced my writing to a large degree, and in many ways, gave me the guts to try my hand AT writing. So, why don't we all back off of our hobby horses and say, "OK, he thinks differently than I do. Doesn't mean I have to engage in the internet version of the dry gulch."

I do hope this appeal for calm has reached someone. I don't expect to be universally praised. And believe me, I have held my fire here. But honestly? We're a small fanbase killing each other over the interpretations of a dead game. We laugh at the Trekkies when they argue over some arcane bit of Trek lore, so then, why the hell are we doing it?

[Olefin]

Gentlemen,
I've had discussions with many of the moderators as well as Olefin. Granted, I am neither a mod, nor the most prolific of posters to this forum. (RL has been a nasty b#$&h of late).

I am getting irritated with the need of some to say that because a sentence is written in a published Twilight 2000 adventure a certain way then that's the way it is, end of discussion.

Considering the game is:

1) Been out of print since 2010 and the demise of 93 Games's latest incarnation, then there is no NEW material to be discussed and/or dissected. In short, we want anything T2K? We gotta do it ourselves. So canon interpretations are going to get spun, folded and mutilated.

2) Accusations being made that the creators of said material are "forcing" their take on the T2K universe on them. Know what? I'm waving the BS flag here. Sorry, not buying. Unless I have come to your home with a loaded gun, put it to your head and demanded you accept my version of T2K or else, then there is nothing preventing you from acting like an adult I presume you to be and simply just going your own way. When I did my stuff for Etranger, we had an unspoken rule, if stuff contradicted, so long as it made some sort of sense, then leave it up to those using it to do what they will with it. I am still proud people there build on my US Army articles. Folks, this game was written by a dozen designers in the 80s on a killer production schedule. Unless you had a line editor with near-dictatorial powers and the ability to retcon at will (For those in the know, it's begun to fracture Classic Battletech to some extent), errors and all kinds of nuttiness was going to sneak in. I know something about that as I am doing contract work for a going concern myself. I am also doing a fan project linking the Force on Force miniatures rules and RDF Sourcebook in a fan scenario pack (Yes, I sent Frank Frey a copy to read). I had to do a lot of interpretation of several sentences of canon to get 11 gameable scenarios out of it. My take on canon may not match somebody else's. So what. YMMV. Really folks, we're going to treat Twilight 2000 like holy writ? If so, then who's being named the high priests? Sorry, I am Jewish enough and not looking to switch religions.

3) Finally? We come here to have fun, not to piss in other people's ponds. I certainly do. I have loved this game since 1984 when I read an Analog review and a voice in my head said "I must have this game." This game has influenced my writing to a large degree, and in many ways, gave me the guts to try my hand AT writing. So, why don't we all back off of our hobby horses and say, "OK, he thinks differently than I do. Doesn't mean I have to engage in the internet version of the dry gulch."

I do hope this appeal for calm has reached someone. I don't expect to be universally praised. And believe me, I have held my fire here. But honestly? We're a small fanbase killing each other over the interpretations of a dead game. We laugh at the Trekkies when they argue over some arcane bit of Trek lore, so then, why the hell are we doing it?

Very very well said Jason - and for the record I loved the articles you did. They were great reads.

[Olefin]

The canon as was presented by GDW is the basis of the game people - and if we cannot discuss it, if we cannot ask questions about it, if we cannot challenge it in order to improve the game and to clean up the multitude of errors, misstatements and errors in it then really what is the board for? If there was bad blood in the past then that is the past. But you dont squelch discussion on a board based on the events of the past.

And as Jason said - no one is forcing anyone to change nor is anyone trying to do so. And the modules and sourcebooks being treated like Holy Writ and any challenge of them blasphemy is a great way to take the game and freeze it in amber forever, a nice bauble to look at but not a living breathing game that can be expanded on, corrected and changed as it should be.

And change doesnt come with some pain and some treasured things having to be discarded or modified. I loved my original Commodore 64 but that doesnt mean I still use it today and treat anyone who tells me computers have changed a lot and are a lot better as some kind of heretic for telling me that and accusing them of being troublemakers.

The modules and guidebooks were written a long time ago by people who did the best they could with the time and resources they had. Discussing them and pointing out those errors and proposing changes is hardly the heresy that I have been accused of.

When I propose rewrites, its to make a game I played originally at 20 years old a much better game that will stay alive and hopefully grow and still be here for a long time, instead of a dusty memory stored on a shelf, not to be touched or modified in any way until it grows moldy with decay.

Or is the board to be like the Catholics of old who burned at the stake the Protestants who tried to change Christianity and restore it back to vitality and growth simply because any challenge to the existing order had to be stopped at all costs because it was all they had known?

Its one reason I am doing the Kenyan sourcebook - as a new place for adventures, modules and to have a place for the game to possibly grow again and not be stuck in amber for good. And if what I propose changes Going Home or the RDF in some small way, then it does. And no one has to do anything - if you dont like it, then you dont like it and dont use it.

If you do, then you do.

and didnt mean to get all religious here but Jason's post about High Priests just got me in the mood

[stg58fal]

Here's my take on canon, folks:


Canon is the sum of the published T2K modules.

Canon provides a framework for the game master.

Therefore, canon may be altered to suit the GM's vision of the universe that he or she is creating for his/her T2K campaign.

Canon thus altered does not, in and of itself, become canon.



This. For every game/system.

This flexibility is something that, for me, is an absolute must-have. It's part of why I stopped playing the Pathfinder Society Organized Play after only one session, and why (when I actually got to game) I would rarely stick with a GM who used published adventures for the majority of their sgame for more than a couple sessions before I either lost interest or offered to take over GMing and let them play.

Published/canon/WTFever you want to call it can only do so much, especially when there's so little of it (compared to, say, 2nd Edition AD&D, Traveler, or Rifts, for example).

The way I see it, once you get the books/PDFs/whatever in your grubby little mitts, the game is YOURS. Do with it what you will. If as GM you don't like some certain aspect, change it. If the players object, don't worry, they'll let you know.

This view may be why I haven't really noticed any confrontation regarding this subject. Or maybe it's because I typically don't have a lot of time to be on here, so I tend to skim a little bit.

[Targan]

I've said this a number of times, but it bears repeating: THE CURRENT TROUBLES ON THIS FORUM DO NOT HAVE CANON VS NON-CANON AT THEIR CORE. Old wounds relating to that argument have been stirred up again, I believe deliberately, and this is not a spontaneous breakdown in the canon/non-canon cease-fire that held for so long.

Not one single member here is openly advocating that everyones' T2K campaigns must conform to canon. Quite the opposite, in fact. Even the most well-known pro-canon die hards here have said again and again and yet again that they DON'T CARE whether other players and GMs run their campaigns with canon or non-canon elements.

The re-opening of the canon/non-canon hostilities have allowed people, who had long put aside their disagreements, to vent their spleens all over again, and we're all only human. Having someone come along and say that your strongly-held opinion back in the bad old days of this forum's near-civil war was right all along feels good. But heed my words, friends - WE ARE BEING MANIPULATED. Much of the recent vitriol has been deliberately reignited solely to feed one man's perverse pleasure.

Everyone, take a step back if you will, look over the more contentious posts of the past few weeks, and analyse them with with a critical eye and with regard to what I've said in this post. There is a pattern at work here, and it's malicious and fully intentional. Don't buy into it. We're better than that.

[Webstral]

The issue at hand is not canon, though disagreements about published materials versus artistic license are the means by which the issue is being expressed. At issue is the culture of this Board—specifically, how we handle disagreements. Integrating new people and ideas can be painful because the relationships and the norms have to be reset, which is one reason why the new is not necessarily good just by being new. We went down this road a while ago and managed to establish a tolerable equilibrium after a couple of members received temporary bans. This was not a fun experience for anyone involved. It was rather like having a long shouting match at the gentlemen’s club. This reminds me of something I have not said pointedly enough: this is a gentlemen’s club. We don’t do business here the way business is done in most of the other forums devoted to gaming or military interests. Those of us who have been here for any length of time like the culture the way it has come to be, more or less.

The way ideas are presented matters. We’ve had a bunch of know-it-alls roll in the door and try to impress upon the long time residents here that the new guys know best. “Thank God I showed up to steer you poor souls in the right direction,” sums up the worst of them. We’re not impressed by that routine here. Ideas stand on their own merit and require neither rank on a collar nor force of expression to make them stand up to scrutiny.

The way we disagree matters. There’s a reason Kato didn’t want politics here. Political topics all too often break down into slurs and name-calling. This behavior does not fit with the established culture here.

When a new element enters the gentlemen’s club, there can be backsliding on the part of the old hands, depending on the behaviors of the newcomer. James, for instance, entered without any ripples. A few who shall go nameless deliberately cannonballed so no one could fail to notice them. The backsliding is not us at our best. It happens, though.

The real question is whether we are going to defend the existing norms—the existing culture—or not. What happened to the DC Group regarding Operation Omega has less to do with canon than it did with culture. Those guys were shocked at how their ideas were treated by some. I missed the worst of it, and frankly I’ve never been interested in getting all of the sordid details. But I know that the question was one of culture, not difference of opinion. The DC Group does not seem to bear me any ill will, yet I took up a stance against a very large slice of their work. I treated them according to the customs of the culture as it existed up to that time. Others, some of them new to the forum, did not employ the norms of the existing culture. We haven’t seen the DC Group since because they poured their love and devotion into the post-Operation Omega project and came to us with a reasonable expectation that we would show the appropriate regard for their work whatever we might have thought about the practicalities of the ideas or their adherence to the letter and/or spirit of the published works. As a Board, we took a big, steaming dump on the DC Group’s work. Not everybody contributed feces directly, but as a group we failed to demand that everyone observe the existing culture. That culture went away, and we are a bit lesser as a result.

I intend to defend the existing norms of the culture from this point onward. Kato went into self-imposed exile rather than tell some folks that we don’t sit in the smoking lounge with one hand down our pants. I’m staying here. We chew with our mouths closed. We swallow before we begin speaking. We do not boorishly browbeat our fellow members of the forum. We behave with grace. We agree with grace, and we disagree with grace. The more vehemently we disagree, the more important that grace becomes. We are not in court, where a measure of drama and chicanery impresses a jury. We are in a group of our peers.

Most importantly, we accept responsibility for our own comments and our own conduct. A number of us have backslid lately. A number of us have lost our grace of late. We need to get it back together and enforce the culture so that the new and newish people have a clear example to accept or reject.

On a somewhat less gracious note, I’m embarrassed by some of the he-said/she-said routine that has been flying about lately. I get that from my middle school students, most of whom are convinced that responsibility for their behavior rests with someone else—someone who provoked them, someone who was unkind to them, etc. We’re grown men. We have free will. If you want to be in this club, exercise your free will in accordance with the culture. If you want to blame someone else for your frame of mind, find a different forum. I hear they are still calling each other names over at the Battlestar Galactica Board at SyFy and have plenty of openings.

I have a prediction: tomorrow or the next day, one of the regulars here will PM me expressing a measure of regret for his recent confrontational words. This will be in keeping with the culture, which is why people here generally respect him. Another person is going to attempt to justify and rationalize his confrontational words rather than take ownership of them. This is not in keeping with the culture. One of those two people is going to be on a short list of folks whose membership cards I am going to actively seek to revoke in defense of what we have here at the gentlemen’s club.

[Rainbow Six]

I must admit that current events have put me off posting.

I run my game based on an 80's timeline in which the entire 1st ed timeline is set back a decade. Thus we sidestep real history such as the gulf war and the ww3 scenario is actualy far more realistic.

I've been tempted to post threads discussing this but in the current climate I'm just not prepared for flame wars and negative attitudes.

I'd also love to see what you've done.

[Cdnwolf]

I just think of it this way... I paid the money for the product. I get to use it the way I want to. If I don't like something, I change it. The published material makes great REFERENCE material but if I don't like it I am not going to keep it. Don't expect an Operation Reset in my game... but maybe the scribblings from a mad scientist for a new and deadly form of typhus or smallpox might be worth something to a mad dictator.

So chill out folks... drink another beer and use the game the way YOU want to.

(Now to prepare my players for the encounter with the pack of zombies in the next village!)

;)

[B.T.]

I've said this a number of times, but it bears repeating: THE CURRENT TROUBLES ON THIS FORUM DO NOT HAVE CANON VS NON-CANON AT THEIR CORE.

Not one single member here is openly advocating that everyones' T2K campaigns must conform to canon.
But heed my words, friends - WE ARE BEING MANIPULATED. Much of the recent vitriol has been deliberately reignited solely to feed one man's perverse pleasure.

Everyone, take a step back if you will, look over the more contentious posts of the past few weeks, and analyse them with with a critical eye and with regard to what I've said in this post. There is a pattern at work here, and it's malicious and fully intentional. Don't buy into it. We're better than that.

The issue at hand is not canon, though disagreements about published materials versus artistic license are the means by which the issue is being expressed. At issue is the culture of this Board—specifically, how we handle disagreements. Integrating new people and ideas can be painful because the relationships and the norms have to be reset, which is one reason why the new is not necessarily good just by being new. We went down this road a while ago and managed to establish a tolerable equilibrium after a couple of members received temporary bans.
This reminds me of something I have not said pointedly enough: this is a gentlemen’s club. We don’t do business here the way business is done in most of the other forums devoted to gaming or military interests. Those of us who have been here for any length of time like the culture the way it has come to be, more or less.
The real question is whether we are going to defend the existing norms—the existing culture—or not.
I intend to defend the existing norms of the culture from this point onward. Kato went into self-imposed exile rather than tell some folks that we don’t sit in the smoking lounge with one hand down our pants. I’m staying here. We chew with our mouths closed. We swallow before we begin speaking. We do not boorishly browbeat our fellow members of the forum. We behave with grace. We agree with grace, and we disagree with grace. The more vehemently we disagree, the more important that grace becomes. We are not in court, where a measure of drama and chicanery impresses a jury. We are in a group of our peers.
I have a prediction: tomorrow or the next day, one of the regulars here will PM me expressing a measure of regret for his recent confrontational words. This will be in keeping with the culture, which is why people here generally respect him. Another person is going to attempt to justify and rationalize his confrontational words rather than take ownership of them. This is not in keeping with the culture. One of those two people is going to be on a short list of folks whose membership cards I am going to actively seek to revoke in defense of what we have here at the gentlemen’s club.

We are greater than the sum of the parts.

Web, what you've written is from the bottom of my heart. It is the question, if we, as a community, keep up our way of debating gentlemanly! This is, after all, one of the reasons, why I (and supposingly a lot of the other members) joined this particularly board.

What Targan wrote, seems evenly to be true. At least, that's the way, I see it.

And what James said, should be true, if we stick to the etablated and proven way of dealing with one another.

There have been postings in that thread, that could have been quoted by myself, but I don't think, this is necessary: You've got the idea, and I am glad, that so many added their personal views.

It is very important, to have new views and ideas. But the "newbys" should "behave". (To make that clear: I still consider myself being a "newby", and the oldtimers should behave accordingly!)

[Olefin]

For the record - nothing I have done here was, in any way, a planned or intentional malicious act. There has been no attempt at manipulation by me in any way, except for stating my opinion and my ideas as everyone else does, to stimulate conversation and present a viewpoint that may not match everyone else's.

Webstral - if this is a gentleman's club, then gentlemen dont publicly call out other members or accuse them of malice of forethought. If there is a culture of civility, then frankly publicly trying to hang one member without any proof of any wrong doing is not an act I have ever heard deemed civil. And the act of smearing excrement that you said before made the board a lesser place being repeated again on a member trying to have honest conversation and express his viewpoint is hardly going to reflect well on the board the second time it happens.

As for what provoked this situation - I posted a thread about timeline errors in HW that directly contradict the timeline in another canon module. What did I say - that the March 2001 date as applied to four US divisions in HW was incorrect as it applied to the timeline in the previously released Ozarks module and that it would work fine if the date was moved to say June 2001.

Not that the events never happened - but that they happened later than in the module so they would fit with the events of Ozark. I.e. at most something along the lines of updating the April 1 numbers to have them bigger but then say by June 1 the events of fighting with New America in the Ozarks have reduced the 85th Division, etc.. to the numbers given in HW for April 1 for those divisions specifically.

And why did I put them up - because Legbreaker asked me directly on a post what I disagreed with specifically about HW and I stated it directly as an answer politely and without rancor.

As simple as that.

As for being some planned act to try to disrupt the board - I was re-reading Ozarks and HW that morning in order to respond to what James had posted and noticed the discrepancy in the timeline and figured it would make a good post.

No manipulation, no act of disruption - just pointing out an error in HW as I was asked to do so by a board member and an easy fix to correct it that I thought made sense and that could have been responded to or not.

There is no directive that says that canon cannot be questioned or cannot be called into account as part of being a member here. Threads, if they are deemed as going too far, can be locked or offending posts removed if they break the rules of the board. Moderators can notify people politely about such posts and they can be modified or removed easily.

I said I am not here to win friends. That doesnt mean I came here to make enemies in any way. And if I do make friends, which I have done, then so much the better.

It means that I will defend, as politely as possible, what I post and answer criticism instead of meekly bowing down to anyone who doesnt like what I say in an attempt to fit in.

Clearly an agenda does exist here on the board but its not mine. My only agenda is to discuss a game that I love in order to have even more fun with it and hopefully find new things about it and may even post some things that others can use in the process.

Thats what a discussion board is supposed to be about. And yes I have made mistakes both here and on older boards I was on in the past. But as opposed to others I can move on from the past and learn not to repeat the same mistakes.

As such I take full ownership of what I have said here without any rationalization beyond that of trying to stimulate discussion on a discussion board/forum. If I offended anyone with what I said it was not intentional in any way and for that I apologize profusely. If there are cultural differences between myself and other members that made what I said seem to be insulting when it was honestly never meant to be, then I will do my best to address that in the future.

What I have posted was not done maliciously or with any plan of any sort. Accusing me of such publicly is not civil behavior nor is it gentlemanly no matter how long a member has been on a board, whether they are a founder or joined a day ago.

Quashing the voice of a member who is honestly trying to stimulate debate and conversations, and doing so while answering the questions of another member in the process as politely as he can, is not a cultured act or that of gentlemen of any type or nationality.

[kalos72]

The problem is, some of this issues/topics are not debatable.

You can't debate with me that the 1st Cav landed in NYC...because in my campaign they did. Simple.

If I ask for opinions on that topic that's one thing but generally...its my own timeline. The difference is that most people put up their own work to share with the population not to get approval or have it reviewed and critiqued.

There is just way too much variation to the way different people write their story lines to use any one timeline/canon as a baseline to test against.

IE Nothing you post is wrong,its yours. We just need to accept or ignore it as we choice personally, privately.

[Olefin]

Agreed.

First Cav in NYC - now thats how you take back NY!

[TrailerParkJawa]

Hi Everyone,

Its been a few years at least since Ive visited the board. Looking at the threads I can sense tension. Its a little odd to see since I remember everyone sharing their ideas about t2k pretty peacefully.

I dont have any solutions other than to say what I really like about the board is discussing things that dont seem realistic or what would or wouldnt be important in a T2K world. As long as we all rememeber its a game and choices have to be made to make the game fun.

TPJ

[Raellus]

Long time, no see, TPJ. We've missed you. Sorry you've walked into such a mess. We are dealing with it now.

[Graebarde]

I've been a member on this board since it was created I think, after the other board folded, and was there for many moon before. I have been an avid Twilighter way before it became synonymous with vampires, which I might add I am NOT a fan of.

I am one that has said more than once "I'm done with this crap", but I come back, mostly to see what new ideas are bouncing around, only to find some of the 'same old crap', spewing I might add from the same mouths as before.

I was one of those that felt DC Groups were treated very poorly, but that is water under the bridge. It's said it's not canon-v-noncanon. Unless you are asking a canon directed question specifically, ANY idea is non canon, but THAT is what flows this board IMO. IF I want canon, I read the books, of which I have all but about three (which I loaned out years ago and never got back and can't even recall WHO I loaned them to.. age does that to you)

Civility is the key. IF you don't like it, there is no need to harp on it. Yes, it DOES drive people away. Nit picking is what kids do for attention, the WRONG kind of attention. I fully agree with Web..

I truely enjoy the information people put out. I might NOT agree with it all, but it is their idea and opinion, and I will strive to only give constructive criticism. As an 'old fart' I do have 'some' experiences in the Real World that can enhace ideas??

95th, I would really like to see you take on the REAL cold war battle scenario cira 1980s. (my era)

NOW can we get to talking about the Twilight Wars?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

From my viewpoint, this hasn't been about the information that is being presented (by old members or new).
It's been about HOW that information was presented (and by that I mean the tone it was presented in).

[Jason Weiser]

I've been a member on this board since it was created I think, after the other board folded, and was there for many moon before. I have been an avid Twilighter way before it became synonymous with vampires, which I might add I am NOT a fan of.


Ya know Grae, I've been thinking the same thing...and really...

Picks up used K-Pot, dons worn LBE

I say it's time we took back the honored name of Twilight from those fangeeks and emo twits. I say we hunt down those baseball playing bloodsuckers and kill them deader than Rasputin! Hell, if Wesley Snipes can do it, we sure as hell can!

Taps magazine on K-Pot to seat rounds then shoves magazine into the well of his weapon, and thumbs the bolt release, making a satisfying CHA-CHUNK as it chambers a round and the sound puts a smile on my face.

Dibs on the HMMWV .50 Cal! Web brew us some hooch! Grae, you're driving! And somebody get us a LAV! I let you all figure out who's crewing. They wanna see Twilight...we'll show 'em Twilight!

:D (This comedy break brought to you solely by a Twilight 2000 fan who wants his shorthand name back).

[Webstral]

Dibs on the HMMWV .50 Cal!

I would love to see what a .50 cal round through the thoracic cavity would do to a vampire. Then a few more in case he was inclined to get back up and capable of doing so. What about in the head? The brain is still the CPU, right? Break the computer and surely the undead die.

P.S. Not at all convinced you want to leave me in charge of the moonshine. It'll get brewed just fine...

[Webstral]

I've been a member on this board since it was created I think, after the other board folded, and was there for many moon before.

Grae, I've been wondering where you got yourself off too. You predate me on the previous Board, and that's saying something.

Ah, if only I had the time to write like I did before kids! I miss having the luxury of spending an entire Saturday writing "The Storm in Germany". Those were the days! I think regularly about finishing that piece--at least through the lull in hostilities resulting from NATO reaching the borders of the DDR. I dream about finishing the Sino-Soviet War up through October 1996. I dream about getting Thunder Empire finished through 01 APR 01, along with Poseidon's Rifles and Silver Shogunate. If I could find a few more hours, I could finish the rest of my guide to northern New England and maybe get started on the San Francisco Bay. Of course, if wishes were horses beggars would ride.

[Legbreaker]

And why did I put them up - because Legbreaker asked me directly on a post what I disagreed with specifically about HW and I stated it directly as an answer politely and without rancor.

I said I had nothing further to say, but I'm sorry, I simply can't remain silent on this one.
I have spent the past 45 minutes intensively searching every post I have made in the last two weeks. Not once have I asked Olefin to list what what he disagreed with. The above statement is a blatant lie.
The question he may be thinking of is my single question in the Howling Wilderness thread after he started listing his issues.

I have made arguments that the HW timeline is incorrect so I will post some of them here.

Ok, lets turn this on it's head for something different.
What do you see is right?

I STRONGLY object to my name being used to justify another's poor judgement and offensive actions.

If somebody can show where I have in fact made such a request, I will happily withdraw my comments and offer public apology to this forum.

[Tegyrius]

I say it's time we took back the honored name of Twilight from those fangeeks and emo twits. I say we hunt down those baseball playing bloodsuckers and kill them deader than Rasputin! Hell, if Wesley Snipes can do it, we sure as hell can!

I've said it before and I'll say it again: vampires should sparkle only after you apply the white phosphorus.

- C.

[95th Rifleman]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: vampires should sparkle only after you apply the white phosphorus.

- C.

I love the smell of burning vamp in the morning....

[mikeo80]

I would love to see what a .50 cal round through the thoracic cavity would do to a vampire. Then a few more in case he was inclined to get back up and capable of doing so. What about in the head? The brain is still the CPU, right? Break the computer and surely the undead die.

P.S. Not at all convinced you want to leave me in charge of the moonshine. It'll get brewed just fine...

I do not remember the name of the game I played, but it did have Vampires. My character was a vampire hunter. My lead weapon was a .460 Wembly....

I played anti vamp like this, Newton's Laws of Motion. Yes I could shoot a vamp in the head/chest/wherever. Vamp still was MOVED by the force of the 460 hitting him/her/it. BUT...I had to follow up with the traditional wooden stake through the heart. SO...modern weapons were my lead in...traditional weapons, (cross, garlic, stake) were the follow up.

It would be interesting to see a small Special OPs group put into Romania...their mission, destroy Polesti oil fields/refineries....

Yeah, the GPS/nav system/map reader fubar'ed....

They are now in TRANSYLVANIA.....

And all of the rucus of WWIII woke Vlad Dragul up...

And he is PISSED>>>>>

THat could be a fun night of T2K vs Vlad the Impaler!!!

My $0.02

Mike

[Rainbow Six]

It would be interesting to see a small Special OPs group put into Romania...their mission, destroy Polesti oil fields/refineries....

Yeah, the GPS/nav system/map reader fubar'ed....

They are now in TRANSYLVANIA.....

And all of the rucus of WWIII woke Vlad Dragul up...

And he is PISSED>>>>>

THat could be a fun night of T2K vs Vlad the Impaler!!!

My $0.02

Mike

I'm sure there's a few ex 2000AD readers on the board - anyone remember a strip called Fiends of the Eastern Front that ran in the early 1980's? Same idea but set in WW2 - the protagonist was a German soldier hunting down a group of Romanian soldiers who were actually vampires. I thought it was brilliant (and genuinely quite scary - I would have been about ten at the time!)

[Olefin]

Read an excellent World War Z story about a bunch of vampires fighting zombies in an Asian country during that war - will see if I can find it. Sounds like a perfect Twilight Nightmares kind of encounter.

[James Langham]

I'm sure there's a few ex 2000AD readers on the board - anyone remember a strip called Fiends of the Eastern Front that ran in the early 1980's? Same idea but set in WW2 - the protagonist was a German soldier hunting down a group of Romanian soldiers who were actually vampires. I thought it was brilliant (and genuinely quite scary - I would have been about ten at the time!)

It was also written up as a novel trilogy.

Also try "The Keep" by F Paul Wilson for WW2 and "Twelve" by Jasper Kent for Napoleonic vampires.

In conventional T2K a castle, a plague of rats, a pet wolf, superstitious villagers, etc could make the players (and villagers) THINK the marauder chief is a vampire (especially if he survived a wound using a hidden flak jacket) - he might even believe it himself.

[Olefin]

To continue the vampire motif - did anyone ever see (I think it was either the revival of The Outer Limits or the New Twilight Zone) episode where after a nuclear war a vampire is trying to lure the surviving duty crew after they launched their nukes out of their bunker and is sitting there entering random codes into the lock, saying how he has eternity to get the code right?

Scary stuff

[weswood]

Read an excellent World War Z story about a bunch of vampires fighting zombies in an Asian country during that war - will see if I can find it. Sounds like a perfect Twilight Nightmares kind of encounter.

There's a movie supposed to be coming out soon about Abraham Licoln, Zombie Hunter. I think it may be straight to DVD, looks really low budget.

[kato13]

There's a movie supposed to be coming out soon about Abraham Licoln, Zombie Hunter. I think it may be straight to DVD, looks really low budget.


I think you are confusing the title a bit it is

Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1611224/combined

It is a bigger film than you would expect
3D
70 million dollar budget
release date in over 20 countries.

[Panther Al]

To continue the vampire motif - did anyone ever see (I think it was either the revival of The Outer Limits or the New Twilight Zone) episode where after a nuclear war a vampire is trying to lure the surviving duty crew after they launched their nukes out of their bunker and is sitting there entering random codes into the lock, saying how he has eternity to get the code right?

Scary stuff

Think it was the Twilight Zone redo. So, yeah, I do recall seeing it. :)

[Panther Al]

I do not remember the name of the game I played, but it did have Vampires. My character was a vampire hunter. My lead weapon was a .460 Wembly....

I played anti vamp like this, Newton's Laws of Motion. Yes I could shoot a vamp in the head/chest/wherever. Vamp still was MOVED by the force of the 460 hitting him/her/it. BUT...I had to follow up with the traditional wooden stake through the heart. SO...modern weapons were my lead in...traditional weapons, (cross, garlic, stake) were the follow up.

It would be interesting to see a small Special OPs group put into Romania...their mission, destroy Polesti oil fields/refineries....

Yeah, the GPS/nav system/map reader fubar'ed....

They are now in TRANSYLVANIA.....

And all of the rucus of WWIII woke Vlad Dragul up...

And he is PISSED>>>>>

THat could be a fun night of T2K vs Vlad the Impaler!!!

My $0.02

Mike


David Weber - of Honorverse Fame - did a one off novel a year or so ago, that had something like this as its premise: though there was hints, it was never said what the "Romanian Freedom/Guerrilla Fighter" was until the end.


Not his best stuff, but worth a read none the less - 'Out of the Dark'

[Jason Weiser]

TV Tropes says it all:

Not be confused with Twilight, with which it probably doesn't have a large crossover demographic. Though a crossover fic between the two would be hilarious, confusing the two is one of the Things Mr. Welch Is No Longer Allowed to Do in an RPG.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/TabletopGame/Twilight2000?from=Main.Twilight2000

[RN7]

I'm sure there's a few ex 2000AD readers on the board - anyone remember a strip called Fiends of the Eastern Front that ran in the early 1980's? Same idea but set in WW2 - the protagonist was a German soldier hunting down a group of Romanian soldiers who were actually vampires. I thought it was brilliant (and genuinely quite scary - I would have been about ten at the time!)

I remember Fiends of the Eastern Front from 2000AD, I read 2000AD from the 1970's until the 1990's. Even today l occasionaly pick up 2000AD and flick through it in newspaper shops. I believe they recently rehashed that story, this time the vampires were concentration camp guards.

Some great characters from 2000AD; Judge Dredd, Johhny Alpha from Strontium Dog, Bill Savage from Invasion, Slaine, the ABC Warriors, Rogue Trooper, Nemesis etc and some of the later stuff like Develin Waugh and Nikolai Dante. Still a big fan!