twilight2000-digest Tuesday, August 3 1999 Volume 1999 : Number 060 The following topics are covered in this digest: Re: Dirty Referee Tricks Openings in T2k PBeMs? Re: DIRTY TRICKS FOR TRICKY REFS (LONG!!!) Re: Frank Freys' Air Modules PC "Guidance" (was: DIRTY TRICKS) Re: Frank Freys' Air Modules PC Motivation PC Unit Size & NPC's Re: PC Motivation Re: PC "Guidance" (was: DIRTY TRICKS) Re: PC Motivation Re: Frank Freys' Air Modules Re: PC Motivation Re: PC Unit Size & NPC's Re: Frank Freys' Air Modules Re: PC Unit Size & NPC's Re: PC Motivation Re: PC Unit Size & NPC's Re: PC Motivation ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1999 11:47:24 -0700 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: Dirty Referee Tricks Mark Oliver wrote: > I'm kind of glad that the topics of conversation are shifting away from > politics back to gaming. > > Anyhow here's my thoughts on the subject. > > I've been gaming for about twelve years now, I started around the time Games > Workshop released Warhammer 40K for the first time (the one with the proper > rule book). Anyhow since then I've seen a lot of different gaming styles, > some worked, some haven't. > > My rule of thumb is to allow maximum freedom in a confined area. For > example I also GM a Starwars campaign. It's easy to allow the players free > run on a starship of definite scope. Materials can be mapped out, sequences > of events planned and encounters plotted in advance. They can then run > around to their hearts content doing what they want to do (like blowing an > escape pod into their ship which was docked along side, sigh). > > T2K is very different. Yes I've GMed sessions where I didn't have much prepared and it didn't work at all... whereas with Star Wars I was able to come up with things as I went along if need be (although the sessions were always better when I had stuff prepared). t2k requires more background info because it is set a mostly familiar environment and players demand some realism. Other games like D&D are fantasy so anything could happen really. - -- ([-[Peter Vieth]-) (-[fitek@ix.netcom.com]-) (-[http://sanitarium.computers-radio.com]-) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1999 13:52:43 CDT From: "yard sale" Subject: Openings in T2k PBeMs? I am asking for anyone that knows or runs one, if there is a Twilight 2000 play by e-mail campaign that I could join. I was in one, but the GM is on call for a month or so, and was wondering if another could be had for me to join. I'd greatly appreciate it if you'd contact me personally, thru the list, or better yet, by ICQ. My info is in my sig yardsale yardsale01@hotmail.com yardsale@rpg-addicts.com ICQ# 17236347 Final Fantasy RPG: http://ffrpg.rpg-addicts.com ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1999 15:38:55 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: DIRTY TRICKS FOR TRICKY REFS (LONG!!!) At 11:18 PM 8/1/99 -0700, Peter Vieth wrote: >I think snake eyes summed role playing up fairly well in an earlier post. I >always think of role playing in comparison to adventurecomputer games. You have a >plot, characters, etc. You can control the characters. The great thing about >roleplaying t2k, etc is that you aren't limited to the choices of a computer >game-- like the pick up, push, pull, use, talk of monkey island. Then of course >you have more freedom in the storyline but that story is an integral part of the >game. There is a setting, characters, and a basic time line of what will happen >in an adventure and the PCs can respond accordingly and work towards whatever >goal they have. I don't doubt that you know this too so i don't fully understand >this arguing (it seems to be arguing for the sake of an argument). > No, I'm arguing because I differ fundamentally from Snake Eyes on this point: I don't think there's a plotline that the players have "agreed" to adhere to and for which they should be punished for varying from, for example if they decide there's something, equally logical and in-character, that they'd rather do (this again is different from the players doing things that are stupid and/or illogical). I actually think you might be closer to my position than his--though I can't quite agree with you about computer adventure games: in most of those, there's a puzzle to solve, only one way to reach the goal, and the game is about finding that way rather than about role-playing. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1999 12:34:51 -0700 From: Snake Eyes Subject: Re: Frank Freys' Air Modules At 10:26 PM 8/2/99 +1000, Peter Grining wrote: >With the kind permission of Frank Frey, I have put up his 'Air Module' >articles, which originally appeared in Challenge 26 & 28. Probably a few >typos, and the articles are for 1st edition. Great job, Peter. Does anybody out there have a listing of all the Twilight: 2000 related material that ever appeared in Challenge? I don't mean the actual articles, but rather their titles and the issue in which they appeared. ~ Snake Eyes *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1999 13:18:25 -0700 From: Snake Eyes Subject: PC "Guidance" (was: DIRTY TRICKS) At 03:38 PM 8/2/99 -0400, Scott Orr wrote: >No, I'm arguing because I differ fundamentally from Snake Eyes on this >point: I don't think there's a plotline that the players have "agreed" to >adhere to and for which they should be punished for varying from, for >example if they decide there's something, equally logical and in-character, >that they'd rather do (this again is different from the players doing >things that are stupid and/or illogical). I actually think you might be >closer to my position than his--though I can't quite agree with you about >computer adventure games: in most of those, there's a puzzle to solve, >only one way to reach the goal, and the game is about finding that way >rather than about role-playing. Hey, I'm a reasonable guy & I respect that you appear to disagree with my gaming style. I'm not much for freeform as a player or as a referee. That's just not my bag. It's a highly subjective thing, and I understand that what works for one group may not work for another. Since you seem to disagree with my theory of PC discipline, I'd like to get your (or I guess anybody else's) input on how you'd deal with the plausible scenario that Loonz outlined with his Kalisz adventure. Say (for the sake of argument) that you've decided that you're going to run Kalisz then Black Madonna and Krakow in that order. You've located and purchased these products and put ample time and effort into preparing for this by developing meaningful encounters and fleshing out NPC's and the local environment. The previously agreed upon "plot" will entail the PC's hooking up with the DIA in Krakow and then fighting a rear-area guerilla & intel gathering operation. That means that you've got to move the players in a general southeasterly direction and on a general timeline in order to engineer correct "plot" development. What do you do to prevent the players from making a break for Berlin or the Baltic coast the first chance they get? What do you do if at the first village they come to they decide to chuck the military life and retire to a rustic lifestyle of farming, politics and community building? Is either of these acceptable to you as a referee? If the PC's only goal, milestone or measurable waypoint is to get from point A to point B in mostly one piece, then I could really care less how they go about doing it. But what do you do when the PC's decided they'd rather not leave point A -- or decide to head toward point C in the opposite direction? Do you nudge them out of point A and toward point B? Do you let them run about willy-nilly, negating the investment and preparation you put into creating your campaign world? I know that any good referee needs to be flexible and must maintain the ability to allow & account for "stupid PC tricks," but when they get too far off track do you nudge them back in line? If not, why not? If so, how? ~ Snake Eyes *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 16:24:50 -0400 From: "Dwight Looney" Subject: Re: Frank Freys' Air Modules > Great job, Peter. Does anybody out there have a listing of all the > Twilight: 2000 related material that ever appeared in Challenge? I don't > mean the actual articles, but rather their titles and the issue in which > they appeared. > > ~ Snake Eyes Try here; http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Battlefield/8738/twilight2000.html Loonz *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1999 13:38:12 -0700 From: Snake Eyes Subject: PC Motivation How do you all as players and referees account for your PC's personalities and/or psychological profile? Or do you bother? Twilight & Merc tend to be high attrition games, so I can see where it might not matter to some. But for those who do care, how do you implement it? I hate the Alignment system of D&D, but I'm not looking to start an argument about that. The options (as I see them) are: 1. No psychological background 3. Player develops PC's profile during course of play 2. Player independently creates the character's profile at generation 4. Player picks by drawing a few cards, just like for NPC's 5. Referee picks as in #4 above. While I don't necessarily love the idea of pinning PC's down in terms of what motivates them, I have found that knowing that information up front allows the referee to tailor specific encounters and situations to play off the PC's various documented "Edges & Flaws" (for lack of a better terminology). It's been my experience that given the chance, most players will bend their morals to whatever suits them best at any given time, and the PC's thus become a pack of craven opportunistic bastards. Twilight has no analog to the Shadowrun concept of Karma, so if you were to require players to document a psychological profile for each PC, how would you go about "punishing" them for veering from that code, or "reward" them for sticking to it even when disadvantageous to the PC? ~ Snake Eyes *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1999 13:46:26 -0700 From: Snake Eyes Subject: PC Unit Size & NPC's Say you've only got 3-4 players in your group. How do you guys handle initial PC unit size? Do those PC's represent the total extent of their unit? Do you flesh out a couple major NPC's to supplement the PC's, or give them enough manpower to round out a squad or platoon? What's worked best for you? What about starting gear & vehicles? Have you ever allowed players to run more than one PC at a time? If so, what were the advantages & pitfalls you encountered? Thanks for the feedback. ~ Snake Eyes *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 18:04:25 -0400 From: "Chuck Mandus" Subject: Re: PC Motivation - ----- Original Message ----- From: Snake Eyes To: Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 4:38 PM Subject: PC Motivation > How do you all as players and referees account for your PC's personalities > and/or psychological profile? Or do you bother? Twilight & Merc tend to > be high attrition games, so I can see where it might not matter to > some. But for those who do care, how do you implement it? I like the GURP's system where you can buy good traits for points or add on bad traits to get extra points you need. Of course like anything, it can be overdone but from what I have seen there are some uses to round out the character's traits. Another thing I like to do is scan in pics of the models from my catalogs in my collection if the PC's player so desires or for my NPC's to give a visual representation of the character. > I hate the Alignment system of D&D, but I'm not looking to start an > argument about that. The options (as I see them) are: > > 1. No psychological background > 3. Player develops PC's profile during course of play > 2. Player independently creates the character's profile at generation > 4. Player picks by drawing a few cards, just like for NPC's > 5. Referee picks as in #4 above. I guess if it was up to me, I'd like the player to generate the personality and run it on his/her own, perhaps picking some traits, again, from a GURPS-like system. > While I don't necessarily love the idea of pinning PC's down in terms of > what motivates them, I have found that knowing that information up front > allows the referee to tailor specific encounters and situations to play off > the PC's various documented "Edges & Flaws" (for lack of a better > terminology). It's been my experience that given the chance, most players > will bend their morals to whatever suits them best at any given time, and > the PC's thus become a pack of craven opportunistic bastards. It is up to the player(s) to decide what the PC's do although uf they got outside the parameters so much, that could pose the problem for the ref. If they threaten to go off the map, I guess I'd set up a vehicle breakdown, flat tire, some NPC's that need their help and it's semi-involved, or even a whole new subplot. A quick story, T.R. knows this one well, but I had a PC that ran his main character first as a typical "loonie" in the RPG world but later on as a petty thief eventually graduating into a murderer/cannibal on the par of a Charlie Manson crossed with Hannibal Lector. He kept causing the PC's trouble in the first two stages to the point where I tried everything to keep the PC in line by punishing him for his bad karma. When he became "Charlie Manson Hannibal Lector Jr.," later that day, the other players got me aside and complained he is making the Twilight: 2000 game less fun to play so I booted him out and ran his player as an NPC arch enemy of the PC's. > Twilight has no analog to the Shadowrun concept of Karma, so if you were to > require players to document a psychological profile for each PC, how would > you go about "punishing" them for veering from that code, or "reward" them > for sticking to it even when disadvantageous to the PC? Sometimes in life bad deeds are rewarded, at least in the short term and for a great price. If the PC's go AWOL, using the examples here, they wouldn't have to answer to anybody (unless caught) but they would be hunted down and/or be at risk of capture of they comeback stateside. They can't come home unless they sneak in to see loved ones, go to funerals, see old friends, etc. If they run into other U.S. units abroad, if they are well known to be AWOL, they will be harrassed, chased, to the point of getting caught or killed. The only "reward" they would probably be able to is hire themselves out as mercinaries or thieves for the various underground societies that are in the world and get paid well and buy mansions in some Third World country. Even then, the price would be is they would have to sleep with one eye open and keep turning their heads back to see who's there . Not a pleasant thought if you ask me. Sure I'd like to have millions of dollars, fancy homes, fancy cars, and a lot of gorgeous "chicks" to keep me happy but if I had to keep "checking my six" all the time, it's not worth it. I guess the best thing to do is keep up a constant fear of retribution. You don't need to send Hind or Cobra gunships, assassins, Army men, P.O.ed spouses, vengeful brothers, clients they screwed, etc at every turn, but it is good to keep up the pyschological atmosphere of such things. Plus too if the PC's do bad things, they build up enemies from average people to the local government where everyone and his brother are out looking for them. That almost happened with my PC's when again, the "loonie PC" referenced above tried to pull some fast ones with a group of NPC's they just met. It took a lot of BSing for hte PC's to get back in good graces as long as the "loonie" was kept away. I just wanted to add some thoughts to the discussion, it's up to any of yuns ("Pittsburghese" meaning the plural form of "you.") to use, discard, or modify as you see fit, your mileage may vary. Chuck DE KA3WRW - --- "Truly those of us with brain cells are an oppressed minority..." - -- Jason Fox said after the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles had been cancelled. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1999 18:31:16 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: PC "Guidance" (was: DIRTY TRICKS) At 01:18 PM 8/2/99 -0700, Snake Eyes wrote: >Hey, I'm a reasonable guy & I respect that you appear to disagree with my >gaming style. I'm not much for freeform as a player or as a >referee. That's just not my bag. It's a highly subjective thing, and I >understand that what works for one group may not work for another. > >Since you seem to disagree with my theory of PC discipline, I'd like to get >your (or I guess anybody else's) input on how you'd deal with the plausible >scenario that Loonz outlined with his Kalisz adventure. Say (for the sake >of argument) that you've decided that you're going to run Kalisz then Black >Madonna and Krakow in that order. You've located and purchased these >products and put ample time and effort into preparing for this by >developing meaningful encounters and fleshing out NPC's and the local >environment. Okay, first off, I wouldn't do this. I did in fact buy all of these modules, many years ago, though I only got a chance to run one of them (Black Madonna) as a one-off adventure at a gaming club meeting. Second, I might indeed try to guide the players toward the modules I had, by dropping hints and placing a few obstacles. However, I would never be _sure_ about where they were gong, so I _certainly_ wouldn't prepare all three modules in advance of the players ever doing anything. At best I'd prepare for each session ahead of that session, taking care (as Mark Oliver noted earlier) to have at least a basic idea of what's going to happen should the players take any of various obvious paths. >The previously agreed upon "plot" will entail the PC's >hooking up with the DIA in Krakow and then fighting a rear-area guerilla & >intel gathering operation. Okay, I don't agree on plots beforehand--I don't want to destroy the element of surprise (and if I don't tell the players what it's going to be beforehand, they can't really agree to it). I have made an exception to this once, when we agree that at the beginning of a campaign, some players would flee from a city under attack to another to set up a new home base--but that was just a matter of getting things started, and was over after the second session of play. >That means that you've got to move the players >in a general southeasterly direction and on a general timeline in order to >engineer correct "plot" development. Well even if you DO have a set plot, no, you don't need to do this: you can easily allow players to diverge from the plot, and then nudge them back onto it later--and you can also speed up the course of events or slow it down. After all, the players and characters don't really know how quickly or slowly things will happen, so even if you have a timeline in your mind, you can change it, and the players will never know the difference. > >What do you do to prevent the players from making a break for Berlin or the >Baltic coast the first chance they get? > You don't. Unless their actions are just plain stupid, you go with the flow. And this isn't as bad as it might seem: for instance, if the characters decide to head for Lodz rather than Krakow, you can always lift some of the characters and plots in Free City of Krakow and place them in Lodz--indeed, you can do this with anything you've already prepared. Of course, the one big disadvantage of this is that if you're basing your game somewhere that exists in the real world, you may end up having to do research if the players get off the path set by the available modules. This can be a problem, and here's where I can see this causing problems, especially if the players move quickly. One option is to force them to move slowly (there are lots of ways to do this--see any episode of The Fugitive or The Lone Ranger) so that you can keep up; one way is to make the areas they travel through (in this case, Poland) sort of "generic", with similar culture and social structure (which works reasonably well in most parts of Poland) and varying only in the plots and NPCs, ignoring the local peculiarities, esp. local history and sites of interest; a third approach is to buy a tourist guidebook for, say, Poland as a whole, which will let you give each area a little bit of local color without having to do real research. Yes, I suppose if you really don't have time to do any research at all and/or if you're not good at making up your own adventures, you can more or less force the characters along a pre-determined path (though, as I said above, there shouldn't be a problem in their going more quickly or slowly than you had planned)--but I'd do this only as a last resort, and I'd be upfront with the players that I was doing this, which should make it infinitely easier to get them to cooperate. >What do you do if at the first village they come to they decide to chuck >the military life and retire to a rustic lifestyle of farming, politics and >community building? Let them--heck, this makes it really easy not to have to do a bunch of research, other than ror that little area. You can then throw new challenges at them; what happens when marauders threaten? Obviously, the characters are best equipped to organize the villege to deal with the threat. What if the village is short of workers, or some critical resource, like spare parts for an important machine? Well, the players are the best choice to go find them....What if the town decides it's time to start trading with other towns? The characters will be the obvious choice to escort convoys--indeed, it may even be a PC that comes up with the idea of trading in the first place, and sets himself up as a merchant. Of course, if you really want a swashbuckling, traveling adventure, the above may not suit you, and you may have to call it quits and start the campaign over again--but OTOH, if the _players_ really wanted that, too, why did they decide to settle down in one village in the first place? It may just be that their idea of what's fun for characters to do is different from yours, in which case you're not going to have much luck "forcing them to have fun." > >Is either of these acceptable to you as a referee? > Absolutely. >If the PC's only goal, milestone or measurable waypoint is to get from >point A to point B in mostly one piece, then I could really care less how >they go about doing it. But what do you do when the PC's decided they'd >rather not leave point A -- or decide to head toward point C in the >opposite direction? Do you nudge them out of point A and toward point >B? Do you let them run about willy-nilly, negating the investment and >preparation you put into creating your campaign world? > Well, I tend to take whatever the characters do as a clue to what their goals are, and as a clue to what the players think would make a fun game--if I just ignore that, I don't think I'm really serving the players. The game is about the _characters_, NOT about my "investment and preparation". I'm not going to make all the players miserable just so _I_ can have the satisfaction of seeing everything I've prepared be used: the game isn't about just me--there are a lot of other people involved. >I know that any good referee needs to be flexible and must maintain the >ability to allow & account for "stupid PC tricks," but when they get too >far off track do you nudge them back in line? > I have in the past, but I regretted it. >If not, why not? > Well, because it's not _fun_--especially not for the players. >If so, how? > See above. :) Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1999 18:38:43 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: PC Motivation At 01:38 PM 8/2/99 -0700, Snake Eyes wrote: > >How do you all as players and referees account for your PC's personalities >and/or psychological profile? Or do you bother? Twilight & Merc tend to >be high attrition games, so I can see where it might not matter to >some. But for those who do care, how do you implement it? > >I hate the Alignment system of D&D, but I'm not looking to start an >argument about that. The options (as I see them) are: > >1. No psychological background >3. Player develops PC's profile during course of play >2. Player independently creates the character's profile at generation >4. Player picks by drawing a few cards, just like for NPC's >5. Referee picks as in #4 above. > I'd say this is one good reason (other than the failings of the game mechanics themselves) to use a system like GURPS to play in the TW:2000 setting: you have to pick character advantages and disadvntages, and personality quirks as well, and all of these help to flesh out the character's personality. However, even if you don't do this, you could use someting like the Personality Traits in Ars Magica: each character has a number of traits, defined as a positive or negative modifier (+3 to -3) added to a roll (the ArM system used 10-sided die) involving that trait (though PC's are never forced to roll to make role-playing decisions)--examples would be Brave +3, Curious +1, or Cautious -2. Characters can have any number of these (and there's no minimum), with PC's tending to start out with two or three and accumulate them over time as their characters become fleshed out. As for how you get the PC's to stick to this, that's both tough and easy--with good role-players, it won't be a problem at all; at worst, you'll occasionally have to remind them about their characters' motivations. However, one good way to nudge less virtuous players is to reward good role-playing with extra experience points and poor role-playing wiht fewer XP's. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 20:44:09 EDT From: OrrinLadd@aol.com Subject: Re: Frank Freys' Air Modules In a message dated 8/2/99 5:51:42 AM Pacific Daylight Time, grining@tas.webnet.com.au writes: << Hiya list, With the kind permission of Frank Frey, I have put up his 'Air Module' articles, which originally appeared in Challenge 26 & 28. Probably a few typos, and the articles are for 1st edition. Peter Grining http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Capsule/6480/T2K.html >> back a couple of years ago on this very list there was some guy that expanded the Air Modules. He had quite a few A/C that weren't included in Mr. Frey's articles. If that indiviual(s) is still on the list, maybe he could post them again? if not, I managed to save them somewhere peace out orrin *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 10:01:37 +1000 From: "Peter" Subject: Re: PC Motivation >At 01:38 PM 8/2/99 -0700, Snake Eyes wrote: >> >>How do you all as players and referees account for your PC's personalities >>and/or psychological profile? Or do you bother? Twilight & Merc tend to >>be high attrition games, so I can see where it might not matter to >>some. But for those who do care, how do you implement it? >As for how you get the PC's to stick to this, that's both tough and >easy--with good role-players, it won't be a problem at all; at worst, >you'll occasionally have to remind them about their characters' >motivations. However, one good way to nudge less virtuous players is to >reward good role-playing with extra experience points and poor role-playing >wiht fewer XP's. > >Scott Orr V2.2 T2K awards 1 XP per session, 1 extra XP for inventive/dangerous skill use, 1 bonus XP for staying on character. It doesn't define on character. Peter Grining *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 10:37:04 +1000 From: "Peter" Subject: Re: PC Unit Size & NPC's >Say you've only got 3-4 players in your group. How do you guys handle >initial PC unit size? Do those PC's represent the total extent of their >unit? Do you flesh out a couple major NPC's to supplement the PC's, or >give them enough manpower to round out a squad or platoon? > >What's worked best for you? > >What about starting gear & vehicles? >~ Snake Eyes Despite the fact that character generation has the players loaded for bear, the published modules have heavy weapons and vehicles as very rare. I guess players being players need the extra firepower. I'd go with no vehicles and only portable weapons. Peter Grining *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 10:59:22 +1000 From: "Peter" Subject: Re: Frank Freys' Air Modules >In a message dated 8/2/99 5:51:42 AM Pacific Daylight Time, >grining@tas.webnet.com.au writes: > ><< Hiya list, > > With the kind permission of Frank Frey, I have put up his 'Air Module' > articles, which originally appeared in Challenge 26 & 28. Probably a few > typos, and the articles are for 1st edition. > > Peter Grining > http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Capsule/6480/T2K.html > >> > >back a couple of years ago on this very list there was some guy that expanded >the Air Modules. He had quite a few A/C that weren't included in Mr. Frey's >articles. If that indiviual(s) is still on the list, maybe he could post >them again? > >if not, I managed to save them somewhere > >peace out >orrin This is actually my intentions with Franks' Air Modules. Peter Grining *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 21:28:31 -0400 From: "Dwight Looney" Subject: Re: PC Unit Size & NPC's Subject: Re: PC Unit Size & NPC's > >Say you've only got 3-4 players in your group. How do you guys handle > >initial PC unit size? Do those PC's represent the total extent of their > >unit? Do you flesh out a couple major NPC's to supplement the PC's, or > >give them enough manpower to round out a squad or platoon? > > > >What's worked best for you? > > > >What about starting gear & vehicles? > > > >~ Snake Eyes > > Despite the fact that character generation has the players loaded for bear, > the published modules have heavy weapons and vehicles as very rare. I guess > players being players need the extra firepower. I'd go with no vehicles and > only portable weapons. > > Peter Grining We usually order pizza on character night. Everyone generates 3 characters if they want to run more than one (they can run one if they choose but I'd require a back-up) and pick the two they want to play. That gives me time to adjust the plot to suit their chosen talents. For gear they can equip them selves until burdened and then they throw the cash in the community kitty for big stuff like missiles and such. I've run as many as 12 PC's (plus NPC's) at once (a pain) 6 is optimal for my abilities. I allow the starting vehicle as per the rules but if the PC's have trouble with the logistics of it and it's burdening them, boom, land mine. NPC's either come into the plot points or the random stragglers. Some go like red shirts on star trek some turn into contacts in the local populace etc. Loonz *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 23:24:06 EDT From: Zek101@aol.com Subject: Re: PC Motivation The Southern Party check this site out guys *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 16:22:36 -0700 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: PC Unit Size & NPC's Snake Eyes wrote: > Say you've only got 3-4 players in your group. How do you guys handle > initial PC unit size? Do those PC's represent the total extent of their > unit? Do you flesh out a couple major NPC's to supplement the PC's, or > give them enough manpower to round out a squad or platoon? > I started with 1 player and so I had to stick NPCs on. I really don't like have more than 3 NPCs per each PC in a party except for times the PCs are part of another unit or something. I picked up another PC later and the party came out to be about squad size, fluctuating from 12 to 20 people (it depended on how many spear carriers the party needed at the moment). However, managing 10-18 NPCs got tiresome. If you have good players who are willing to, let them control an NPC or two. Last time I GMed I had like 9 players and so I didn't use NPCs in the party except as spear carriers. I think 8 is a good size for a party. BTW, often times not all the PCs are around for a session so the players basically have designated other PCs who will play their characters while they are gone. This more so in the AD&D campaign I'm in than my t2k campaign (I usually play a PC who is not there and leave the PCs to control the other missing PCs). The party ensures that the PC is being role played like the player would do it. > What about starting gear & vehicles? Except for my first campaign, I haven't given out vehicles in t2k at the start. In m2k i allowed the characters to purchase several vehicles. For military characters t2k I give the weapons for their army, some ammo (two or three clips for all their weapons combined) and two or three grenades. They better have a good reason if they want more. > Have you ever allowed players to run more than one PC at a time? It might be interesting to have them start with more than 1 PC but I haven't. - -- ([-[Peter Vieth]-) (-[fitek@ix.netcom.com]-) (-[http://sanitarium.computers-radio.com]-) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 16:26:33 -0700 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: PC Motivation Chuck Mandus wrote: > A quick story, T.R. knows this one well, but I had a PC that ran his main > character first as a typical "loonie" in the RPG world but later on as a > petty thief eventually graduating into a murderer/cannibal on the par of a > Charlie Manson crossed with Hannibal Lector. He kept causing the PC's > trouble in the first two stages to the point where I tried everything to > keep the PC in line by punishing him for his bad karma. When he became > "Charlie Manson Hannibal Lector Jr.," later that day, the other players got > me aside and complained he is making the Twilight: 2000 game less fun to > play so I booted him out and ran his player as an NPC arch enemy of the > PC's. Heh I had a player who was rather annoying and didn't role play well either. Funny how PCs don't want to play anymore once their character has lost his legs to a mortar round. The DM for the AD&D campaign (we tend to have six hour sessions on Sundays about once a month, 3 hours D&D, 3 t2k) waited until we had booted the player and then turned him into a villain as well. - -- ([-[Peter Vieth]-) (-[fitek@ix.netcom.com]-) (-[http://sanitarium.computers-radio.com]-) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of twilight2000-digest V1999 #60 ************************************ To subscribe to Twilight2000-Digest, send the command: subscribe twilight2000-digest in the body of a message to "majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-twlight2000": subscribe twlight2000-digest local-twilight2000@your.domain.net A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "twilight2000-digest" in the commands above with "twilight2000".