Which edition do you play?
 

Just curious as to what edition is played by your group or which one you prefer. I'm a first edition fan myself.

First edition as far as I am concerned is the only edition

I use a slightly modified version of 2013 the reflex system. My group has just started to use it and although its takes a little more time than most systems to get use to they do like more than most for a modern/sci-fi system.

Hmm how about.
 

I play more than one.
;)

2.2 Edition for me

1st edition fully converted to Gunmaster.

After reading Targan's answer I got to thinking (yeah I know, dangerous or what!), while the question asks what edition we might play, I think there needs to be some discrimination between rules and timeline.

So to go further, I use the 2.2 rules but with a modified version of the 2.2 timeline. I have no problem with the 1st Ed. timeline but I do like the extra vehicles and equipment that a later war start allows - what can I say, I'm a gearhead and I like big gear lists :rolleyes:

I don't which option to pick. I go to v1.0 for the backstory and timeline, and v2.2 for the rules/mechanics.

Raellus I suppose I was thinking rules more than background, I'm glad everyone is clarifying that since the background does effect equipment choices and playable characters.

The one thing I will give 2.2 that it is better for making characters with a background. The inclusion of contacts and the ability to make a civilian character (ability to avoid the draft ) also adds the the variable starting scenarios. The Merc 2000 material also gives you more gaming versatility.

Mixed.

I prefer 2.2 rules, especially character generation.

I run/play 1st more often, since I run at conventions, and (my impression) most of the players are there for '80s nostalgia.

2013 rules for me. I particularly like the character generation options, especially for non military characters.

Setting wise I prefer a home brew timeline set approx 15 years in the future. If I was playing any of the classic timelines it would be V1.

2.2 with a modified timeline.

I don't play but almost every module I own is v1. I think I lost my v1 manuals and now only have a v2 manual somewhere in the garage.

Hey if you don't mind having the books as PDFs, Far Future Enterprises sells CD-ROMs of all the 1st edition material on one disc and all the 2nd Ed. material on a second disc.
They even sell all the 2013 material on disc.
Each CD-ROM costs US$35 which ends up usually being cheaper than buying the PDFs individually.

http://www.farfuture.net/FFE-CDROMs.html

2.2 Edition for me, with a modified timeline and character generation.

Hey Jawa, you can either get the CD-ROMs as Stainless mentions which are a great deal, or if you only need a few you can get individual PDFs from DriveThruRPG.com, will work out more expensive overall if you want all the books, but good for filling in gaps if you need to.

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse/p.../Twilight-2000

Was there more than just the basic game for 2013?

One day I intend to take a few choice things v2.2 does better and transplant them into v1. V1 is my favorite, but v2.2 does have a few improvements.

Overall I am surprised from the results, I was expecting the newest edition to be the most popular.

My reason for this poll and for a similar one on facebook is to ascertain weather it would be worth my time to polish up some 1st edition extras I have. I do not like doing something and have no one to enjoy them. I have some equipment, optional rules and other material that has either been sitting around in a notebook or that I have recently been working on.

By all means, please do.

2.2 with 2013 elements. The Timeline can be anytime. Now fooling with the "Biohazard"theme from the 2.2 GPS. normal plague, the bacteria mentioned and a modification of the 2013 zombies.

twilight 2000 2.2 + conspiracy rules! (dark conspiracy III)
using a post-modern timeline around 2030

conspiracy rules! is for the modern equipment and the special assignment rule.

I mainly use 2.2 with some Ver1. I like some of the ideas of Twl2013.

I am now looking at Modern D20 because it is set up on Roll20.net and I want to see if I can steal some of the ideas to run a game.

I run a home brew using alot of v1 rules. But my mass combat and hit locator on humans is where the home brew comes in

1st edition using the Twilight Encounters update.

I prefer 2.2 with the V1 timeline. (Haven't I already answered this poll before?) But I use the v2 timeline in my web site to maintain commonality (when it matters anyway).

Besides a few quite minor differences, there's almost no change between the various versions from 1995 onwards. The only real differences are prior to the outbreak of war, and how long it took Nato to get involved after Germany stepped over the Polish border.
http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=3109

Minor differences - hardly

V1 - North Korea and South Korea
V2- United Korea that is US Ally but somehow the US still takes losses to North Korean units (which was clearly a sign of a rushed edit and copying from the V1 US Vehicle Guide)

V1- Japan sits out the war, Soviet units in Vietnam
V2- Japan not only participates in the war but gets nuked big time. Vietnam has a US division stationed there at the beginning of the war and there is no mention of Soviet units there at all

V1 - Iran is a US ally, Iranian forces allied with the US against the Soviets
V2 - Iran has no govt at all, no mention of Iranian forces allied with US against the Soviets

V1 - no mention of Argentine or Brazilian war at all- and clearly a nuclear war of any kind isnt mentioned
V2 = Argentina and Brazil fight a nuclear war between themselves

V1 - France comes out of the war in good shape
V2 - France has the south under criminal control and the mountain areas in open revolt against the central govt - but somehow is sending troops overseas instead of trying to restore order

I would say thats more than just minor differences after 1995

v2.2 rules, but I very rarely play in any of the canon timelines. I'm either using modern equipment for TEDs in Traveller or doing historical (or alt-historical) scenarios or doing Merc or Dark Conspiracy.

Colour me dumb, but TED is unfamiliar to me, what does it mean? (I haven't played Traveller and while I know of it, much of it is still unfamiliar).

Technologically Elevated Dictator. New Era takes place after the collapse of the Third Imperium, and there are backwater planets where the ruler is the (descendant of the) person who hoarded the most technology, so while the peasants get by with animal-drawn wagons and maybe a bow, the ruler and his guard have assault rifles and armored cars. There are rules for randomly determining what the peak technology level was (for scavenging), what level it paused at during the collapse (for the ruler), and what level it ended up at (for the general populace).

Ah ha!
Thanks for the explanation.

I'm familiar enough with the premise of the New Era edition, even have the main book, but as mentioned, I never played Traveller so many of the abbreviations, acronyms and such like escape me!

A few sentences is all the difference. Yes, the later edition(s) added some information, and changed the situation in Korea, but when you look at the unit histories (not to mention most of the timeline) it's about 99% cut and pasted.

As I said the differences in Vietnam, the Kuriles, Iran and France make the two timelines very different - also equipment as well - i.e. there goes the LAV-75 and the giraffe version of the M1

I'm sort of in an interesting situation. The v2.3 rule set works best, but the V1 timeline works better than that contrived mess that GDW came up with for v2.2.

However...

My personal belief is that if IRL we go to a Twilight War world, it will happen sometime in the 2030-2035 timeline. (I refer to that time as the "bump in the road" -- If we can make past that, the future's probably good for another century.) I would advocate a new timeline, to go up to 2030 or so -- it's not far enough in the future that we can't project weapons and vehicle development, but more realistic than others posited here.

I use a classless Cyberpunk 2020 modified with Twilight 2000 rules. I've adopted some version 2.2 skills and deleted or rationalised many cyberpunk skills.

I find the combat rules more realistic but quite (realistically) lethal. Players in my games find out that gung-ho individuals get hero's graves quite quickly. Due to the savage automatic fire rules and the fact that most of the player's body is unarmoured the players tend to become adept at 'fix-n'-fuck' tactics of suppressing and grenading the enemy. Fire combat is often quite wasteful of ammo, especially at short ranges.

I use a 'version one style' choose-what-you-like character generation system where everyone gets the same amount of skill points no matter what. This stops players seeking out terms in special forces for extra points and it means you don't have to do a term in support if you want to get scrounging. I also have a much lower rank table where nearly all players are privates for enlisted and lieutenants for officers, but you do occasionally get higher ranks. Rank and time in as I said has no effect on skills.

As for a setting I either play my own modified twilight 2000 (with tech up to 2010 to simulate the increased R&D and faster adoption time engendered by warfare) or present day that's become almost what I thought of as science fiction a few years back!

Straight 2.2 although I doubt we are doing it 100% correctly. Combat is a bit confusing.

What do you find confusing about it? I've always seen it as rather straight forward, but then some of my other preferred systems can be somewhat....complex for beginners.

I play a HIGHLY MODIFIED version of the V2.2 rules with Traveller skill levels and a bunch of rules imported from the Mythras/Runequest system.

As happens in reality...

2.2 timline
My own Homebrew of houserules (deadly of course :D )

Antenna