View Single Post
  #4  
Old 07-06-2009, 01:56 PM
Slappy Slappy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Default

On the character:
She's about 5'6", light brown shoulder length hair, pretty much permanently in a pony tail and green eyes. A bit stocky from most people's perspective, but not uncommon for a female soldier and former athlete. Wearing a pretty standard US woodland camo uniform, M-4 carbine as primary weapon. I'll work on a more detailed writeup along your lines when I have a little more time.

On the system:

As I said, I know the historical T2k rulesets fairly well (1.0 and 2.0 at least). I think from a marketing perspecitve they might be more attractive to perspective players as they tend to be well known in general.

1.0 does fine for character generation with some tweaking (300 background points is too much for military personnel and not nearly enough for drafted civilians). The combat system is reasonable although some hate the 3 rounds per 'shot' rule and the lack of automatic fire.

2.0, in my opinion yields characters who are far too unskilled unless old. Careers give few skills per term and one secondary skill point every four years is pretty skimpy. It leaves characters with only a 20% chance of success at routine tasks a lot of the time. You could always handle that with additional points.
The other big issue with 2.0 is damage. It is laughably small compared to character hit capacities, making them nearly impossible to injure. I also think that a d10 system just doesn't have enough granularity to really capture the real world.

My suggestion would be to just pick one and go with it. You can handle character realism through adjustments of points either way and make up with mechanical shortcomings that appear through house rules. If necessary one can just convert over later if required (i.e. for 1.0 to 2.0 divide all attributes by 2 and all skills by 10).
Reply With Quote