Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

v4 Rules & Mechanics Discussion

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    v5 and Alternate Versions of Twilight 2000

    To help keep discussion in this thread focused on the OP topic (v4 rules), I've created a separate thread for "v5" and alternate versions of T2k.



    -
    Last edited by Raellus; 12-04-2020, 11:06 PM.
    Author of Twilight 2000 adventure modules, Rook's Gambit and The Poisoned Chalice, the campaign sourcebook, Korean Peninsula, the gear-book, Baltic Boats, and the co-author of Tara Romaneasca, a campaign sourcebook for Romania, all available for purchase on DriveThruRPG:

    https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...--Rooks-Gambit
    https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...ula-Sourcebook
    https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...nia-Sourcebook
    https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...liate_id=61048
    https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/...-waters-module

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by wolffhound79 View Post
      I was thinking about this in the last couple days. What if there is some kind of copy right issue For instance whoever wrote the original time lines for v1 and v2 would need to be paid for or possible sue for likeness rights. Could FL be avoiding having to pay some of the original game designers by changing just enough of the game and saying its a whole new take If so Why not just say that to everyone I get they are a European company and they are obviously opening up the game to Swedish fans as I once read there was a huge following of twilight fans in sweden, but it kinds of just pissing on everyone else. I believe they could have written in sweden joining the war to support finland and norway very easily. I dont know just my two cents.
      No. FL apparently licensed the copyright from whoever now owns the copyrights to the GDW game (FFE). The copyright owner possesses all of the rights that the writers had in their work. The writers gave up/assigned those rights to GDW years ago, which of course inured to the present copyright owner.

      However, you are sorta correct. Given just how dramatic the Alpha version departs from the original - from the backstory to the mechanics - I wonder why they even bothered to get a license - it really is that much of a change. Alpha certainly does not match up with the fully compatible "continuation" that I understood FL advertised.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by mpipes View Post
        I wonder why they even bothered to get a license...
        They bought the name and product recognition I think. Not like they kept much else. Paid for the goodwill associated with the title as a marketing boost for their product.

        That's my theory anyway.
        If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

        Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

        Mors ante pudorem

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Tegyrius View Post
          While not disagreeing with you, Leg, I will note that 2013 was never intended to be "core" in the sense of revising the Cold War/2000 timeline or extending its continuity. Different timeline, different historical backdrop, different era - another path leading to a familiar (but not identical) post-WWIII setting. 4e is very much being billed as a new edition of the classic Cold War timeline. "Roleplaying in the World War III That Never Was," indeed.

          - C.
          So, I'm new here, but have been enjoying the game all the way back to v1 (withoutv ever having had the opportunity to consistently play...)

          I love 2013's mechanics with v2.2's timeline. Adjust the prerequisites for the 2013 life paths to make it easier to realistically gain some of them, and expand them in line with v2.2's quantity of life paths (or Paul Mulcahy's or Mitch Berg's expansions) and I'd be happy.

          I've even tried adopting 2013's core mechanics to D&D...

          I would be happy to try v4 - except I've seen Tales from the Loop and Year Zero mechanics in action. Not a fan. Not a fan of them at all. I'll probably buy a pdf version of v4, for completeness only. The system just doesn't feel like it'll work well to support the flavor and atmosphere intended.

          I just can't see what are essentially one-shot mechanics sustaining a sandbox campaign. Hopefully I'll be proven wrong.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Legbreaker View Post
            They bought the name and product recognition I think. . . . Paid for the goodwill associated with the title as a marketing boost for their product.
            I can relate. That's how I feel about Mongoose's version of Traveller.

            The good news was, all of my original, 'classic' Traveller books still worked just like new the day after the Mongeese shipped their edition. 'My game' didn't go anywhere.

            I don't believe Fria Ligan's motives are suspect: they wanted to create an edition of T2K using their house system as the base, and they were pretty clear about that from the start. There's a legit argument to be made about taking a less-grognard oriented approach to the game in order to find a new audience. Sucks to be on the grognard-positive side of that decision, though. I wasn't involved in the playtest, so I can only imagine the additional frustration that brings.

            Good news is, I pulled out my v1 box set last night; still works, just like new.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Black Vulmea View Post
              I can relate. That's how I feel about Mongoose's version of Traveller.

              The good news was, all of my original, 'classic' Traveller books still worked just like new the day after the Mongeese shipped their edition. 'My game' didn't go anywhere.

              I don't believe Fria Ligan's motives are suspect: they wanted to create an edition of T2K using their house system as the base, and they were pretty clear about that from the start. There's a legit argument to be made about taking a less-grognard oriented approach to the game in order to find a new audience. Sucks to be on the grognard-positive side of that decision, though. I wasn't involved in the playtest, so I can only imagine the additional frustration that brings.

              Good news is, I pulled out my v1 box set last night; still works, just like new.
              The question becomes whether or not they appeal to both old and new players.

              Older players are loyalists who want something that is nostalgic and maybe plays a little quicker. Current generations of potential players are probably more fickle, having access to more options, with greater ease of access.

              Will they produce something that only appeals to newer players and will that be sufficient to sustain the franchise, or will this be a one and done to capitalize on the license while producing localized content for a mostly Swedish audience

              I'm not a fan of the mechanics. I'm probably not going to be a fan of the timeline and backstory.

              If they can produce beautiful and functional maps, I'll probably continue buying their products and marry them with 2013's mechanics and v2.2's timeline.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by 3catcircus View Post
                Will they produce something that only appeals to newer players and will that be sufficient to sustain the franchise, or will this be a one and done to capitalize on the license while producing localized content for a mostly Swedish audience
                That's a very interesting question. In a year or three, it'll be illuminating to see relative sales figures for Swedish vs. English printings.

                - C.
                Clayton A. Oliver • Occasional RPG Freelancer Since 1996

                Author of The Pacific Northwest, coauthor of Tara Romaneasca, creator of several other free Twilight: 2000 and Twilight: 2013 resources, and curator of an intermittent gaming blog.

                It rarely takes more than a page to recognize that you're in the presence of someone who can write, but it only takes a sentence to know you're dealing with someone who can't.
                - Josh Olson

                Comment


                • #83
                  This sort of thing was raised some months back although using other FL games as a guide.
                  The feeling then was that FL does not have a long term plan for their games and given that they are a relatively small company in the grand scheme of things, they probably cannot afford to commit long term in the same way that WotC/Hasbro can. Simply because they don't have the finances to weather any downturn that may occur over the years.

                  This is obviously a business decision rather than a lack of interest in the product but it does appear that even with successful FL games, there just is not much official material available after a few years. For whatever reason, their business model appears to be to develop a particular idea, push it for a few years and then develop a new idea.
                  What that does infer though, is that there will be no long term support of their reboot of T2k.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by StainlessSteelCynic View Post
                    This sort of thing was raised some months back although using other FL games as a guide.
                    The feeling then was that FL does not have a long term plan for their games and given that they are a relatively small company in the grand scheme of things, they probably cannot afford to commit long term in the same way that WotC/Hasbro can. Simply because they don't have the finances to weather any downturn that may occur over the years.

                    This is obviously a business decision rather than a lack of interest in the product but it does appear that even with successful FL games, there just is not much official material available after a few years. For whatever reason, their business model appears to be to develop a particular idea, push it for a few years and then develop a new idea.
                    What that does infer though, is that there will be no long term support of their reboot of T2k.
                    Agreed. I really like Free League and I own Aliens, Coriolis, and Tales From the Loop. They make gorgeous games but they very much seem to be campaign driven and not setting builders when it comes to source books. I was excited when a new version of T2K was announced but also wary. It does now appear that they bought the rights just for name recognition and just wanted to put out another post-apocalyptic RPG. This is a bit odd since they already have Mutant Year Zero and the sequel to Tales From the Loop, Things From the Flood.

                    In fact given how dark the setting is I contend that Free League could have easily put out a mini-supplement to accompany Things From the Flood. Call it something like Of Missiles and Machines and have it be a optional set of rules for a post-war Tales From the Loop setting. Three chapters in length it could have had a Cold War gone hot in the eighties scenario, a post-Cold War collapse with regional wars and economic meltdown and then finally extra rules to survive in the post-war/collapse setting. Easy and efficient, tying into a setting they already have established while not messing up T2K.

                    Thats just my idea, and I wish they had done that instead of mangling T2K.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by 3catcircus View Post

                      I've even tried adopting 2013's core mechanics to D&D...
                      I actually ran a short campaign under a v1/AD&D rules mix in the Against the Giants books. The PCs basically bombarded the Hill Giant's Fort with mortars into a mess and they never into the dungeon underneath because they couldn't find the entrances after bombarding the fort. There weren't many monsters left to fight either.

                      The PCs started out well in the Ice Giant Rift, but after lots of automatic weapons fire, grenades and rockets, the PCs ran out of ammo and got wiped out in the melee that happened after that...that's why it was a short campaign. But my friends and I had a lot of fun.
                      Last edited by pmulcahy11b; 12-07-2020, 07:27 PM.
                      I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes

                      Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by pmulcahy11b View Post
                        I actually ran a short campaign under a v1/AD&D rules mix in the Against the Giants books. The PCs basically bombarded the Hill Giant's Fort with mortars into a mess and they never into the dungeon underneath because they couldn't find the entrances after bombarding the fort. There weren't many monsters left to fight either.

                        The PCs started out well in the Ice Giant Rift, but after lots of automatic weapons fire, grenades and rockets, the PCs ran out of ammo and got wiped out in the melee that happened after that...that's why it was a short campaign. But my friends and I had a lot of fun.
                        I wasn't using firearms in D&D. Rather, the "x skill points = y number of dice" rolling against a TN set by a controlling attribute lends itself to D&D 3.x which also uses skill ranks and controlling attributes. I converted BAB to a skill with bonuses based on class and used Armor as DR.

                        It worked well, but my players couldn't get over the idea of not having ever increasing hit points...

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Tegyrius View Post
                          That's a very interesting question. In a year or three, it'll be illuminating to see relative sales figures for Swedish vs. English printings.

                          - C.
                          I'm guessing it'll depend on three factors:

                          1. How much Swedish content is produced initially vs. later on in the sales year.

                          2. Feedback from players (regardless of language) - old school guys will have no problems with crunchy rules, so long as they make sense and can reasonably model the intended real world thing they are trying to model. Newer guys seem to want something that is "fun" - even if the mechanics are a terrible representation of reality.

                          3. Whether or not the timeline and backstory are sustainable. We all know we're fickle when it comes to this, arguing v1 vs v2 vs v2.2 vs v3 vs alternates. How many of us who aren't from Sweden will look at the timeline and pan it - will it be a "you have to be Swedish to get it" or will it be universally panned by old school guys regardless of our nationality

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by 3catcircus View Post
                            I'm guessing it'll depend on three factors:

                            How many of us who aren't from Sweden will look at the timeline and pan it - will it be a "you have to be Swedish to get it"
                            At least you won't realise the weirdness of some of the things in there. Like fighting between US and Sweden. And towing an 317 meter long aircraft carrier into the center of Stockholm and anchoring it in an area which is about 400x800 meters (after having towed it > 90 kilometers through narrow sea lanes).

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by pansarskott View Post
                              And towing an 317 meter long aircraft carrier into the center of Stockholm and anchoring it in an area which is about 400x800 meters (after having towed it > 90 kilometers through narrow sea lanes).
                              Not to mention the water isn't deep enough where they've put it, and it's well within range of shore fire from a very hostile populace.
                              The stupid burns.
                              Not to mention the ship they've chosen didn't even get it's crew until a few months earlier - nowhere near enough time for everyone to learn their jobs properly and start acting as an actual team.
                              Oh, and then there's that little fact that the Baltic Sea is basically the Soviets playground, ringed on the east and south with loads of naval facilities and shore based aircraft that would just LOVE to have a go at sinking a US carrier.
                              Shall we talk about reinforcements now How easy would it be to block any NATO ships with a few sea mines and a diesel powered sub or two....
                              Did I mention how stupid the idea is
                              ...and then you find out that originally FL were going to have the carrier totally undamaged and in 100% fighting condition, yet still without all it's supporting ships...
                              How stupid would you have to be as a commander to think putting an untested capital ship in the middle of a Soviet kill zone would somehow be a good thing
                              If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

                              Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

                              Mors ante pudorem

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                I agree, there's absolutely no reason to bring it in there in the first place.

                                Originally posted by Legbreaker View Post
                                Not to mention the water isn't deep enough where they've put it
                                That's actually one thing they got right. The ship has 'only' 12,5 m draft (wikipedia) which should be enough (although I didn't check depth for the whole route. And FL probably didn't either). sea chart over where it's anchored. Zoom out and try to figure out how to get there
                                Last edited by pansarskott; 12-12-2020, 10:48 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X