A new Twilight:2000... how would you do it?

DMScott said:
The QLI folks seem to mostly cruise the Citizens of the Imperium boards, interested folks might have more luck getting solid info there:

http://www.travellerrpg.com/cgi-bin/Trav/CotI/Discuss/ultimatebb.cgi

One of the boards is dedicated to Twilight: 2000.

Have you read any of the fan posts on their ideas of creating a Twilight: 2030? It seems they want it to become more of a Sci-Fi game than a gritty war-story game. Lasers and Power Armor... I seriously don't see it happening in 26 years. The F-15, the Air Force's most advanced operational air superiority fighter I believe was designed in the early 70's. There is quite a lag between design and operation. I just don't see man-portable lasers becoming the infantry weapon of choice when plain old reliable bullets do the same job. Congress has also been moving away from researching new technologies in favor of improving existing ones. They axed the Commanche helicopter and the Crusader artillery system and are planning on improving the Apache instead and generally view artillery as a thing of the past in an age of cruise missiles.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

ddougan said:
I find it incredible that they are expecting us to buy (and read, and reference, and look-up) 3 core rule books:

A D20 Core Rule book
T20 Traveller
T20 Twilight

I can appreciate that. [I'm not actually interested in T2K -- I just saw your thread and passed the information on -- but I do take your point.]

Mind you, do wait and see how it works out in practice: it may be that you "need" the T20 stuff in the same sense that you "need" a PHB/DMG/etc to play D20 games, i.e. not really. At worst, there will be an OGL T20 book to bring the count down by one.

And they may simply change their mind, in response to comments on their forum. They've done so before, if nagged early enough in the development cycle (i.e. soon). Hint.
 

I can see why they are going to make it an add on to T20. Have you seen the book? It is a MONSTER. The majority of the book is character creation and new rules to cover a more lethal combat setting and vehicular combat. Twilight:2000 is going to require a much larger equipment and vehicle section than T20... creating a new tank that doesn't really exists detracts from the setting. T20 gives you a few sample ships but the main focus is the rules to create your own. Also, background information is going to be much more in depth. T20 give you an overview of the galaxy but doesn't really go into depth on specific locations. Twilight will need to go into detail on the current state of various nations throughout Europe as well as the United States.

I honestly wouldn't be suprised if Twilight is as big if not bigger than T20 even without the rules and character creation section.

For those not familiar with T20, the system is VERY different from D&D. Nobody starts at 1st level, you serve a number of 4 year terms and roll for events that happen in each term which gives you XP, equipment, and contacts. Differences in character levels really doesn't have as much of a game impact as in D&D... the Lifeblood combat system makes sure that a 10th level character can die as quickly from a gunshot wound as a 1st level character.
 

drnuncheon said:
Er...how would you need that stuff in GURPS but not in T2K? The 3e GURPS book has a reasonable assortment of weapons in it, including what I would think would be the 'most common' modern ones. (I don't recall what it's got vehicle-wise.)

Sure, it'd be better with all the other books. But fact is, you don't need GURPS Vehicles to stat up a real tank - you need the Basic Set and Jane's. It goes 30 mph for this long on this many gallons of gas...really all you need is an estimate of the DR.

If it works that way for GURPS: World War II it ought to work that way for G:T2K

Oh what a lovely rumour one could start...

- There are GURPS and T20 versions of Traveller
- Marc Miller is in a T2K licensing/reprinting mood
- Loren Wiseman, original T2K line editor at GDW, now works for Steve Jackson Games
- Loren recently moved from his existing role to work on an unspecified "new project"

;)
 

Morte said:
If it works that way for GURPS: World War II it ought to work that way for G:T2K

Oh what a lovely rumour one could start...

- There are GURPS and T20 versions of Traveller
- Marc Miller is in a T2K licensing/reprinting mood
- Loren Wiseman, original T2K line editor at GDW, now works for Steve Jackson Games
- Loren recently moved from his existing role to work on an unspecified "new project"

;)

I e-mailed Loren just last Tuesday to ask about T2K and he didn't mention anything about it other than Far Future now ownes the license and he said he wasn't sure what Marc had in mind for T2K.
 

3catcircus said:
I based my statement solely on the fact that WOTC d20 is a skill/feat/class/level based system. I just can't see making prestige classes for "Ranger" or "USMC Sniper" or feats like "SERE School graduate" or "Naval Nuclear Reactor Operator" - And, to paraphrase someone on a TW2K message board - "Hearing someone describe their character as a Infantryman 3/Ranger 3 makes me shudder." The d20 mechanic itself (skill ranks + bonus vs. DC) works just fine. It is the underlying class/level/feat system that would, I think, ruin a TW2K remake.
A skill/feat/class/level-based system seems like a perfect fit for a military game -- as long as you lose the hit dice. What am I missing?
 


mmadsen said:
A skill/feat/class/level-based system seems like a perfect fit for a military game -- as long as you lose the hit dice. What am I missing?

As long as leveling isn't the focus of the game. A military game needs to maintain combat lethality for all characters regardless of the character's level. A 30 year veteran is just as mortal as a kid fresh out of basic and the same things will kill each. I really think that is the beauty of using T20's system. Lifeblood makes each character just as mortal as the other (well, almost) when facing lethal weapons. However, higher levels mean older more experienced characters which is reflected in their higher skill bonuses and greater number of skills overall.

For what it is worth, one group I was with converted the Lifeblood system to D&D. NOT A GOOD IDEA! Constructs and Undead are instantly much more deadly because you have to pick them apart little by little where they can be doing Lifeblood damage and kill you in a few hits.
 

Calico_Jack73 said:
As long as leveling isn't the focus of the game. A military game needs to maintain combat lethality for all characters regardless of the character's level. A 30 year veteran is just as mortal as a kid fresh out of basic and the same things will kill each. I really think that is the beauty of using T20's system. Lifeblood makes each character just as mortal as the other (well, almost) when facing lethal weapons. However, higher levels mean older more experienced characters which is reflected in their higher skill bonuses and greater number of skills overall.

Well I haven't seen the system, but honestly if you study military history, veterans are much more survivable than green troops. This certainly isn't in terms of their body being more durable, but it is in terms of avoiding getting wounded either seriously or altogether.

That's probably why I tend to like VP/WP systems. The 20th level character never really changes how many WP he has. He just gets better at avoiding taking real wounds.

buzzard
 

buzzard said:
Well I haven't seen the system, but honestly if you study military history, veterans are much more survivable than green troops. This certainly isn't in terms of their body being more durable, but it is in terms of avoiding getting wounded either seriously or altogether.

That's probably why I tend to like VP/WP systems. The 20th level character never really changes how many WP he has. He just gets better at avoiding taking real wounds.

buzzard

I knew someone was going to bring that up... I have my response all ready. :D

A veteran knows where to look for trouble (more ranks in Spot) and when and where to dive for optimum cover. Both of those are covered already. It does NOT make him any more bulletproof. If a veteran is standing out in the open and I open up on him with an M-16A1 (A2's are not fully auto) he'll be DEAD DEAD DEAD. Hit points are supposed to represent divine grace and luck... neither really work in T2K. Luck is represented by the GM/Player rolling low on a to hit roll. Vitality represents ducking and weaving and when you finally take Wound damage it represents that you were too wore out to get out of the way. Great for cinematic games, not for realistic modern combat. The veteran could bounce around all he wants... if I have an automatic weapon I WILL hit and kill him unless he gets behind cover which I've already mentioned before.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top