Good Luck, You're on your Own! (T2K Fanzine Thread)

[Olefin]

I agree that we should have a tag on articles like that

now if an article is directly in support of canon that could be different (for instance if one of the GDW authors hears about the fanzine and wants to contribute an article)

As for articles like Matt's - I loved it and even if it contradicted canon in some ways it is perfect for a fanzine. Its his view on Twilight 2000 as a fan - and is something we can use for campaigns in our own worlds.

Face it - the canon stopped in early 2001 with the exception of a few Challenge Magazine articles here and there that are later

Thus anything with a tag after May or so of 2001 has no "this contradicts canon" as we all know that 2300AD is only one possible future per what GDW said themselves.

Plus, as every module stated, the referee - i..e us - has considerable latitude to modify information no only within the modules but also within the sourcebooks themselves, even to the point of ignoring modules based on events in their campaigns.

That alone would mean that canon is what you make of it within your own campaign.

What the fanzine needs to say is that these articles represent our campaigns, which are based on canon, and as such they do deviate from canon in various ways and shouldnt be taken by anyone as canon that is gospel in all campaigns.

The 49th is a classic example - What Jason wrote is very good and informative and can be used as is or pieces can be used. Now that doesnt mean it canon in any way. But its a great read and a great piece of fan literature.

[kato13]

Originally Posted by Olefin

Plus, as every module stated, the referee - i..e us - has considerable latitude to modify information no only within the modules but also within the sourcebooks themselves, even to the point of ignoring modules based on events in their campaigns.

That alone would mean that canon is what you make of it within your own campaign.

Targan's game with the Soviets Lublin's command being destroyed by Po's group or my group killing the Black Baron are perfect examples. Each would require the "Canon" return to Europe series to be modified.

[Olefin]

similar situation with mine - we killed the Black Baron and gave the Madonna to another faction in Poland - thus a lot of the return to Europe modules were moot

same with what my GM did with the Corpus Christi modules - my experience as a player is totally different than the base modules - thus an article based on that would be very different from canon

You can see that with Olefin's timeline - that is what happened with us as players and how my GM had world events proceed - and it included how we changed canon both with how he had the game proceed but also with our own actions - on the way out of Kalisz we did a hell of a lot of damage that in his opinion changed the whole nature of the Soviet pursuit of the 5th and the follow on attacks against NATO by the affected units. The ambush we did on the 129th Motorized later on really changed the situation in the "Madonna" area as well.

[Targan]

With the greatest respect, there's been a big over-reaction to my last post and some replies seem to have missed the point. For the record my last post was intended to forestall any reeignition of the canon/non-canon argument, not ignite it. I'm in no way suggesting that Grimace or any contributors do anything other than as they see fit. I'll confine further comments on this issue to PMs for safety's sake.

[Panther Al]

I hereby move that all references to 'Canon/NonCanon' shall be relabelled 'That Which Shall Not Be Named' - For ease of use, 'TWSNBN' is acceptable.

Anyone second?

[Grimace]

I second and concur.

[Matt Wiser]

Grimace: glad to be of service. When I find the RDF air order of battle I did a while back, I'll find it and send it to you. It covers both sides, btw. Great job, by the way, on issue #1, and may there be more to follow.


As for the comment on the Naval stuff and the whole TWSNBN: I did the two pieces to fill plausible plot holes in canon, and to get comments and feedback in doing so. Again, if you want to use it in your campaign, you're perfectly free to do so. And if not, that's entirely up to you.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Targan

With the greatest respect, there's been a big over-reaction to my last post and some replies seem to have missed the point. For the record my last post was intended to forestall any reeignition of the canon/non-canon argument, not ignite it. I'm in no way suggesting that Grimace or any contributors do anything other than as they see fit.

100% behind this statement/position.

@ Grimace
I hope to be able to finalise my work on the 2nd Marines 2000 operation soon for consideration for publication.

[Grimace]

Looking forward to seeing what you can send my way, Legbreaker!

And sounds good, Matt!

[Grimace]

Well, so far I've had three people mention that they'd contribute material to the 2nd issue. Can I get any other volunteers?

The more we get, the better this fanzine will become! It also means it will last longer.

So if you've got something that's been sitting around, long forgotten, and want to share it, send it my way! Art, stories, maps, PCs, NPCs, weapons, gear, additional/optional rules....whatever!