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]

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]

Modiphius 2D20 System

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]

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]

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.