Alternate Versions of Twilight 2000

[Raellus]

A place to share alternative approaches, homebrews, and modded versions of T2k.

-

[Legbreaker]

For those more hard line enthusiasts though I think a v5 with a thoroughly investigated and cogitated classic Cold War timeline would be best, with, perhaps, a modern update being something more of a 'setting' supplement later...

Yes, that's a thought that's crossed my mind too - standard setting plus a 2040-50 setting, both using the same mechanics and probably the latter a timeline extension of the earlier.
40-50 years is long enough so that any major influences PCs make in 2000 wouldn't be able to be reversed or whatever in the intervening half century.

Then there's this idea floated on Discord earlier today...

[Rainbow Six]

If there is ever a 5th edition, I see two options - keep it set in 2000 and compatible with 1st and 2nd ed, or push the time forward to at least ten years after the publication date (20 might be better). I'd definitely like to hear people's opinions on those two ideas.

I'm in broad agreement with both ideas. My preferences would be the following

1. Go forward 10-20 years as you've suggested (I've said a couple of times that I think V4 would have been better served doing this rather than trying to go backwards and come up with a rebooted Cold War timeline). Call it Twilight 2030 or Twilight 2040, make it clear that it's a variant rather than a reboot.

2. Stick with the V1 timeline. Keep all the key points (Sino Soviet War, West German 'invasion' of East Germany, gradual nuclear escalation leading up to TDM, etc). Maybe look at whether some things could be tweaked a bit - for example, the situation in Yugoslavia where the US allies with the Serbs - but I'm not even sure if that's desirable / advisable as any tweaks ultimately means it's not V1.

The idea of combining the two into one product would be interesting if they could be aligned. I don't know how well that would work in practice though - I mean, isn't that essentially what happened with T2k and 2300 (albeit with a longer gap between them) and one of the issues was that having a pre determined future put some restrictions on new material for the earlier period

[mpipes]

GDW as I recall planned a series of module changing the basic backstory to create an alternate setting. I remember a pandemic setting and post asteroid strike as well as a near future setting (~2030 I think). Seems like there was a zombie setting proposed as well.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

You're thinking of the survey they had in the back of the 2.2 main book.
I think that all the scenarios you mention were part of the survey in which they asked people to submit their preference for the next game that GDW would produce.
It would have used the same rules system so just like the Merc: 2000 book, while not actually being part of T2k, it would be compatible with rules, equipment and so on.

The scenario chosen by most was a near future setting in which nations fought each other for basic resources - water, food. It would be set in the 2000s and feature more modern technology and was called Armor 21.

[3catcircus]

Any thoughts on combining 2013's mechanics with v1/v2.2 timelines

I like the d20 dice pool roll under mechanic from 2013. I do, however, think the lifepaths should be expanded as per v2.2/Mitch Berg/Paul Mulcahy, along with making the pre reqs for the SOF type life paths a little easier to access.

I suppose you could also go in reverse, using v2.2 as-is other than going to the dice pool system from 2013. I see no reason why that couldn't happen since they went from a d10 to a d20 between v2 and v2.2...

[Tegyrius]

It shouldn't be an issue. One of the design objectives of 2013's game engine, Reflex, was to be usable with the 1.0/2.0/2.2 timelines (or for non-post-apoc modern or near-future settings).

- C.

[3catcircus]

It shouldn't be an issue. One of the design objectives of 2013's game engine, Reflex, was to be usable with the 1.0/2.0/2.2 timelines (or for non-post-apoc modern or near-future settings).

- C.

Is there a set of design notes that make it easy to directly convert v1/v2.2 content I've been looking at stats and it isn't clear to me what the magic formula is...

[Raellus]

Twilight 2030

Back in 2014, Rainbow Six and I worked out a timeline/future history for Twilight 2030. In a nutshell, the US and a somewhat fractured NATO is fighting a resurgent Russian Federation (including allies Belorussia, Bulgaria, Serbia) in Eastern Europe; while a new iteration of SEATO battles the Chinese and North Korea in Asia. It's a quite a bit more complicated than that (the narrative history fills a 12-page Word doc), but I don't want to bore you with the details. Of course, the war escalates- first, with the use of battlefield tactical nukes and, later, a limited strategic nuclear exchange, culminating in a failed NATO summer 2030 offensive. Some of what we predicted in 2014 has already come to pass in the real world today; fortunately, none of the really bad stuff has. Yet...

It was a fun thought experiment, and led to a couple of brief T2030 PbP campaigns, but it never felt quite like good ol' T2k.

Although I like the idea of playing Twilight 2000 with current/near-future weapons, vehicles, and equipment, there are a couple of issues that arise as a result.

If both the PC party and the OPFOR have equal access to modern weapons, optics, NODs, comms, body armor, etc., then you essentially end up playing Modern Warfare with paper and pencil. If the PC party has greater access to said gear, then they become OP (bordering on godmode); on the other hand, if the OPFOR has greater access to said gear, it won't be long until a TPK scenario takes place.

Also, IMHO, having access to a lot of modern/near-future tech kit sort of violates the retrograde tech ethos of T2k.

-

[kato13]

For those who have not dug into the thread map

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.phpt=773

Here are two links related to alternate versions that can be found there.

Other version related threads

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.phpt=773#ver

The products of the DC Working Group (which I will always consider version 1.5)

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.phpt=773#t2k_user

[Tegyrius]

Is there a set of design notes that make it easy to directly convert v1/v2.2 content I've been looking at stats and it isn't clear to me what the magic formula is...

Sorry, but no. The only place direct porting is really feasible is with some armored vehicle AVs, and that breaks down on the low end of the scale.

- C.

[Legbreaker]

T2k can really be played in my opinion with any military type rule set, as long as it covers important issues such as radiation, scavenging/scrounging/foraging, limited fuel, and resource management.
The setting more than the rule set is the game.

The problem of course is that not every rule set contains the necessary elements (some of which I listed above). GDW I think got it right, or at least close to it.

[Vespers War]

T2k can really be played in my opinion with any military type rule set, as long as it covers important issues such as radiation, scavenging/scrounging/foraging, limited fuel, and resource management.
The setting more than the rule set is the game.

The problem of course is that not every rule set contains the necessary elements (some of which I listed above). GDW I think got it right, or at least close to it.

I disagree slightly in that I think both the rules and the setting can be adapted, because there's a tone to both. I went the other way and used the T2K rules for World War I, because there aren't that many games that cover disease, foraging, and resource management in their rules to the extent that GDW did. There are definitely other rule sets that can handle the setting, but the T2K rule set can also handle other settings - I think it would also work well for partisans in WW2, as another example.

[3catcircus]

I disagree slightly in that I think both the rules and the setting can be adapted, because there's a tone to both. I went the other way and used the T2K rules for World War I, because there aren't that many games that cover disease, foraging, and resource management in their rules to the extent that GDW did. There are definitely other rule sets that can handle the setting, but the T2K rule set can also handle other settings - I think it would also work well for partisans in WW2, as another example.

The key is that the T2K rules work for any type of game involving gunpowder weapons. If you know how the designers came up with the stats for various weapons and vehicles...

[Legbreaker]

I disagree slightly in that I think both the rules and the setting can be adapted, because there's a tone to both. I went the other way and used the T2K rules for World War I, because there aren't that many games that cover disease, foraging, and resource management in their rules to the extent that GDW did. There are definitely other rule sets that can handle the setting, but the T2K rule set can also handle other settings - I think it would also work well for partisans in WW2, as another example.

Generally I'm in agreement - there are other rule sets which can be used, they just need to be able to handle those elements (such as radiation) which aren't commonly found in other RPGs.

The key is that the T2K rules work for any type of game involving gunpowder weapons. If you know how the designers came up with the stats for various weapons and vehicles...

Absolutely. We can see that in the 2.2 rules being used with only relatively minor tweaks in several other games GDW produced - Traveller: TNE, Dark Conspiracy, Cadillac's and Dinosaurs for example.
And we do in fact know how the stats where calculated. The formulae were published in the Traveller book, "Fire, Fusion and Steel". I'm sure Paul can shed a LOT more light on that subject than most of us though.