Mongoose Publishing and Twilight 2000

[Chris]

Just read through the "State of the Mongoose 2010" post from their forums.

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/forum.php

They are talking about publishing 2300AD and Twilight 2000 (updated to a new timeline) using their version of the Traveller system. Thought you'd like to know!

Relevant Quote

Going Back in Time oe 2300AD
At the time of writing this, we have just signed a new licence for 2300AD (once called Traveller 2300AD), the science fiction RPG where man is just reaching the nearby stars for the first time and finding his way about the galaxy. This is a much grittier setting than Traveller/The Third Imperium, with heavy cyberpunk and exploration elements.

The lead writer on this project is Colin Dunn, a man who knows the setting inside out and is primarily responsible for motivating us to get the licence!

The new game will build on the core Traveller rulebook, as usual for our Traveller-based games, with suitable additions and tweaks in its own core book. Look for this one to be released around the third quarter of 2011, along with a healthy supporting run of supplements and sourcebooks. The licence will run concurrently with Traveller itself, so there are a great many years for 2300AD to run.

We have also started to discuss the return of Twilight 2000 (likely with another date in mind for it, for obvious reasons), based on a completely different Third World War. However, this is unlikely to appear in 2011, so check back in a year"s time!

Later,
Chris

[HorseSoldier]

Colin Dunn was the writer of the so-so 2320AD update of 2300AD for one of the d20 systems out there. Given how well he 'fixed' the Kafer War in 2320, I can only hope he won't be involved in a T2K update.

[pmulcahy11b]

Maybe people will have a use for all those "not available in the Twilight 2000 timeline" items on my site.

[Fusilier]

Not again....

[Grimace]

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

[Bullet Magnet]

Colin Dunn was the writer of the so-so 2320AD update of 2300AD for one of the d20 systems out there. Given how well he 'fixed' the Kafer War in 2320, I can only hope he won't be involved in a T2K update.

So, what was the "fix" I've been searching online for a while now and can't find a clear answer.

[Tegyrius]

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]

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.

[Raellus]

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]

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.

[Tegyrius]

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.

[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]

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).