twilight2000-digest Tuesday, January 18 2000 Volume 1999 : Number 084 The following topics are covered in this digest: Re: Damage Re: Firearms Combat, Damage, etc.... Re: Damage Polish Structures New homepage New version of Twilight 2000 Re: New version of Twilight 2000 Re: New version of Twilight 2000 Re: Polish Structures Re: Polish Structures Re: Polish Structures Re: Damage Re: Polish Structures Re: New homepage Re: Polish Structures for the programmers Re: New version of Twilight 2000 Re: Damage Re: New version of Twilight 2000 Re: New version of Twilight 2000 Re: New version of Twilight 2000 Re: New version of Twilight 2000 Re: New version of Twilight 2000 Re: New version of Twilight 2000 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 15:04:34 -0600 From: Rob Barnes Subject: Re: Damage I don't remember how it was handled in 1st Edition, but my copy of the 2.2 rules says: "All weapons do the same damage at all ranges. The damage value of the weapon is listed on the relevant weapon card, and is the number of D6 rolled. Some weapons have a damage value of -1. In this case, roll 1D6 and subtract 1 from the result." (2.2 rulebook, page 208) Also, in the 2.2 rules, there is the optional "quick kill" rule which would make taking a bullet in the chest or head undesirable regardless of what type of weapon it was fired from. It's been a very long time since I played using the 1st edition rules, but I remember that we halved the values for hit capacity and got much more believable results than the way the rules were written. Plus, it was a lot easier than changing all the weapon values. Also, our fix to the problems associated with the RCN skill was to generate a "secondary attribute" called Perception which was the average of INT and EDU expressed as a percentage. After the character began play, this value could be improved like any other skill, but not during character generation. It was used in basic observation situations which weren't specific to military knowledge or training. Also, though it could be used as a "replacement" for RCN skill in military applications, it was always at a penalty, because it didn't include the sort of training a military scout would get with regard to identifying vehicles, spotting ambushes, etc. We had a lot of civilian characters in our game, and it allowed them a chance to be effective without overshadowing the characters who had bought RCN. Sometimes a task would require PER rolls and RCN got the penalty, such as searching a room for clues. Peter Vieth wrote: > Steve Chymy wrote: > > > Walter Rebsch wrote: > > > > > I thought weapons did damage based on the range, unless the weapon has a 'C' > > > beside the damage number in the referee's charts. Thus at short range (up > > > to 40 meters), an AK would do the ('damage number' x 'range category') + > > > 'range category' d6. An AK has a DAM number of 2, so for short range it > > > would be (2x4)+4d6. The average roll on 4d6 is 14, so the average damage > > > would be 22, and the max damage would be 32. At meduim range it would be > > > (2x3)+3d6, long (2x2)+2d6, and extreme (2x1)+1d6. > > > > > > Plus, doesn't it say, once you reach your hit capacity in a body area (other > > > than the head), you are seriously wounded and must roll vs CON to stay > > > conscious to do anything other than lay there and yell medic. If it's in > > > the head, you're automatically unconscious. > > > > This is the way we play the game, I don't know were the other fellow get a max > > damage of 18 points from > > an AK47. If you are at close range, say under 150yards, you can easily get > > toasted. (IMHO) > > Have I been reading 2nd edition wrong all this time? Or is this 1st? I don't have > the rule books in my dorm (just going by what i remember) > > *************************************************************************** > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com > with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 13:24:35 -0800 (PST) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Michael=20Cook?= Subject: Re: Firearms Combat, Damage, etc.... Hello, I gm a gaming group that's played both the t2k system and our own house rules system. our system is partly simplified and partly complicated from t2k's system, but seems to run quite well (i'm sure it lacks some in the realism front, but so does t2k). for marksmanship, we use a percentile stat called AIM that's based on a couple of the character's basic stats. when a character fires, the character's AIM is modified for range, movement, weapon, any cover the target has, the current facing of the target, and, if firing more than one shot, recoil. this yields a to-hit number. if the shot is an aimed shot, a second to-hit number is also used, this one also penalized to varying degrees depending on the location being aimed at. the player then rolls percentile dice to see if they hit. in the case of an aimed shot, if the roll makes both to-hit numbers, then the aimed shot is successful. if it passes the unaimed to-hit, but doesn't pass the aimed to-hit, then it will likely still hit the target, but we use a scatter diagram and a d10 roll to determine where. this means that the shot can still miss if it misses to the wrong sector (based on the target's current facing). If the shot wasn't an aimed one, then a d100 roll is made using a table of hit locations. we get fairly specific here, with possible locations such as the elbow, calf or foot. leg and arm locations are divided into left and right as well. depending on the location, the target will also automatically have to make some sort of check (head:consciousness check, any arm location:drop check, any leg location:stumble check). we don't actually roll damage in the t2k way. we don't bother with muzzle energy variations between individual guns, because we haven't found it to be worth the trouble to do the work involved in producing modified damage figures for every single gun in the game (since we have different health point and damage systems than t2k, or rolemaster for that matter -- rolemaster's Weapons Law: Firearms is quite a good resource rpg-usable weapons info -- we can't just borrow the figures from those games). instead, we roll for hit severity (graze/light/medium/severe). each size of ammunition has a hp of damage figure for each of these four categories, and once the severity roll has been made (it's a d10 roll) damage is applied. obviously, armour and strong cover will reduce and/or absorb the hit's severity level. the bullet may still penetrate at a reduced severity if the armor/cover isn't strong enough. i'd discuss how we handle armor/cover, but i'll save that for another day i think. the severity of the hit also causes losses of agility strength and endurance (our constitution stat), may cause further drop/stumble/consciousness checks (at a penalty), affects the rate at which the wound bleeds, and causes automatic death in the case of a severe hit to the head (in most cases the damage from a severe hit, and in many cases even a medium hit, to the head would kill the character anyway). as far as the lethalness of damage is concerned. Head: severe hit - causes death. medium hit - knocks character unconscious. damage maybe sufficient to kill. light hit - stunned for minimum 30 seconds. damage maybe sufficient to kill, especially if the character has taken previous damage to their head. consciousness check. Torso: severe hit - automatic collapse. consciousness check. medium hit - collapse check. agility/strength/endurance -5 light hit - collapse check. agility/strength/endurance - -1 Arm: severe hit - automatic drop of anything held. arm is useless for a number of cycles equal to the damage sustained. medium hit - drop check at penalty. arm is numb (agility/strength penalty on actions involving this arm) for 5 cycles (2.5 minutes) light hit - drop check. arm is numb (agility penalty...) for 1 cycle (30 seconds) graze - drop check at bonus. Leg: severe hit - automatic stumble. leg is useless for a number of cycles equal to the damage sustained. medium hit - stumble check at penalty. leg is numb (agility/strength -5 for movement and leg-related checks) for 5 cycles. light hit - stumble check. leg is numb for one cycle. i'll also roll for the chance of a critical hit (damage to major ligaments, major muscle tissue damage, bone breakage, etc.) if i feel it's warranted. it's not a perfect system, but i do find it easier to run than t2k, which makes my job more enjoyable. if people are interested, i'll post some more of the different ways we do things soon. [m]ichael. - --- Mark OIiver wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Clayton A. Oliver > To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com > > Date: 14 January 2000 07:46 > Subject: Re: Damage > > > <<< I usually resolve damage with 10- or 20-sided > dice instead of 6-siders, > depending on whether I'm running a "dark realistic" > or "cinematic" game. >>> > > That's quite a good idea actually. > > Another idea might be to roll d4s (in secret) for > damage to your players if > they're having a hard time and you're feeling > generous. Then again there's > always those d10s or d20s for when you really want > to discourage them from > going somewhere :) > > > Regards, > > Mark > > *************************************************************************** > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to > majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com > with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body > of the message. > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.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: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 10:47:17 EST From: Calibur1@aol.com Subject: Re: Damage > Another of the things I'd like resolved before I run another campaign: > weapons in T2k don't do enough damage. An AK-47 round in the chest can > do a maximum of 18 points of damage. However, that's not nearly enough > to hurt most of my players, especially when you do it the way the rules > say to (once hp reach 0 the character isn't dead???). And players scoff > at anyone with a pistol; opponents with pistols might as well be > throwing dirt. Clearly, weapons must be more dangerous or PCs must have > less hit points. What would be realistic? How deadly is an AK round? I realized this early on in my games too! The first thing I did was adjust the damage dice (up & down) according to similar caliber types. Some examples are: .22 LR =1D6-1 (minimum damage of 1) .38 Special, .380 ACP & 9mm =1D6 .45 ACP, .357 mag. & 7.62mmT =2D6 .44 mag., .30-30, 5.56mm & 5.45mm =3D6 7.62mmN/L/S, 8mm Mauser, .30-06, .00 Buck 12 gauge =4D6 .50 BMG, 12.7mm =8D6 14.5mm =12D6 The second thing I did was adjust the hit points. The number for that body location was it's maximum hit points. As in the rules, different degrees of wound severity had different effects. 0 points in that location meant a severed limb or death. With these two adjustments, Rambo types were eliminated, and my players now quickly dive for cover at the sound of ANY gunfire. It didn't matter what weapon the attacker was using. All that mattered was the size of the round. After all, the human body does not care if it's being shot at by an M16 or AK-47. All it cares about is the size and amount of those foreign pieces of metal entering it. A lot of you may argue about ballistics, muzzle velocity, etc., but come on, it's only a game! *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 03:02:55 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Polish Structures I have found a really good site for GMs who set their game in Poland. This site shows pics of a lot of the leftover fortifications from WW2, ribbons of "Dragon Teeth" tank traps, great pics of bridges and some pics that had me baffled until I realised they were rather sobering pictures of the kilns in a Nazi death camp. He has included a huge amount of photos that appear to be underground tunnels of some sort that may be some sort of communist bunker system?, (I don't read Polish, if someone can translate it I'd like to know how wrong I am!) all in all its a good source for descriptions of Polish terrain features. Any PCs who move into one of these blockhouses is set for life! http://www.gamma.com.pl/mru/ Jim *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 18:14:29 +0200 From: Pietu Subject: New homepage Hi New Twilight2000 relative homepage opened at http://personal.inet.fi/koti/peter.himberg/main.htm Check it out. Pietu Helsinki Finland *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 21:41:53 -0000 From: "Loretta" Subject: New version of Twilight 2000 Hello I'd like to ask something. I've been reading this mailing list for a few months and have seen people mention a new version of Twilight, bought up by another company??? Have I got totally the wrong end of the stick??? Could someone tell me if anyone is actually planning to reprint Twilight soon and whom??? And could you get it in the UK? Thanks people, Love, Loretta *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 17:03:47 -0700 From: rogue09@sprynet.com Subject: Re: New version of Twilight 2000 Loretta wrote: > Hello > > I'd like to ask something. I've been reading this mailing list for a few > months and have seen people mention a new version of Twilight, bought up by > another company??? Nope-the company which owned the rights (Tantalus) got bought out by iEN... > > > Have I got totally the wrong end of the stick??? Could someone tell me if > anyone is actually planning to reprint Twilight soon and whom??? And could > you get it in the UK? There is no information about Tantlaus having sold these rights to Twilight or iEN beginning to produce a new version of the game... > > > Thanks people, > > Love, > > Loretta Anyone hear differently on this issue? iEN has ignorned my letter to them... T.R. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 11:20:21 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Re: New version of Twilight 2000 >Loretta wrote: >> Hello >> I'd like to ask something. I've been reading this mailing list for a few >> months and have seen people mention a new version of Twilight, bought up by >> another company??? > >Nope-the company which owned the rights (Tantalus) got bought out by iEN... > >> Have I got totally the wrong end of the stick??? Could someone tell me if >> anyone is actually planning to reprint Twilight soon and whom??? And could >> you get it in the UK? > >There is no information about Tantlaus having sold these rights to Twilight or >iEN beginning to produce a new version of the game... > >> Thanks people, >> Love, >> Loretta > >Anyone hear differently on this issue? iEN has ignorned my letter to them... >T.R. It looks like Tantalus only sold the rights to its computer games. In which case they: 1. Couldn't sell it for some occult legal reason. 2. Couldn't sell it because no one wanted it. 3. Didn't sell it because they wanted it. I hope its "3" and Tantalus embarks on a great adventure as an RPG manufacturer. Jim. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 22:49:56 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Polish Structures At 03:02 AM 1/16/00 +1100, Jim & Peta Lawrie wrote: > He has included a huge amount of photos that appear to be underground >tunnels of some sort that may be some sort of communist bunker system?, (I >don't read Polish, if someone can translate it I'd like to know how wrong I >am!) all in all its a good source for descriptions of Polish terrain >features. I read a little Polish, but I don't have time to look at it right now. Probably, the tunnels are the ones used by the Polish resistance (there was right-wing Polish Home Army, I think, and also a Communist group, though in the end, in the Warsaw uprising, I think they fought together), and I expect they're in Warsaw--probably extension of the sewer system. I believe there are a couple of other towns with similar things, in particular Szczecin/Stettin. 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: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 15:24:58 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Re: Polish Structures - -----Original Message----- From: Scott David Orr To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com Date: Sunday, 16 January 2000 2:58 Subject: Re: Polish >I read a little Polish, but I don't have time to look at it right now. >Probably, the tunnels are the ones used by the Polish resistance (there was >right-wing Polish Home Army, I think, and also a Communist group, though in >the end, in the Warsaw uprising, I think they fought together), and I >expect they're in Warsaw--probably extension of the sewer system. I >believe there are a couple of other towns with similar things, in >particular Szczecin/Stettin. > >Scott Orr Do you know of any online information on these tunnels and the activities that took place in them Scott? Jim *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 00:27:38 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Polish Structures At 03:24 PM 1/16/00 +1100, Jim & Peta Lawrie wrote: > > > Do you know of any online information on these tunnels and the >activities that took place in them Scott? Hm...not off the top of my head, no. I seem to recall there was a movie made about it (Polish), but I've never seen it, and can't recall the name. 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: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 22:56:53 -0800 From: Ron Hale Subject: Re: Damage Calibur1@aol.com wrote: I realized this early on in my games too! The first thing I did was adjust the damage dice (up & down) according to similar caliber types. Some examples are: .22 LR =1D6-1 (minimum damage of 1) .38 Special, .380 ACP & 9mm =1D6 .45 ACP, .357 mag. & 7.62mmT =2D6 .44 mag., .30-30, 5.56mm & 5.45mm =3D6 7.62mmN/L/S, 8mm Mauser, .30-06, .00 Buck 12 gauge =4D6 .50 BMG, 12.7mm =8D6 14.5mm =12D6 You've left out .25 and 32ACP and several rifle calibers, also the 7.62mmT is basically a 32ACP round so should probably be in the line above where its at. TTFN Ron Hale *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 13:12:03 -0000 From: "Mark OIiver" Subject: Re: Polish Structures - -----Original Message----- From: Jim & Peta Lawrie To: T2K Forum-A ; T2K forum Date: 15 January 2000 16:05 Subject: Polish Structures > I have found a really good site for GMs who set their game in Poland. >This site shows pics of a lot of the leftover fortifications from WW2, >ribbons of "Dragon Teeth" tank traps, great pics of bridges and some pics >that had me baffled until I realised they were rather sobering pictures of >the kilns in a Nazi death camp. I grew up around an old RAF base in East London, it was open from about 1914 up to the 60's (RAF Hornchurch for those in the know, small piece of trivia it was from this airfield that a Spitfire flew to Germany and dropped a spare set of legs for Douglas Bader when he was a POW). The place is basically a park now but it's still littered with old bunkers, pill boxes and even a few blast pens. It's actually been a pretty good inspiration of what sort of defensive structures would survive from the WW2 era to the modern day (it was also a great place to play as a kid!). If anyone is interested I could go and take a few snaps of what's left, maybe it would give some inspiration to other people as welll, I still live relatively near it. I haven't been there for a few years but it doesn't appear to have changed much from the views you get as you drive past, I've always meant to show my wife where I used to spend my childhood so I've got a good cover story ;) I can also confrim that tank traps are still fairly common in certain places. Around me where a railway crossed under roads that date back to that time (quite common) you'll still see some "Dragons Teeth" style tank traps on the slope running down to the railway. It was quite a concern that any invading force landing in East Anglia would use the railways as a quick road into London. Regards, Mark *************************************************************************** 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, 17 Jan 2000 15:15:17 +1300 From: Andrew Tiffany Subject: Re: New homepage Hi all, New to this list, only joined a few days ago. A question already..... >New Twilight2000 relative homepage opened at >http://personal.inet.fi/koti/peter.himberg/main.htm >Pietu Pietu(Peter Himberg?)'s new site has some rules that were apparently posted to this list somw time back, from "Roland A." about Autofire and recoil alternate rules. Has anyone used these? And Roland, can you expand on how you altered the ROF and recoil values as mentioned in these alternate rules? Cheers Andrew Tiffany *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 12:08:28 -0800 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: Polish Structures Homeless people sleep in those tunnels now I think, they probably still gives tours of them. I'll write more when i have time (also for whoever emailed me about the encounter generator i wrote in QB, i think its on a backup cd Ill look for that too). *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 12:24:28 -0800 From: Peter Vieth Subject: for the programmers Does any of you know how I could generate random height maps? *************************************************************************** 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, 17 Jan 2000 06:32:58 EST From: CardSharks@aol.com Subject: Re: New version of Twilight 2000 In a message dated 1/15/00 6:11:22 PM Central Standard Time, rogue09@sprynet.com writes: << Anyone hear differently on this issue? iEN has ignorned my letter to them... >> I know the answer because I was part of the conversation. A proposal was made to Tantalus that they sell T2K to someone who wanted to put out a print version. They said no. Then a proposal was made that Tantalus give them a license to produce a print version. Thay said they would think about it. Time for thinking hasn't expired yet. More questions? Marc Miller at FarFuture@AOL.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, 17 Jan 2000 20:19:33 +0200 From: "Pasi Parviainen" Subject: Re: Damage I don't know if you have looked TNE (Traveller: the New Era) but there is (personal) weapons with damage such as 22 dices (plasma, fusion etc.). Rolling 22 x d10 or d20 wouldn't it be too much?! ;) Generally I'm happy with d6s, especially when playing with TNE. If players aren't suffering enough, give 'em some from Plasma-cannons, eh! Also, we usually cut hit-points half (ie. in our RealMerc rules expansion) and double damage from weapons when in 'point-blank' ie. less than say 3 or 5 meters. In addition rolling 10 or more below 'task-level' is so called 'critical' hit, which means maximum damage, so no rolls. Add this to point-blank and I think it's enough to keep those cool-headed PCs from making hazard actions... :) PasiP *************************************************************************** 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, 17 Jan 2000 19:50:26 -0000 From: "Roger Stenning" Subject: Re: New version of Twilight 2000 Hi, marc- Long time no hear - hope you're well, and Happy New Year! > I know the answer because I was part of the conversation. A proposal was made > to Tantalus that they sell T2K to someone who wanted to put out a print > version. They said no. So what about Tantalus re-printing it, then? > Then a proposal was made that Tantalus give them a license to produce a print > version. Thay said they would think about it. Time for thinking hasn't > expired yet. Figures. It makes, IMHO, no commercial sense to buy the damn thing, and then sit on it ad infinitum. What do you think they're playing (sic) at? Best regards, Roger Stenning Webmaster, the Impossible Scenarios Group www.the-isg.co.uk *************************************************************************** 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, 17 Jan 2000 13:31:20 -0800 From: "Corey Wells" Subject: Re: New version of Twilight 2000 They're not playing at anything. The bought a lot of GDW's stuff at a firesell. Originally, they were an electronic medium company. So printing something wasn't anywhere near their are of intentions. I think they had some of idea of maybe producing some electronic format, games or something. Otherwise, they saw them as a licensing resource. No one has made a serious offer to license. Not money wise. Now, if they have sold their computer games section, don't know wht they'll do besides license. You have several hundred thousand dollars to purchase a five year license from them? I don't. Corey. - ----- Original Message ----- From: Roger Stenning To: Sent: Monday, January 17, 2000 11:50 Subject: Re: New version of Twilight 2000 > > So what about Tantalus re-printing it, then? > > > Then a proposal was made that Tantalus give them a license to produce a > print > > version. Thay said they would think about it. Time for thinking hasn't > > expired yet. > > Figures. It makes, IMHO, no commercial sense to buy the damn thing, and then > sit on it ad infinitum. > > What do you think they're playing (sic) at? > > Best regards, > > Roger Stenning > Webmaster, > the Impossible Scenarios Group > www.the-isg.co.uk > > *************************************************************************** > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com > with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.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, 17 Jan 2000 21:30:36 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: New version of Twilight 2000 At 01:31 PM 1/17/00 -0800, Corey Wells wrote: > > >They're not playing at anything. The bought a lot of GDW's stuff at a >firesell. Originally, they were an electronic medium company. So printing >something wasn't anywhere near their are of intentions. I think they had >some of idea of maybe producing some electronic format, games or something. >Otherwise, they saw them as a licensing resource. No one has made a serious >offer to license. Not money wise. Now, if they have sold their computer >games section, don't know wht they'll do besides license. You have several >hundred thousand dollars to purchase a five year license from them? I >don't. > I think the previous poster's point was that licensing the game for whatever they can get, rather than waiting around for years for a six-figure up-front licensing fee that's not going to materialize, would be their best bet. Right now, their return on the investment is zilch. It's hard to argue that the licensing rights are "worth" X amount if no one is actually willing to pay that: something is "worth" what people are willing to pay. 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, 17 Jan 2000 19:42:51 -0800 From: "Corey Wells" Subject: Re: New version of Twilight 2000 Actually, if they bought a bulk of products from GDW, at very low price, then the licensing of just one can more than pay for the investment. That's probably what Dark Consiracy has done. Their licensing of it probably has paid for their investment. And they have to give certain rights when they do license... So if Joe comes and buys a 5 year license for $1000, and then makes a couple million off of it, Tantalus loses. I understand the points, but sitting on it for the right price is smart. To a point. This kind of product will lose value over time, because interest will wain. Then it will have to have heavy promotion to sell again. So it will be more costly to whoever does buy it, so they will ask a lower purchase price. But, because of the licensing of Dark Conspiracy, I'm sure they have at least broke even on the purchase. - ----- Original Message ----- From: Scott David Orr To: Sent: Monday, January 17, 2000 18:30 Subject: Re: New version of Twilight 2000 > I think the previous poster's point was that licensing the game for > whatever they can get, rather than waiting around for years for a > six-figure up-front licensing fee that's not going to materialize, would be > their best bet. Right now, their return on the investment is zilch. It's > hard to argue that the licensing rights are "worth" X amount if no one is > actually willing to pay that: something is "worth" what people are willing > to pay. > > 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. > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.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, 17 Jan 2000 23:42:26 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: New version of Twilight 2000 At 07:42 PM 1/17/00 -0800, Corey Wells wrote: > >Actually, if they bought a bulk of products from GDW, at very low price, >then the licensing of just one can more than pay for the investment. That's >probably what Dark Consiracy has done. And that leaves part of their investment (the part that paid for TW:2000) making zero. The fact that you've made some money on the rest of the investment doesn't passing up the chance to make more. >Their licensing of it probably has >paid for their investment. And they have to give certain rights when they >do license... So if Joe comes and buys a 5 year license for $1000, and then >makes a couple million off of it, Tantalus loses. I'm not sure I understand you. If the Tantalus licences it for $1000, they make $1000; if not, at present it appears they're going to make $0. $1000 is better. I would hazard a guess that they're trying to milk this for guaranteed income, and that the offers they've received have been for a percentage of profits. But I don't know. > understand the points, >but sitting on it for the right price is smart. To a point. This kind of >product will lose value over time, because interest will wain. Then it will >have to have heavy promotion to sell again. So it will be more costly to >whoever does buy it, so they will ask a lower purchase price. But, because >of the licensing of Dark Conspiracy, I'm sure they have at least broke even >on the purchase. > The "point" passed a long time ago--the game has been out of print for years, and I don't see any evidence that Tantalus is about to find a licensee to their liking. 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: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 01:30:49 -0600 From: Rob Barnes Subject: Re: New version of Twilight 2000 My guess is that the name "Twilight:2000" is not terribly marketable at the moment, considering the date. If it ever sees the light of day again it will probably be with a new name and a revised timeline ("Twilight:2010" or some such, at the least) to make it interesting to the potential market. Twilight came out in 1985 when a turn of the century post-holocaust game was of interest. If it had been released as "Twilight:1980" it would've been a failure. I think T2K is dead, commercially speaking. That doesn't mean those of use who are fans can't continue to support it, but if we want to see a good military/post-holocaust type RPG on the market anytime soon, I think we'd be better off trying to convince one of the existing RPG companies to make one, rather than trying to revive T2K. Begging Tantalus sure isn't going to do much good, from the sounds of it. That said, it is STILL my favorite game of all time and I would love to see it back in print. I just don't believe it will ever happen. - -Rob Scott David Orr wrote: > At 07:42 PM 1/17/00 -0800, Corey Wells wrote: > > > >Actually, if they bought a bulk of products from GDW, at very low price, > >then the licensing of just one can more than pay for the investment. That's > >probably what Dark Consiracy has done. > > And that leaves part of their investment (the part that paid for TW:2000) > making zero. The fact that you've made some money on the rest of the > investment doesn't passing up the chance to make more. > > >Their licensing of it probably has > >paid for their investment. And they have to give certain rights when they > >do license... So if Joe comes and buys a 5 year license for $1000, and then > >makes a couple million off of it, Tantalus loses. > > I'm not sure I understand you. If the Tantalus licences it for $1000, they > make $1000; if not, at present it appears they're going to make $0. $1000 > is better. > > I would hazard a guess that they're trying to milk this for guaranteed > income, and that the offers they've received have been for a percentage of > profits. But I don't know. > > > understand the points, > >but sitting on it for the right price is smart. To a point. This kind of > >product will lose value over time, because interest will wain. Then it will > >have to have heavy promotion to sell again. So it will be more costly to > >whoever does buy it, so they will ask a lower purchase price. But, because > >of the licensing of Dark Conspiracy, I'm sure they have at least broke even > >on the purchase. > > > The "point" passed a long time ago--the game has been out of print for > years, and I don't see any evidence that Tantalus is about to find a > licensee to their liking. > > 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. *************************************************************************** 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 #84 ************************************