Mongoose Publishing and Twilight 2000

[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.

[cavtroop]

Originally Posted by Targan

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.

I second this. I seriously like the Reflex system. I don't think any of the generic systems will work well. The one I am most familiar with - Savage Worlds - is exactly the opposite of what I think would work well with this setting. You have one skill for shooting - 'Shooting' that handles all firearms - rifles, pistols, smg, mg, etc. etc. SW lacks the crunch that this setting needs I think.

[Dog 6]

Originally Posted by Targan

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.

I got around to reading the Reflex rules and I must say I'm very impressed, if its not "the best" its damn close.........

[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

[cavtroop]

Pretty rough crowd here

The fact of the matter, this is the way the industry is going, except for maybe the big publishing houses. Mongoose may be able to get stock in stores around the world, but the majority of purchases are done via the internet, or even .pdf sales.

Trust me, I'd rather have it like the good ol' days of the 80's, where I could go to the hobby store, flip through the books for hours and hours, but those days are mostly gone excepting for the more mainstream stuff.

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by cavtroop

Pretty rough crowd here

Cav,

Agreed, we do have to be realistic.

Sure, gone are the days when a gaming company could push any POS game out the door and sell them in a game store around the world. Those days are gone!

Still, I don't think it's unrealistic to expect games that are complete and playable.

Tony

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by helbent4

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

I didn't think I was going to be one to defend 2013 but, here goes nothing...

In my opinion this is an unnecessarily harsh criticism of the entire product because you can't really judge the rules if you're simply taking other people's comments on them and haven't actually read them yourself.

The Reflex system is a good solid set of rules that you can scale up or down as needed. Sure it had issues at the start with integration of vehicles but then so did Twilight: 2000 in at least 2nd ed. There's not a lot of new RPGs released in the last 10 years that didn't have minor rules issues here and there.

Just in case anyone sees more here than what I actually mean, I'm not seeking to attack anyone's opinion here, I'm not a fan of the 2013 timeline myself but geez talk about harsh crowd.
The guys did put out a decent stand-alone military RPG, something that very few (if any) other companies are even interested in doing.

Perhaps they should have called it 'Apocalypse: 2013' or called it 'End Date: 2013' or 'Alpha & Omega 2013' or just '2013' or any-damned-thing else - I think the biggest problem here is nostalgia. With the Twilight name attached to it, perhaps some people where expecting it to be exactly like T2k which it could never hope to be simply because the world has changed too much and as I mentioned before, military & post-apoc RPGs are now a minor market in the grand scheme of things.

It needed to be more current so as to attract the next generation of gamers because in reality, the only real market for Twilight: 2000 these days is with older gamers who already have most of what they need to run it. So the company would be reduced to making new adventure modules and with a product that has an appeal to a relatively small audience, you aint gonna make much money out of that.

[Jason]

I have run a T2013 campaign. I have said it before and I will repeat it here; T2013 has the best mechanic for small-unit conflict of any rpg I have ever played. I love T2k 2.2 ed., but T2013 blows that system out of the water. I never had a problem with any of the other rules including vehicle combat (which is admittedly rare).

The creators of T2013 made a serious tactical error when they marginalized the background. The background is weak enough to throw some people, adding a few tweaks made it work for me.

RPG publishing must be an enormous headache. I cannot imagine trying something on that scale.

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

I didn't think I was going to be one to defend 2013 but, here goes nothing...

In my opinion this is an unnecessarily harsh criticism of the entire product because you can't really judge the rules if you're simply taking other people's comments on them and haven't actually read them yourself.

SSC,

I think you are mistaken, I bought a copy of the rules and have "actually read them" myself. You are thinking of someone else?

As for who I listened to, I had some questions with the rules and figured I should go directly to the horse's mouth. These problems were posted there. In fact, I found a mea culpa from I what i believe were the game designers themselves, about how they tried to adapt T2Ks vehicle combat rules to Reflex and this created unexpected rules conflicts. (Like many things in life, I could be mistaken.) I don't think I'm being unnecessarily harsh if I'm simply agreeing with openly acknowledged flaws.

I agree, perhaps T2013 should have been called something else and therefore it could have been judged on its own terms, instead of using a licence that mostly ended up being ignored. A lot of effort is made in attracting a "new crowd", but my experience with newer gamers is they tend to expect simpler, quicker, more abstract rules and games, even when relating to combat and warfare. Pretty much the opposite of T2013 in general and Reflex in particular, whether or not you think this is good or bad. (Personally, I think there is a lot to recommend Reflex and while I've played and run Dogs in the Vineyard, Shock: Social Science Fiction, Unsung and other indie/avant-garde systems I still prefer a good crunchy game.)

Bringing this back to Mongoose, updating T2013 had demonstrably mixed results. Arguably, some gamers were at least a little alienated while the hoped-for breakthrough with younger gamers that was apparently the whole point of the exercise wasn't altogether achieved. It's not clear to me why if Mongoose were to take a kick at the can they would want to do it in the same way and expect different results.

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.