View Single Post
  #16  
Old 05-08-2019, 07:15 PM
CDAT CDAT is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vihkr View Post
I know this has been discussed before but I wanted to have a thread on this with the news of v4 and Modiphius being confirmed by Marc Miller. I have long been mulling over being involved in a v4 release and supplementary materials, like many of you have, while some of us have been actively working towards by releasing their own v1 and 2.2 sourcebooks and materials.

I propose that we crowdsource (forum-source?) our own fan-approved alternative version of v4 and release it during the same timeframe as Modiphius' version, or soon after. Competition is healthy, after all. I have a few suggestions on how we can proceed and if there is interest, why don't we just do it? We can work out the general plan here. Kickstarter is an option.
I agree that competition is healthy if there is enough room for both, if not then you are taking from one to support the other, leaving not enough for either to survive. Now is this the case I do not know, but should we not at least wait to see what they are coming out with before we say I want nothing to do with it?


Quote:
Originally Posted by vihkr View Post
Ruleset discussion--which one to use?:

First a note on copyrights of existing games and game mechanics.

1. Create a version of GDW House Rules System, hybrid v1 and v2.2 if you will, with enhancements: v2.X. The general consensus here is that v2.2 is not broken, being a cornerstone in the GDW/FFE "house rules" system.

Pros are character generation, a feature and notoriety it shares with Traveller, a generally good combat system including vehicles and skill resolution with enough crunch to tackle relatively complex systems such disease and long distance travel and survival. I personally miss the deck of cards NPC motivation system from v1 but can live without it. Another big pro is the wealth of sub-systems which have been developed for it, many of them originating from this forum. A pro we can't deny is that we have a built-in, experienced in v1 and v2.2 playtest audience here.

Cons are its crunch (especially for the modern, post-Masquerade RPG audience), and its relationship with Traveller. Traveller 5e was a disorganized mess and it got creamed and rightfully so, in reviews. Furthermore, Twilight 2000 v1 or v2.2 generally scores between 2 and 3 out of 5 stars on popular RPG sites so call it a 2.5. This score is generally replicated by T5e on these same sites. Ironically, T2300AD tends to score higher, despite having the same rule system, but I partially attribute this to its setting. In all 3 cases, it is not a popular system with the modern RPG audience. Another con is its lack of integrated miniatures or skirmish rules to resolve larger battles (partially resolved with supplements) nor rules for the strategic aspect (like taking over a cantonment and becoming a local warlord). Another big con is that T2000 is really a sandbox system with poor organization and lack of coherent narrative to realize that kind of gameplay (until Twilight Encounters came out). Sandbox games have become really popular since the concept was (re-)popularized in retro gaming circles in 2012 or so. See this blog for more on T2000 as sandbox.
With Traveler being under the Mongoose Publishing currently how does that rule set work (if at all) with TW2000 V1 to V2.2? If it does not (my guess but I do not know) then does it really matter that they were basically the same rule set once? Now I am not a game designer or anything like that but how difficult would it be to fix some (all?) of the cons that you listed? I do think keeping the old rules or even slightly updating them (but keeping them backwards compatible) is a good thing as it give you several sourcebooks right from the get go (maybe hard to find in Dead Tree, but available in PDF). Right now with how much thought I have put into it this would be my first choice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vihkr View Post
2. Go with a GURPS supplement or BRP system (like D101 from OpenQuest).

Pros are a built-in audience for those types of platforms and generally good market awareness and marketshare (and reviews). It would also be comparatively simple to graft our setting into either one of these game systems, which would allow us to come to market in relatively short order. A derivative of the latter system, Delta Green, even has detailed rules for modern systems such as electronics, hacking, holographic sights and recent body armour and a great way to model automatic weapons fire, as well as fear and reactions during combat. It also has a gear catalogue which rivals T2000! In a lot of ways, a derivative of BRP is a shoe-in for a system to consider.

Cons: if we go GURPS, we'd have to qualify as a licensed supplement with SJG; a BRP derivative, no such problem. GURPS and to some degree BRP, are rather crunchy systems, with extensive skill and equipment lists with heavy record-keeping which are generally out of vogue with the modern gaming crowd. GURPS and BRP are known as love-it or hate-it systems, but judging by purchases of either, there's a lot of people who love them. The character generation systems for both also leave a lot to be desired (point-buy vs. old-school D&D).

Now it may be because I like more depth but I do not think that the crunchy systems are as disliked as some think. I do think it is the case that a fair amount of youth today have no attention span, and so do not like the crunchy system. However I assume that if they are like most of my family they barely even have the attention span to play games were everything you need to play is on the cards you play, and if that is true then those players will not be playing any RPG. So I am guessing that we might lose a few players, but I do not think it will be as many as I hear people say. So GURPS would be my second choice as my understanding is that the system has been very stable (it was a long time ago that I last played GURPS).


Quote:
Originally Posted by vihkr View Post
3. Warhammer/WFRP Hybrid: very much how like Flames of War and Team Yankee are derivatives of Warhammer, and WFRP is an RPG implementation of the latter, we could create our own version of WFRP but set in T2000.

The big pro is miniatures and the massive popularity of these games. While most of the RPG industry flounders, the titles listed above are growing. Check out BF Events and bear in mind that they are the junior partner to giants such as GW, Warmachine and Fantasy Flights Games with their Star Wars line of miniatures games and RPGs. Ease of accessibility, nice physical accessories and appeal to a wide market are all drivers of these games. As a follow-on RPG, WFRP has been praised as a great game system, although its setting largely helps with this. Built-in audience.

Cons: the rules themselves have been criticized as being tournament-focussed. The telescopic scale systems are gamey. There is a considerable cost and time to entry (unless we are talking about a Team Yankee RPG as the existing miniatures collections could be transferable). We'd have to negotiate licensing with Battlefront to go the Team Yankee way.

My first concern is that several of the companies are not well know for supporting games that are not hot sellers, so what happens if they pull support? Some (GW especially know for this) are not well balanced, how well will we be able to get around that if using there rule set? Several of the companies change their rules more frequently than I think is needed, if/when they do how does that affect us? and last concern that I have right now with this one is that some of the companies are disliked by portions of the gaming community (that does not mean they do not sell well) so how will this affect sales for a new/returning game that has no history with them? My thought right now is that this one is not a good option, but could be convinced otherwise.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vihkr View Post
4. Ambush Alley/Force on Force-RPG Hybrid: add an RPG element to a skirmish game system.

Pros: a good skirmish game has been a long time coming and Ambush Alley filled the bill. Now repped by Osprey and with some sort of connection to Battlefront, this is effectively WFRP-lite but for Battlefront and Team Yankee. The same pros as above apply but the system itself is truly sublime. Like Fistful of Tows, Ambush/FoF biases character skill over everything else. This is a system which begs to be expanded into an RPG. A lot of players have huge modern and/or apocalyptic 20mm 1:72 miniatures collections and that is perhaps the scale which always worked best for T2000. We should consider 1:72 as a default scale for any T2000 v4.

Cons: may be difficult to make an RPG out of a skirmish game. Same cons as 3., above.

I have to admit I did not know anything about this game, so went to their web site and took a look at their forum, it may be even less active than this one. Only four posts with a date within the last year (OK, one more is at 11 months and 3 weeks) and most of those are 5 months or more. So with that level of activity how popular is the game? As for scale I have lots of 6mm (thousands), 15mm (hundreds), an 28-34mm (hundreds) and maybe it is because I do more tabletop games than skirmish games (all the skirmish games are done in the 28-34mm) so the 20mm just sounds like an odd size to me, as I know no one in my group has anything in that size. Then as it has the same cons as above makes this look like a poor choice to me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vihkr View Post
5. "Open World Survival" (i.e. retroclone B/X D&D):

Pros:
Forgotten Lands was a pretty huge success in this "new" field of games as of late. It's not really new as it's just a re-imagining of B/X D&D but with a clear hexcrawl sandbox bent. It has rules to facilitate the strategic aspect of the game, like fortress maintenance and domain expansion, without simply being a shopping list of what it costs to employ serfs to build the walls. Into this marketspace you could also add any retroclone, but IMO, Forbidden is the best of them, taking the crunchiness of B/X D&D or Torchbearer, for instance, and making the rules as simplistic and easy to play as possible. The key pro is that these types of games are immensely popular, for the fantasy RPG market, at least. They have a small barrier of entry (vs. say v2.2 or GURPS) and can introduce new audiences in short order.

Cons: The big one here is how to develop a contemporary ruleset in this type of framework without ending up with a busted system like d20 Modern. I haven't seen anyone be able to do it, although perhaps RECON came close and is the best example of this type of effort. In a lot of ways, Ambush Alley is really a modern imagining of RECON. Another con is the d20 moniker. Maybe we can go out on a limb here and use 2d6 or 2d12 or something but then we're in Modiphius' territory.

Settings:
I will admit that I have only played D&D once, but found it to be OK, would have liked more meat to my character. By that I mean it just felt like there was not enough to the character they were just print and play. One warrior did not feel different from another. I also see a huge issue with trying to do anything with Palladium Books especially if it has to do with kickstarter after they screwed over a large group of people with their Robotech Tactics game, I think anything that they are even remotely affiliated with will have issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vihkr View Post
1. Double down and go straight T2000 v1 or v2.2. Pros: alternate timeline nostalgia. Cons: not very popular, especially with everyone else outside this forum who couldn't even tell you what the Cold War was.
I am not sure how this is really different than the first option? Are you saying just option 1 is modifying these rules and this is using them just as written?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vihkr View Post
2. T1965. Pros: homegrown alt-timeline from this forum. Cons as above.
I am unfimilure with this alt-timeline, it is on this forum? I am guessing it starts in 1965? If that is the case I think it could be a good supplement but think what really sets TW2000 apart is the WWIII and "you are all on you own". It could be started in 65 but if the cold war is too long ago I think 65 would be worse. Having said that I do think it would be a good supplement like Merc 2000.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vihkr View Post
3. Team Yankee (the 198X alt-history timeline): Pros: good tie-in with rules system 3. or 4., above. Relatively popular, especially with wargamers (who can and do cross to RPGs). Tie-ins with a wealth of material such as Viktor Suvorov, Chieftains, Red Army by Ralph Peters, Red Dawn, Red Storm Rising and recently Brad Smith* Cons: licensing is going to be a legal issue, especially if designing a WFRP version of Battlefront's Team Yankee.
* Interesting side-note: Brad Smith is a wargamer and could be persuaded to be involved in our little project.
As I have said in other posts on this forum I do not think that it is as popular as is being made out to be. My local group plays at least ten different table top war games at multiple locations, however when I asked most recently none of the players or staff know anything about Team Yankee. Now, yes maybe my location is the extreme outlier but I just have a hard time believing that we are that far out there. Also if we are going to try and do this on kickstarter BattleFront does not have the best reputation there after the Dust kickstarter that they were part of, not as bad as Palladium Books but still very far from positive. Also all the concerns I have with option three and four would apply here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vihkr View Post
4. T2025 or T2035. As 1. and 2., above. Pro: outlined right on this forum. A big con is that this timeline is subject to becoming irrelevant like T2000.
Regardless of what time you have it start in the timeline is always going to be come irrelevant in someways. As WWIII did not happen and knock on wood will not then you are going to have to make some adjustment to history. So I think either pick a date in the not to distant past and make changes from there, or some date in the near future and make the changes there. So I guess I kind of see this as potentially part of the other options.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vihkr View Post
5. Go more mass-market appeal with a generalized apocalypse setting with a military feel. Pro: appeal. Cons: misses the central design premise of T2000, which was: How do we roleplay military characters and weapons without the restrictions of the military? Another con is that the field is swamped--anyone wanna play Fallout RPG?

If you are still reading, thanks, I wasn't expecting to create a 9500 char post.
I agree that does not have the correct feel to it. In a nut shell I think that first we should at least wait for more information on version 4 before we all decide to jump ship and make our own. However if it is wrong I do think there are some viable options from good to very bad, but just my thoughts and the are worth what you paid for them.
Reply With Quote