Mongoose Publishing and Twilight 2000

[Fusilier]

Not again....

[Grimace]

Yep, again...and again....and again.

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Fusilier

Not again....

You're not likely to get yet another re-hash of the Cold War going hot. Learn to live with it. Or write your own.

- C.

[kato13]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

You're not likely to get yet another re-hash of the Cold War going hot. Learn to live with it. Or write your own.

- C.

Or simply ignore what you don't like, understanding that tastes differ amongst reasonable people.

[Dog 6]

Originally Posted by kato13

Or simply ignore what you don't like, understanding that tastes differ amongst reasonable people.

i'll buy it as long as the back story is good and they don't kill off 90% of the world like in 2013k. 2013k sucked so bad i wish i had my money back for it.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Dog 6

i'll buy it as long as the back story is good and they don't kill off 90% of the world like in 2013k. 2013k sucked so bad i wish i had my money back for it.

Many, many people don't like the backstory in T:2013. What do you think of the Reflex system? I really like it.

[Dog 6]

Originally Posted by Targan

Many, many people don't like the backstory in T:2013. What do you think of the Reflex system? I really like it.

never used it, the back story made me sick so i shoved it to the floor where it sits to this day

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Dog 6

never used it, the back story made me sick so i shoved it to the floor where it sits to this day

Ah well, your money, your opinion as you say. Just seems strange to me that you have no interest in assessing the Reflex rules at all. You don't have to read those parts of the rule book dealing with T:2013's backstory. Heck, you could even cut that stuff out with a box cutter!

If I was going to start a new T2K campaign with players other than those I have been gaming with for the past 2 decades I would probably use the Reflex system over Gunmaster, that's how good I think it is.

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Dog 6

i'll buy it as long as the back story is good and they don't kill off 90% of the world like in 2013k. 2013k sucked so bad i wish i had my money back for it.

I'm curious. Exactly what casualty rate would you consider acceptable for a modern WWIII scenario? FYI, GDW's figures in the 2.0 timeline were 52% in the United States and 45% in Canada, and those numbers were exclusive to primary and secondary casualties from the 1997 nuclear strikes over the 1997-2000 period (pp. 234-236).

To put it another way, what survival rate would you consider plausible for a global conflict producing near-complete disruption of the medical and agricultural industries that enable the current population density in developed nations?

- C.

[Dog 6]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

I'm curious. Exactly what casualty rate would you consider acceptable for a modern WWIII scenario? FYI, GDW's figures in the 2.0 timeline were 52% in the United States and 45% in Canada, and those numbers were exclusive to primary and secondary casualties from the 1997 nuclear strikes over the 1997-2000 period (pp. 234-236).

To put it another way, what survival rate would you consider plausible for a global conflict producing near-complete disruption of the medical and agricultural industries that enable the current population density in developed nations?

- C.

40-60% would be in the range

[Eddie]

Originally Posted by Dog 6

40-60% would be in the range

JFTR, this survival rate would equate roughly to the global population of the 1960s, give or take 10 years.

A 10% survival rate would equate to the global population of roughly 1700 or so.

If we use the 2006 world population that we had when we were working on the book.

[cavtroop]

Originally Posted by Dog 6

i'll buy it as long as the back story is good and they don't kill off 90% of the world like in 2013k. 2013k sucked so bad i wish i had my money back for it.

Wow, that's pretty opinionated. I loved the reflex system, and thought the background was pretty well done, and very well researched. I had a group put together (it fell through, oh well), and we were going to use the Reflex System, but the orig. Twilight 2000 1.0 background - not because we thought the 2013 background stunk, but for nostalgia reasons.

I never understood why some people are so quick to throw out the baby with the bathwater - not just here, but in all the RPG industry. If someone doesn't like the setting, but the rules are just fine, why not use them, and make your own background? Excepting for T:2000, I don't know of a system that I ever ran where I used the background as presented. At best I tweaked it a bit, at worst I chucked it out completely and wrote my own, or took another background for the game.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by cavtroop

I never understood why some people are so quick to throw out the baby with the bathwater - not just here, but in all the RPG industry. If someone doesn't like the setting, but the rules are just fine, why not use them, and make your own background? Excepting for T:2000, I don't know of a system that I ever ran where I used the background as presented. At best I tweaked it a bit, at worst I chucked it out completely and wrote my own, or took another background for the game.

That's a good question. I think it's because a lot of would-be GMs don't have the creativity or time to create their own background. I was 11 when I picked up T2K v1.0 and I don't think I could have come up with better at that age. A lot of more mature GMs still don't have the wherewithall to create a believable background/setting. They rely on the published materials.

Also, I think most people are drawn to a game system precisely because of the background. "I like Fantasy and Cyberpunk lit so I'm going to check out Shadowrun..." or whatever. I've seen lots of online GMs who use different rules for a game but only a few examples of GMs who create new backgrounds/settings for use with an existing rules system.

Lastly, it's a question of cost. Nowadays, most PnP RPG core books are pretty expensive. I think most people will balk if presented with only half a useable product. Although I heard a lot of good things about the Reflex system, and was curious to try it out for myself, I didn't fork over the cash for T2103 bacause I didn't like the background. Now that the producer's kaput, I wish I'd gone ahead and picked up a copy. But, at the time, I didn't want to pay just for a new rules system.

[cavtroop]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Lastly, it's a question of cost. Nowadays, most PnP RPG core books are pretty expensive. I think most people will balk if presented with only half a useable product. Although I heard a lot of good things about the Reflex system, and was curious to try it out for myself, I didn't fork over the cash for T2103 bacause I didn't like the background. Now that the producer's kaput, I wish I'd gone ahead and picked up a copy. But, at the time, I didn't want to pay just for a new rules system.

I've always wondered how 93GS would have done, had they released the Reflex System standalone, and then T:2013 as a setting - that's how alot of game systems are doing it nowadays. Take Savage Worlds for instance - the 'Explorers Edition' - essentially just the base rules - sells for $10. Then you can buy setting books. They have everything from WWII, to High Fantasy, Steampunk, Wild West, dozens more. That way as a GM or group, you get the core rules, and plug-in the settings you want, or simply create your own.

No idea if that would have worked for 93GS or not however. I do know I still plan on getting a 2013 game going as soon as I can

[Eddie]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Although I heard a lot of good things about the Reflex system, and was curious to try it out for myself, I didn't fork over the cash for T2103 bacause I didn't like the background. Now that the producer's kaput, I wish I'd gone ahead and picked up a copy. But, at the time, I didn't want to pay just for a new rules system.

Keith still has books for sale and there is always the .pdf on DTRPG.

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Lastly, it's a question of cost. Nowadays, most PnP RPG core books are pretty expensive. I think most people will balk if presented with only half a useable product.

Rae,

One problem with T2013 was that it wasn't even half a usable product.

From what I gathered, there were serious issues in parts of the vehicle combat system where it tried to mesh with the Reflex system in different ways relating to small arms and light cannon penetration vs light armoured vehicles and initiative. I think there are new rules (linked-to elsewhere in this forum) that iron out these inconsistencies a long time after I bought the main rules.

Tony

[Dog 6]

Originally Posted by cavtroop

Wow, that's pretty opinionated. I loved the reflex system, and thought the background was pretty well done, and very well researched. I had a group put together (it fell through, oh well), and we were going to use the Reflex System, but the orig. Twilight 2000 1.0 background - not because we thought the 2013 background stunk, but for nostalgia reasons.

I never understood why some people are so quick to throw out the baby with the bathwater - not just here, but in all the RPG industry. If someone doesn't like the setting, but the rules are just fine, why not use them, and make your own background? Excepting for T:2000, I don't know of a system that I ever ran where I used the background as presented. At best I tweaked it a bit, at worst I chucked it out completely and wrote my own, or took another background for the game.

my money, my opinion.......

[cavtroop]

Originally Posted by Dog 6

my money, my opinion.......

Absolutely, I'm not trying to take it away from you. But you and others haven't even *played* the game, and are panning it, which doesn't make sense to me.

Nothing I say is going to make you pick it up and give it a whirl, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by cavtroop

I never understood why some people are so quick to throw out the baby with the bathwater - not just here, but in all the RPG industry. If someone doesn't like the setting, but the rules are just fine, why not use them, and make your own background? Excepting for T:2000, I don't know of a system that I ever ran where I used the background as presented. At best I tweaked it a bit, at worst I chucked it out completely and wrote my own, or took another background for the game.

Anymore for me, the answer is because I have multiple rules-sets that I can adapt to a setting that interests me. Off the top of my head, I can think of 3 "generic" or "basic" rules in my possession-- Cortex, Traveller, and Savage Worlds. In the time it took me to type that sentence, I remembered I also have GURPS and generic D6.

T2k is one of the few games I have that I would run without shifting to another system,* and one of the few rules-that-came-with-settings that I might try to adapt to another setting.**

* Of the above, SW or Cortex would work for me in a T2k setting game. Or Trav, since that's where this thread started.
** I think v2.2 would work great in an espionage game, modern or historical.

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by Dog 6

i'll buy it as long as the back story is good and they don't kill off 90% of the world like in 2013k. 2013k sucked so bad i wish i had my money back for it.

The weak backstory was one of the reasons I didn't bother with it myself. As Raellus mentioned, I didn't want to pay for something that wasn't sitting well with me with what I saw. I later got a free copy, and granted I only skimmed through it, I'm still satisfied with sticking with the original.

Perhaps there should have been a separate rules book from the game book.

[Legbreaker]

One of the MAJOR reasons I haven't picked it up is that I've never been able to lay my eyes on it. Personally I don't like buying sight unseen, I prefer to pick it up in the shop, flick through the pages and get a general feel for the work first.
Down in this part of the world that simply wasn't possible - it was either order it from O/S or fork out for the PDF after a brief look at the promo material. The local stores hadn't even heard of it.

[Dog 6]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

One of the MAJOR reasons I haven't picked it up is that I've never been able to lay my eyes on it. Personally I don't like buying sight unseen, I prefer to pick it up in the shop, flick through the pages and get a general feel for the work first.
Down in this part of the world that simply wasn't possible - it was either order it from O/S or fork out for the PDF after a brief look at the promo material. The local stores hadn't even heard of it.

pm me if you want my copy............

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

One of the MAJOR reasons I haven't picked it up is that I've never been able to lay my eyes on it. Personally I don't like buying sight unseen, I prefer to pick it up in the shop, flick through the pages and get a general feel for the work first.
Down in this part of the world that simply wasn't possible - it was either order it from O/S or fork out for the PDF after a brief look at the promo material. The local stores hadn't even heard of it.

I was in a similar position here in the more civilized north. I much prefer PnP materials over PDFs and the like. Call me old fashioned. The few gaming stores up here in my neck of the woods (S. Arizona) didn't carry T2103 ("Twilight what?")- at least when I checked- and refused to order it if I didn't pre-pay. Based on what I'd heard and seen to that point, I wasn't willing to jump through the hoops.

It must be hard for a small gaming company to get its product out there among the masses in this day and age. I don't fault 93GS for this situation. I'm sure they were doing the best they could with the resources they had. I think it's symptomatic of the PnP RPG industry as a whole.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

You're not likely to get yet another re-hash of the Cold War going hot. Learn to live with it. Or write your own.

I don't like where this is going. We don't need tension and acrimony between us old school fans (or "derelicts" if you prefer) and the Young Turks.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Tegyrius is right however and while his comment was short on words it shouldn't necessarily be taken that he was getting short with other people.
It's far too easy to interpret the wrong tone in something that someone writes as opposed to hearing/seeing them speak and thus is becomes far too easy to read the wrong intent in someones comments.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

Tegyrius is right however and while his comment was short on words it shouldn't necessarily be taken that he was getting short with other people.
It's far too easy to interpret the wrong tone in something that someone writes as opposed to hearing/seeing them speak and thus is becomes far too easy to read the wrong intent in someones comments.

You're right and your points (and Tegyrius') are well taken. The tone of his post, however, was pretty clear. I don't want this to turn into sniping, especially given the posts surrounding the recent demise of 93 Games Studios and the reliscense. For my part, I will choose the high road.

[Legbreaker]

I believe there's two equally valid ways of approaching yet another version of T2K.
The first is to leave the timeline basically the same as GDW had it - world political relations fell apart in the late 80s and 90s before turning nuclear in late 1997.
The other is to completely rewrite everything with a point of diversion in 2010 (or thereabouts) and set the game about 10-20 years in the future. Obviously this wouldn't actually be Twilight:2000 anymore, but the general feel would be roughly the same (provided the background was written that way).

[Tegyrius]

This. You can see where Leg's used to saying what he means rather than worrying about getting paid by the word.

- C.

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

I believe there's two equally valid ways of approaching yet another version of T2K.
The first is to leave the timeline basically the same as GDW had it - world political relations fell apart in the late 80s and 90s before turning nuclear in late 1997.
The other is to completely rewrite everything with a point of diversion in 2010 (or thereabouts) and set the game about 10-20 years in the future. Obviously this wouldn't actually be Twilight:2000 anymore, but the general feel would be roughly the same (provided the background was written that way).

I totally agree with the second point being the best of the two in my mind. A 2008 POD is actually quite workable considering you had a US election coupled with a war between russia and a nominal US ally. While I doub't the end result would change a more active US role would poison relations between east and west and could with the right spin slowly lead to a new cold war (military spending to "cure" the recession?).

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I don't like where this is going. We don't need tension and acrimony between us old school fans (or "derelicts" if you prefer) and the Young Turks.

Something I don't think many members of this forum have ever acknowledged or understood is that most of the so-called Young Turks started out as, and remain, fans of GDW's original game. Keith and the freelance talent he assembled under 93GS' banner were, without any exception of which I'm aware, long-time players or GMs of the first and second editions. I've been playing since I picked up the boxed set sometime in the late eighties. Did I miss the meeting where someone decided that a DD-214 with a 1991 or prior ETS date was a requirement for valid Twilight: 2000 fandom?

Raellus, I think you took my tone exactly as intended. I spent the last four and a half years trying to do my best by the fan base represented here and I'm tired of this forum's members tacitly condoning slams at my work with your (collective) silence. You (again, collective) have been doing it since a certain specific member began issuing unfounded personal attacks and threats of violence against me and Keith. It ceased being tolerable a long time ago. I don't hold any illusions about this community finding my input valuable, but it would be nice to be able to continue reading and occasionally posting here without seeing yet another cheap shot.

SSC, I also think you took my message exactly as intended. I do not believe another treatment of the Cold War would be commercially viable in today's gaming industry. I felt that way when we started planning 2013 in mid-2006 and I stand by that viewpoint, even if I am less than fully satisfied with the final implementation of the 2013 timeline. A "classic" timeline is unlikely to appeal to many gamers outside the remaining Twilight: 2000 fan base. If any established publishing company gets the license, I expect their direction will be another attempted modernization of the property in order to play on contemporary fears and make it more relevant to an audience larger than the ex-GDW fan base. The only way anyone's going to update the Cold War is if a team of fans gets the license themselves and proceeds to publish for love rather than profit. Even if that happens, they're going to be competing with the vast body of fan-written work that many people (chief among them this forum's more ardent contributors) have put out since GDW shut down. What's more, any such publisher's target audience will judge their new products by the standards those fans have set, perhaps even moreso than against GDW's original material.

- C.