Differences in TW200 & 2300AD combat

[Michael Lewis]

Does anyone know the differences between combat in these 2 systems?


Michael

[pmulcahy11b]

Twilight: 200 --that might be an interesting game.:D

Truth is I haven't done more than parse through T2K13. And the combat system seems to me more comprehensive, but more cumbersome as well.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Keep in mind I never used the T2k 1st Ed. rules so I don't particularly remember much about them except that it used percentile rolls to determine success/failure.

2300AD had a rules system that seems like it was the prototype for the T2k 2nd Ed rules. Main differences were that even though there was a difficulty level/task resolution system akin to T2k 2/2.2 in place, the outcome was also subject to die modifiers that could add or subtract from the die roll.
2300AD also used Coolness Under Fire.

I can't think of much else without dragging out the books but I sort of recall that my overall impression was that it would be fairly easy to convert weapons and equipment from 2300AD to T2k 2/2.2 rules because they shared some similarities already.

Edit: firearms didn't have the range bands that 2/2.2 does, I'm pretty sure they just had a max effective range listed.

[Michael Lewis]

Sorry. I meat Twilight 2000 2nd edition.

It looks like Twilight 2000 2nd edition came 3 years after 2300AD. I was wondering what the main differences in the game mechanics were. What did they change for the better or worse and why.

[pmulcahy11b]

Sorry. I meat Twilight 2000 2nd edition.

It looks like Twilight 2000 2nd edition came 3 years after 2300AD. I was wondering what the main differences in the game mechanics were. What did they change for the better or worse and why.

Sorry, I mis-read your question. Twilight v2 (but not 2.2), 2300AD, Cadillacs & Dinosaurs, and Dark Conspiracies all use the T2K v2 combat system. It's simplified over V1 -- many said oversimplified -- which in part led to v2.2. (Another big part was the oversimplfied character generation system -- V1s is better.) GDW's ultimate goal was for all their RPGs to use as much of each other rules as possible, allowing the GM to pick and choose what he wanted. V2, therefore is quite similar to v2.2.

[copeab]

Alas, I only have Traveller 2300, which seems to have differed in more th a n name from 2309AD. T2300, iurc, used 4d6-4 for skill rolls and weapon d a n a ged was fixed, modified by degree of success on the attack roll.

[Adm.Lee]

AFAIK, 2300AD and Twilight:2000, v2 were to be very similar. I never had the former, but I rather like the v2.2 development of T2k. 2300AD now (via Mongoose) uses the rules from Traveller (that is, 2d6 for everything)

Now, Twilight:200 would be about Roman legionaries, cut off behind German (or Dacian or Persian) lines after Legio V had been overrun by barbarian horse-archers. The last word from the legate: "Bona fortuna. Estis solitarii." :D

[swaghauler]

Sorry. I meat Twilight 2000 2nd edition.

It looks like Twilight 2000 2nd edition came 3 years after 2300AD. I was wondering what the main differences in the game mechanics were. What did they change for the better or worse and why.

I have both editions of 2300. They are a "poor cousin" to later GDW rules systems. the damage was very different. Base damage was modified by "sublocations" in each individual location. For instance, the torso has a heart "sublocation" that doubles the damage inflicted. I always though of 2300 as being a blend of Twilight and MegaTraveler (which I also own). It was, in my opinion, more complex than it needed to be. 2300 is still available on CDROM from Far Future Enterprises. Check it out for yourself.