Version 4 of the game

[Olefin]

There has been scuttlebutt of a V4 version of the game for over a year (with 2013 being seen as the third version of the game) but until recently it was more just wishful thinking.

However recently there have been multiple posts about it on a facebook group for the game by a person who I have confirmed is working on the effort. I wrote to Marc Miller and he did confirm that its not just wishful thinking. He didnt give me a timeline for when it will occur or what its timeline will be (i.e. Cold War, near future, etc.) or who the new owners/licensee will be but he did confirm it is in progress and that there is a new owner/licensee for Twilight 2000.

[Legbreaker]

Which makes it near impossible for those of us working on new material to be sure we're heading in the right direction with it.
Speaking for myself, I'm a little annoyed that the wider community is only just hearing about this now and that we haven't been given the opportunity to express our preferences about the new game and in particular it's setting.
After all, without us, there is no game, just a collection of printed words that don't sell.
I HATE marketing (studied it long enough, worked in it far too long), but I know that if you're not finding out what your target market wants, you're not going to have a very saleable product.

[Olefin]

Leg - take it from me - neither I or Raellus are happy either - we basically got told that at this time there is no more interest in new works for either V1 or V2 versions of the game - meaning that the stuff we were working on as far as anything official is dead in the water.

Thus after three new releases in two years we get told thanks but the new owners arent interested in anything new for V1 and V2, at least for now. Hopefully they will be open to stuff from writers like us in the future.

[Olefin]

Only details on timing come from Twilight:2000 - Roleplaying In The Aftermath Of World War III facebook group and the person who is working on it - Marc wouldnt give me anything more either

Chris Lites - It will be officially announced in the fall. It's from a large publisher who I think fans will be pleased with. I'll see if I can share anything else.

He also said it wont be anything like Twilight 2013

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Me personally, I heartily encourage people to keep creating material for the earlier game versions if they wish to do so, specifically because there seems to be a trend in modern games for "streamlined" rules and more "narrative" content. Streamlined, meaning little in the way of rules to give you guidance.
I've found that games with those two concepts tend to leave me unsatisfied with the gameplay - they're dull and uninspiring

Naturally it depends on the game system you choose but I've found that for my tastes, certain older game systems offer the right mix of GM freedom and rules/mechanics. I like to have a rules as guidelines but I want those guidelines to be solid & robust. A lot of the games on offer these days come across to me like some tabletop version of interpretative dance while ignoring the idea of teamwork.

Now I'm not saying that this new version of T2k is going to be "rules-lite and catering to the angsty, whiney, tell-my-own-story-rather-than-follow-the-GM's-story player" kind of game but those types of games appear to be popular enough at the moment to be a market-influence on the rules designs.

EDIT: just realized that Chris Lites is probably one and the same guy that wrote the Dust rpg - which is a rules-light, action-adventure style game.
https://www.modiphius.com/dust-adventures.html
I'm not saying that that makes me think a 4th edition of T2k is going to lack the mechanics that make the game something you can sink your teeth into, but it does make me think that I'll wait for some game reviews before deciding to buy it or not.

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

Me personally, I heartily encourage people to keep creating material for the earlier game versions if they wish to do so, specifically because there seems to be a trend in modern games for "streamlined" rules and more "narrative" content. Streamlined, meaning little in the way of rules to give you guidance.
I've found that games with those two concepts tend to leave me unsatisfied with the gameplay - they're dull and uninspiring

Naturally it depends on the game system you choose but I've found that for my tastes, certain older game systems offer the right mix of GM freedom and rules/mechanics. I like to have a rules as guidelines but I want those guidelines to be solid & robust. A lot of the games on offer these days come across to me like some tabletop version of interpretative dance while ignoring the idea of teamwork.

Now I'm not saying that this new version of T2k is going to be "rules-lite and catering to the angsty, whiney, tell-my-own-story-rather-than-follow-the-GM's-story player" kind of game but those types of games appear to be popular enough at the moment to be a market-influence on the rules designs.

thank you that is what I needed to hear - even if for some reason the new game isnt looking for stuff on the older versions there is no reason that we cant still publish them even if its "fan canon"

[Olefin]

"EDIT: just realized that Chris Lites is probably one and the same guy that wrote the Dust rpg - which is a rules-light, action-adventure style game.
https://www.modiphius.com/dust-adventures.html
I'm not saying that that makes me think a 4th edition of T2k is going to lack the mechanics that make the game something you can sink your teeth into, but it does make me think that I'll wait for some game reviews before deciding to buy it or not."

Yes its the same guy - and yes I have the same concerns

Looked thru his bibliography and if he is writing for the game it is definitely going to go away from mechanics and more towards action adventure. Besides Dust he wrote several Conan Adventures, Mutant Chronicles, Infinity the Roleplaying Game, and Unknown Armies - none of which from what I can see have much in common with either the V1 or V2/2.2 version of the game - or even 2013 for that matter. I am hoping someone polls the fan base if they are deciding on that kind of change

[Olefin]

Based on who Chris Lites works for the new owners/licensee is probably going to be Modiphius Entertainment. Keep in mind this is conjecture as I have not heard anything at all yet officially.

People might want to look at their stuff and see what you think.

if its them this is their mission statement

Make partial or minor changes to (something), typically so as to improve it or to make it less extreme.

Transform (a structure) from its original anatomical form during development or evolution.

[Adm.Lee]

I hope whoever the publisher is will be reaching out to the community for playtesting.

Beyond that, I don't know what to think about this announcement.

[swaghauler]

I cannot linger long as I have a prior engagement but when I saw this thread I figured I'd add in what I know. IF Modiphius is the developer and they are using their trademarked 2D20 system, here's a decent tutorial of Conan 2D20 (the game I have actually played in this system)...

https://youtu.be/PSEljgkp0uk

I would call the 2D20 system a "medium crunch" cinematic system (where you can do all sorts of cool things using a feature known as MOMENTUM). It might work but I would have to see how they will deal with automatic weapons. John Carter and Star Trek both have projectile/energy weapons but those are not the same as modern automatic weapons. I don't know how the Mutant Chronicles does them (each 2D20 system is modified to fit the game using it).

I cannot get the video link to work so just YouTube Blades and Blaster's Modiphius 2D20 tutorial.

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

John Carter and Star Trek both have projectile/energy weapons but those are not the same as modern automatic weapons. I don't know how the Mutant Chronicles does them (each 2D20 system is modified to fit the game using it).

From the Quickstart for Mutant Chronicles, it looks like there are three fire modes, all of which expend Reload tokens for bonuses:

Semi-Automatic: spend a Reload to get an extra d20 on attack and +1 Dark Symmetry die (a die that inflicts damage on a 1 or 2 and triggers a weapon's special ability on a 6).

Burst: spend 1 or 2 Reloads to get an extra d20 on attack and a number of Dark Symmetry dice equal to the Reloads spent.

Automatic: spend up to 3 Reloads to get an extra d20 on attack and a number of DS dice equal to Reloads spent.

Examples of special abilities triggered by a 6 on the Dark Symmetry die are Armor Piercing (ignore some armor), Knockdown, Spread (damage additional hit areas), Stun, and Vicious (inflict extra damage).

[pmulcahy11b]

Why can't we use the same rules set (my favorite is v2,2) and come up with a new timeline and backstory?

[Legbreaker]

Exactly. 2.2 isn't broken, and at most requires just a few tweaks.
Personally I miss the detail of the 1st ed vehicle damage system, but the rest has worked perfectly fine for the last quarter of a century.

I'm not convinced a new history is necessary either. Perhaps another alternate version much the same as Merc is an alternate, but where's the need for a complete re-write?

That said, I think Fasa did new versions of Shadowrun quite well - they simply advanced the timeline about the same number of game years as between real time editions and incorporated new/altered rules and technology as an evolutionary, rather than revolutionary step.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Speaking for myself, I'm a little annoyed that the wider community is only just hearing about this now and that we haven't been given the opportunity to express our preferences about the new game and in particular it's setting.
After all, without us, there is no game, just a collection of printed words that don't sell.

I hear you and I'm sympathetic, but anyone who watched T2013 getting absolutely pummelled by naysayers during development, let alone once it was released, would understandably be EXTREMELY wary of saying much to the wider community if they were early into the development of a new system.


In any case, what I would want from a new T2K and what most T2Kers would want are likely very different things. I've resigned myself to never getting the levels of crunch I'd be happy with.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I understand your point but I think 2013 shot itself in the foot at least once and that didn't help things much. By that I mean the restrictions they put on people for contributions to the development - I seriously considered submitting information but when I saw the demand for proof of military service by submittal of your DD 214 Form (or equivalent) I decided not to do so.
I completely understand that they wanted to weed out the wannabes but for us in Australia, you can't just send military documents to foreign nationals and besides that, Army Reserve members didn't get discharge papers when they finished their service.

Among some potential contributors that approach created a feeling that there was some sort of elitism going on and they decided not to get involved. The timeline/history that 2013 provided deserved some criticism, for example it failed on some points of geography that would have been very easy to check with a simple internet search.
Having said all that, the rules were (and still are) good and a lot of the support material was equally as good.
But 2013 lost a lot of goodwill when the head honcho blamed die-hard fans of T2k for 2013's lack of success - purely military themed rpgs have always been a niche market, I don't recall any that have ever sold as well as T2k except perhaps Palladium's Recon/Advanced Recon game. So any new military rpg was never going to sell in large volume and 2013's release was around the same time as D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder were getting the lion's share of publicity and the hype for D&D 4 was building up.

[Legbreaker]

As I indicated earlier, market research when developing a product, ANY product whether that be a new design of shoes, confectionery, or a game is absolutely VITAL to it's success. With T:2013 that didn't appear to have happened, as as SSC has mentioned, what little external input they accepted was heavily cherrypicked.
With this new version we've heard absolutely nothing, even though (we presume) development has been going on for quite some time. This does not bode well at all for a successful release and acceptance by the gaming community. All we know for sure is there is a "press release" scheduled for publication sometime in the 3rd quarter of this year.

[Raellus]

I get it what y'all are saying, but I'm not sure that asking the 400-odd fans of a dead system what they want out of the new version of their favorite old-school RPG is the best path to developing a marketable new RPG, c. 2019.

I think that the whole point of developing a new version of the franchise is to move outside of the echo chamber of established fandom. Will this alienate fans of the older versions of the game? Probably. Will this ruin the chances of the new product making money. Probably not.

-

[Legbreaker]

Considering we are the majority of the market for them, it's sheer idiocy not to find out isn't it?
They don't have to cater for everyone, but don't you think it's a smart idea to at least try and cater for the majority?

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Considering we are the majority of the market for them, it's sheer idiocy not to find out isn't it?
They don't have to cater for everyone, but don't you think it's a smart idea to at least try and cater for the majority?

If we are the majority of the market, then there's not enough of a market to turn a profit on a new product and the project should be shut down.

My expectation is that they may try to broaden the scope to be a post-apocalyptic survival RPG that still has a lot of military backgrounds but also has more emphasis on the civilian side, to broaden the market. Essentially, look at what 2k13 did and do the opposite, because they narrowed the scope so much that they had no market. There's room in the market for PA games, and given what's out there, I think it's enough of a differentiator to have a serious game based on realistic tech (as opposed to a far-future PA with wondertech or the comic-book style mutations of Gamma World) without also pigeonholing players into strictly military backgrounds. The trick is to find enough of a differentiator to stand out without becoming so niche that you artificially limit your market.

That said, if it is going to Modiphius' 2d20 system, I'm almost certainly out of their market because I don't like that system. I'll just stick with my collection of GDW T2k and continue adding to it as I find old product in used book stores.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

If we are the majority of the market, then there's not enough of a market to turn a profit on a new product and the project should be shut down.

We are the majority of the current market. That market may well expand, but where do you think most of the earlier reviews are going to come from?
With all my years of product development, sales, etc, I can't think of a worse way to approach this than they appear to be doing.

If they're changing the background, the rules, and setting it in a different time (say 2025), can it really be called Twilight? Why not just call it "Armageddon" or something like that and be done with it? Is it just an attempt to ride on the coat tails of the earlier games?

Of course all of this is pure speculation. We know virtually nothing at this point and may well be pleasantly surprised when the first official information is published (due in about 4-6 months I believe). Personally though, I'm not holding my breath.

[Olefin]

Well we know there is obviously some kind of decent market out there or the works that I did and Raellus did wouldnt have had many sales at all - and keep in mind that they were only offered at one place - i.e. got me how many fans never go to drivethrurpg.com at all or who are only interested in actual printed material and not pdf's. (i.e. I'll just stick with my collection of GDW T2k and continue adding to it as I find old product in used book stores.)

The real question is how much remains of the original market and does the new release managed to be released in such a way that it can really build an enduring and large enough fan base to make it profitable to pay people to write new material for it and make a profit

i.e. there are only so many people like Raellus and me who did it because we love the game versus working authors doing this for a living and thus having to sell enough product to be able to pay them and still make a profit

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

We are the majority of the current market. That market may well expand, but where do you think most of the earlier reviews are going to come from?
With all my years of product development, sales, etc, I can't think of a worse way to approach this than they appear to be doing.

If they're changing the background, the rules, and setting it in a different time (say 2025), can it really be called Twilight? Why not just call it "Armageddon" or something like that and be done with it? Is it just an attempt to ride on the coat tails of the earlier games?

Of course all of this is pure speculation. We know virtually nothing at this point and may well be pleasantly surprised when the first official information is published (due in about 4-6 months I believe). Personally though, I'm not holding my breath.

One thing I am hoping the new licensee/owners are smart enough to do is to allow people to still write for and release material for the old versions as well. That would also expand their releases - i.e. this month its V4, next month you get a "classic V2.2" release, etc..

Sort of what Star Trek has done - i.e you have books now being written on both the reboot Star Trek and the classic Star Trek and both sell well.

Thus I couldnt see why they couldnt embrace what I or Raellus wrote or what Leg is thinking of writing as part of what they are doing as "classic releases" instead of for the the new canon.

Still very much canon but now canon for V2.2 versus canon for V4

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Olefin

...what Leg is thinking of writing...

Which is about a third done at the moment, but on hold until we know more about this 4th edition and what they are doing with the game.
I can see both advantages and disadvantages with my work tying into the new version. One advantage is possibly tapping into professional artwork and printed hard copies (not to mention actually getting a decent financial return for all the hours I've put in). Disadvantages I've already touched on.

[Jason Weiser]

I will keep my powder dry till we get details. I do hope it respects the source material in some form or fashion. I think that's where 2013 went wrong IMO. That said, if V4 does that, and breathes new life into this old girl, I'd be happy.

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

I understand your point but I think 2013 shot itself in the foot at least once and that didn't help things much. By that I mean the restrictions they put on people for contributions to the development - I seriously considered submitting information but when I saw the demand for proof of military service by submittal of your DD 214 Form (or equivalent) I decided not to do so.
I completely understand that they wanted to weed out the wannabes but for us in Australia, you can't just send military documents to foreign nationals and besides that, Army Reserve members didn't get discharge papers when they finished their service.

Among some potential contributors that approach created a feeling that there was some sort of elitism going on and they decided not to get involved. The timeline/history that 2013 provided deserved some criticism, for example it failed on some points of geography that would have been very easy to check with a simple internet search.
Having said all that, the rules were (and still are) good and a lot of the support material was equally as good.
But 2013 lost a lot of goodwill when the head honcho blamed die-hard fans of T2k for 2013's lack of success - purely military themed rpgs have always been a niche market, I don't recall any that have ever sold as well as T2k except perhaps Palladium's Recon/Advanced Recon game. So any new military rpg was never going to sell in large volume and 2013's release was around the same time as D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder were getting the lion's share of publicity and the hype for D&D 4 was building up.

This very much. I’m an international politics major/history minor with a background in research and intelligence analysis and have done contract work for the NSA but they dismissed my offers out of hand. When this attitude was brought up on (I think) Yahoo Groups they were less than courteous. I looked over the finished project and found the whole background premise somewhat laughable.

[Benjamin]

The issues I worry about for V4 are...

1. that the Timeline will be too politicized given our current social climate.

2. it will be just generic PA game with no real Twilight War focus.

3. It will very quickly become dated with a background that almost immediately feels wacky.

4. It will overlook the longer conventional war that led into the Twilight, thus lacking leftover forces serving overseas and the foreign and abandoned feel of the original

5. It will lack a good vehicle combat system and all of the in depth vehicle descriptions

What I would really like would be for the designers just to suck it up and make it an alternate history background set in the same time period as the original. Look at how popular the Team Yankee table top miniatures game has become. Maybe do a tie in with that game if possible. Twilight 2000 with integrated miniatures rules and cool minis would be great. A generic Post Apocalypse game is totally worthless to me.

Benjamin

[ChalkLine]

Originally Posted by Benjamin

This very much. I’m an international politics major/history minor with a background in research and intelligence analysis and have done contract work for the NSA but they dismissed my offers out of hand. When this attitude was brought up on (I think) Yahoo Groups they were less than courteous. I looked over the finished project and found the whole background premise somewhat laughable.

Had a similar experience, and they were even less impressed because I'm a civilian and always have been.

[Olefin]

Better yet would be to just pick either V1 or V2.2 timelines and then make possible rule changes (i.e. incorporate changes to the combat system, make the fuel more realistic as to what kind of energy you can get out of ethanol or methanol, show JL8 jet fuel as what the military was using as a distinctly different fuel than high octane general aviation gas, correct some of the issues in game play that people have found over the years) and then either have the releases be during the current timeline (i.e. up to April 2001 and have them occur during the period that the games covered) or better yet extend the timeline and take it forward thru 2001, 2002, etc..

When I was told they werent looking at Africa or Australia it immediately made me think this was going to be a very North America or Eurocentric game and not expand it to include events all over the world like Raellus and myself did and like the Challenge articles did.

Frankly all we dont need is another aborted Twilight 2013 type launch

FYI as to political views - check out Frank Frey's facebook sometime - not exactly conducive to anyone who is either Christian or voted for Trump or Bush (either one of them) - but he checked his political views at the door when he wrote back in the 80's and 90's and they really didnt impact his work in a noticeable way - same with most of the other canon authors

Hopefully the new writers will be able to follow in their foot steps

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by Benjamin

The issues I worry about for V4 are...

What I would really like would be for the designers just to suck it up and make it an alternate history background set in the same time period as the original. Look at how popular the Team Yankee table top miniatures game has become. Maybe do a tie in with that game if possible. Twilight 2000 with integrated miniatures rules and cool minis would be great. A generic Post Apocalypse game is totally worthless to me.

Benjamin

Thats why when I wrote the East Africa/Kenya sourcebook for the canon I set it in the same time period, with mentions of multiple other modules and events (Going Home, the RDF, Kings Ransom among others) to tie it completely into the current timeline. Extended the timeline a month or so - i.e. my "now" is around mid-May 2001 - but otherwise it fits. Even made sure that if I mentioned real world events they took place in the context of the timeline instead of breaking it.

Hopefully the new writers will do something similar

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by Benjamin

...

What I would really like would be for the designers just to suck it up and make it an alternate history background set in the same time period as the original. Look at how popular the Team Yankee table top miniatures game has become. Maybe do a tie in with that game if possible. Twilight 2000 with integrated miniatures rules and cool minis would be great. A generic Post Apocalypse game is totally worthless to me.

Benjamin

Um is Team Yankee still even a game? At least in my local area (5 games stores all with places to play) none of them even knows anything about it. We had one member of our local group pick some stuff up for it, but then they killed the forums and that killed what little interest there was in my group. But I have never seen a game played, or even heard of one being played with in at least two hours of where I live, lots of other games that I know nothing about. But if that is the definition of a popular game I think we might be in trouble. As "dead" games have more talk around here than Team Yankee. (Dead games I am talking about are like AOG Babylon 5 Wars, and even Twilight 2000).