Showing posts with label Twilight 2000. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Twilight 2000. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 4, 2017

Surprise! A New Twilight 2000 Supplement!




So this came thru over the weekend:

NEW For Twilight: 2000.

The East Africa Sourcebook. On DriveThruRPG.

From the deserts of Somalia to the Serengeti of northern Tanzania, the waters of the Indian Ocean to the jungles of the Congo, the East African/Kenya Sourcebook, the first new canon work for Twilight 2000 since 1995, shines a light on an area hinted at in previous works but never before detailed, where what is left of civilization in Africa struggles against the Somali Islamists, the PARA, the LRA and desperate pirates whose only mission is to take what they can from what still stands.

The Sourcebook contains a detailed order of battle for the American, French and Rwandan forces in the area as well as for their foes. A timeline is provided that shows how WWIII came to Africa, including the nuclear strikes that devastated much of the refinery production in Africa, leaving the refinery in Mombasa as the only hope for the Americans to provide the fuel the that keeps CENTCOM supplied in their continuing fight with the Soviets in Iran. The continuing struggle of the French to build a new Empire from the ruins of Africa come alive in the Sourcebook,  detailing their triumphs and missteps, including how they assisted the LRA to power in Uganda.


For those looking for new challenges and new adventures, the East African/Kenya Sourcebook provides them in spades offering everything from fighting a military campaign against the PARA and the Somalis, to convoy escort duty against pirates, to deep patrols trying to destroy terrorist bases or to find useable aircraft and supplies to keep AFRICOM going now that no more will be forthcoming from the United States.  For those who wish to be mercenaries, either in the employ of others or building their own “kingdoms” in the ruins of Africa, there are opportunities a plenty. 

Here's a link to the DTRPG page.

"... the first new canon work for Twilight 2000 since 1995 ..."


Well, it has been a while. How many people still care enough to make this worth doing. There are multiple comments on the page above so clearly at least a few people are paying attention. I have to wonder though - how many T2K campaigns are happening right now around the world? Say meeting once a month or more? Ten? For all editions together I suspect it's a really small number.

I don't say that as a slam. Twilight was one of my favorite games of the late 80's and I have almost all of the books for both 1st and 2nd edition. That said it's a hard sell these days - not many players are interested in a realistic retro take on a war that never actually happened. If you look up "simulationist" in the gamer dictionary this might be exhibit A and those do not seem to be anywhere close to popular today. Neither do "crunchy" as in rules nor "alternate history" other than steampunk or modern + magic type settings. Twilight doesn't do magic, unless it's the magic of letting your M214 portable minigun saw through a humvee and all of the raiders inside in a single combat round. 

If I was trying to get a game going today I'd probably pitch it as "like The Walking Dead but without zombies". It might sound odd but it's the closest thing I've ever seen to a T2K campaign and covers a lot of the same scenarios and situations. 

I don't know if I will ever run (or play in for that matter) a sustained T2K campaign. Finding enough players to do it right now is damn near impossible and I don't see how the passage of time will make that any better. Maybe at some point the retrogaming thing will sweep these kinds of games up into a popular movement once again but I suspect it won't be anytime soon.

Regardless, I admire GDW for keeping some of the non-Traveller stuff alive. In a world where there's Yet Another Version of tiny-booklets D&D every month I am glad some of the other classic RPG's are still available in some way.

Friday, August 28, 2015

RPGaDay - Day 28 - Favorite Game You No Longer Play

Well this one is fairly easy. There are a bunch of games I am not playing right now that might get played again in the future, so I am going to take this as "... no longer play and are unlikely to play again." That does make it a lot easier.


I spent a lot of time playing AD&D in the 80's. We had a blast and it was the major game that formed the baseline of what "RPG" meant to me. I bought the books, read the magazines,  painted the miniatures, wore the t-shirt, and fought through innumerable adventures for a good 10-11 years, from elementary school into the college years. When the next edition came out we moved on to it and never looked back. That's sort of the problem ...

I haven't sat down to run a 1st edition AD&D game in over 20 years. I haven't played one either.  I loved this game when it was "the" game but I've never thought the mechanics were the peak of game design for all time. Everyone I played with thought 2E was an improvement and moved on. We all moved to 3E when it came out too.

When it comes to nostalgia I've considered running an old school game but when it comes up B/X D&D is the game of choice as it's simpler, cleaner, and faster. Goblinoid Games managed to add in most of the good parts of AD&D into it with their Advanced Edition Companion for Labyrinth Lord.
So there's not much need to go full-retro with AD&D just to be able to play a dwarf cleric. I suggested it to the Apprentices and they said "but we like Basic" and that was that.

For a while I even considered running Hackmaster, the older edition, which is a whole bunch of AD&D 1st & 2nd edition with some updates. No one took it seriously as an option.

While I may have some nostalgia for it, no one else is willing to spend some of their limited gaming time on an old, clunky game when there are other options, options they like better, available. So it seems unlikely, very unlikely, that I will ever run or play this again unless I stumble into a nest of old-schoolers  - and decide it's truly worth some of my limited gaming time.




Runner Up:


We had some really good times playing this game in the late 80's and 90's. You wouldn't think the end of the civilized world would be great for that but it was a lot of fun as a game. It was never the most popular RPG but it was my favorite game of that type.

This one is suffering from a similar yet different problem from AD&D. Tastes change and time moves on and my friends and the Apprentices are not terribly interested in the post-apocalyptic game as a genre anymore. With AD&D it's about the mechanics - the subject matter is still awesome, but the system has been surpassed. For Twilight 2000 the mechanics are fine, and being able to cut loose with an automatic grenade launcher from your humvee is still a cool thing, but the setting as a whole is just not something they care about.No magic,  no mecha, no powers, just normal humans and real-world gear. I'd love to run some of my current players through the epic published campaign but I doubt that will ever happen.







Wednesday, December 19, 2012

The 7 Games You've Played the Most



This article over at Gnome Stew got me to thinking about this, and I thought it was interesting enough to do myself. Anyone who has been reading the blog for any length of time can probably figure out most of them but I wanted to go through it myself and see if there were any surprises. I'll do the "played" today and the "GM'd" tomorrow.

The 7 Games I've Played the Most: (this assumes "DMing" doesn't count as "playing")

1 - AD&D  - I spent a LOT of time on this one, getting my DMG about 1980 and the rest of the books  the next year and a regular set playing group the year after that - one that stuck around for decades. This was THE game for me in the 80's, all others were secondary, and I obsessed over it like nothing since.


2 -AD&D Second Edition - Yeah this kind of surprised me, but we had a full 11 year run on this as we started the day it came out in 1989 and played it regularly until the 3rd edition launch in 2000. The center of this time was a nice long ongoing campaign set in the Forgotten Realms that a friend of mine ran pretty much this entire run, which was basically "the 90's".



3 - Gamma World  - I'm cheating a bit by lumping all editions together here but it was really one ongoing campaign that started in 2nd edition with one set of characters about 1983 and continued through 3rd edition (convert and move on!) and 4th edition into the 1990's. Run by the same friend, this was set from the ruins of Louisiana up to the Great Lakes over the years.Part D&D, part Western, part Superheroes, we had a lot of fun with this game.


4 - D&D 3rd Edition - I'm going by hours here, as over the years I played this quite a bit but never in a good long sustained campaign. Added up it's probably the fourth most-played game but it tended to be in very small chunks here and there. The biggest problem here is that I was running so much I didn't have time to play 


5 - Mechwarrior - I am again lumping all editions together here. This game came out in 1986 and we jumped on it immediately, having a fondness for the giant robot war story campaign that never really went away. Again, a friend of mine ran it, and a group of about 4 of us played it in sustained bursts for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd editions, through the original succession wars, and into the clan invasion. We painted the mini's, read the novels, and waged war on a planetary scale at times. Most of our Battletech games were tied in to our Mechwarrior campaign, wherever it happened to be at the time. It's a whole different way to play the game as having to consider "what happens next" gives one a different perspective on combat, from character fates to repairs, to transportation - it was a lot of fun.


6 - Twilight 2000 - I was pulled into a campaign of this in the late 80's run by one friend and it became a regular part of the rotation with another friend running campaigns of it as well. It's a fairly realistic game - there are no magical healers, radiation kills you instead of granting superpowers, and there are no giant robots, zombies, ninjas, or wizards.It's just a group of relatively normal humans trying to make their way in a broken world. Overcoming those challenges makes for a fun game though not  everyone likes that kind of thing. We played 1st edition, 2nd edition, 2.2 all back forth from about 1987 into the 90's and even had a short run of 1st edition just a few years ago.


7 - Star Trek - Fasa edition. Besides the various D&D's this is the only entry that covers only one edition of a game but it was a lot of fun. Creating a single character and running him over most of a decade (on and off) is something I have not done before or since. There have been other Trek games but this is the only one I experienced as a player.

After this we get into a long tail of Traveller, Boot Hill, Marvel Super Heroes, Champions, Shadowrun, Warhammer FRP, Rifts, Gurps, B/X D&D, Star Wars, 4E D&D etc. I've played a lot of games but the ones listed above form the core of my playing experience. One thing should be clear from the above: There is always a D&D game, then are the side games or temporary diversions. I don;t expect that will change anytime soon.

Friday, March 25, 2011

Cool Things from Old Games: The Twilight 2000 NPC Motivation System



One of the things I look for when reading a game book is interesting parts I might want to use with another game. Now I admit that I do not find something I can actually use all that often, but when I find a particularly cool sub-system I still like to note it down. After all, just because I haven't found a use for it yet doesn't mean I won't find a place for it down the road.

Something that comes up in almost every RPG is NPC reactions to the player characters. Some games have systems to account for this , like most versions of D&D. Some largely leave it up to the DM but this can be tricky over the course of a long term campaign as the DM may fall into a rut, broadly categorizing huge groups of NPC's without a ton of thought. This is especially true in sandbox campaigns or city campaigns where large numbers of random strangers may interact with characters or bear witness to their actions where some kind of reaction is justified. When called upon to do this session after session it can be difficult to insert enough variety to keep things interesting.

One thing that can help add variety to NPC reactions is some kind of random reaction system. Now this does take some of the burden off of the DM but it doesn't always make sense, giving the DM another problem to solve in figuring out why this guy likes or doesn't like the party.   What if we skipped the surface step of "how does the NPC feel about the players" and get right to the heart of the matter and find out what matters to the NPC, which allows the DM the much simpler step of then using that motivation to determine how the NPC feels about the characters. That's the theory behind the NPC motivation system from T2K, and it's one I like a lot.

How does it work? Take a regular deck of cards. Draw two - the highest value card is the primary motivator for that NPC, and the lower value is the secondary motivation. The suit and the value tell you what the motivation is as in:

Clubs (Violence) - Club NPCs have a greater tendency to react with or use violence than others
2-4 = Somewhat Violent: Not intimidated or frightened by threats of violence and not afraid to use it when called for
5-7 = Moderately Violent: Aggressive and prefers to use violence as a solution 
8-10 - Very Violent: Loves a good fight and wants to be a warrior or is a warrior
Jack = Murderous: The NPC has either committed a murder or is planning a murder. Not just killing someone but a deliberate and secret killing of someone for personal gain.
Queen = Stubborn: The NPC is set in their ways and resistant to change and persuasion by others
King = Brutal: The NPC is a sadistic brute who enjoys inflicting physical injury on others
Ace = War Leader: The NPC is an unusually good leader in combat situations. They have a grasp of tactics and stay cool under fire. 

Diamonds (Greed) - Diamond NPC's want to be rich
2-4 Somewhat Greedy: Will sell items for cash/gold even if alone and in the wilderness
5-7 Moderately Greedy: A very hard bargainer, likely to be cash/gold only, and easy to bribe
8-10 Very Greedy: Always open to bribes (may even expect them), deals only in gold/cash, may plan treachery if he thinks the PC's have considerable wealth and thinks he could get his hands on it
Jack = Coward: will run from danger whenever possible, will cower and refuse to fight if he cannot run
Queen = Lustful: driven by lust, typically of the opposite sex, and may be all members or one member in particular
King = Selfish: Will never help without demanding (higher than usual) payment, will never give anything away for free,  and will jealously guard possessions
Ace = Generous: Will gladly give anything he has to someone in need, will make trades that do not favor him, and will refuse payment for help with many tasks

Hearts (Sociability) Influenced by their love of people, tends to be friendly, loyal, and just
2-4 Somewhat Sociable: Amiable, talkative, and cooperative with most people
5-7 Moderately Sociable: Strong sense of duty and loyalty to whatever group he joins
8-10 Very Sociable:  Strong commitment to justice and the welfare of everyone he meets and looks for the good qualities in anyone he meets
Jack = Wise: Always exhibits good judgement and offers sound advice
Queen = Loving: Loves someone so completely that they would sacrifice themselves for that person - could be a spouse, a parent, a child, or a friend
King = Honorable: Scrupulously honest in all dealings and his word of honor is an absolute bond. Will carry out an honor-bound task to the point of his own death. Contemptuous of liars and oath-breakers.
Ace = Just: Sees justice as the greatest virtue and the main consideration in determining a course of action - no respect for cheating and backs any attempt to right an injustice

Spades (Ambition) Seeks personal power and influence
2-4 Somewhat Ambitious: Inclined towards boastfulness and a desire to impress peers
5-7 Moderately Ambitious: The NPC looks for a position of responsibility in any organization they join
8-10 Very Ambitious: The NPC is driven by a desire to manipulate and control the people around them and to be in charge
Jack = Pompous: Arrogant and conceited, considers himself clearly superior to everyone around him
Queen = Ruthless: Lets nothing stand in the way of achieving goals and has total disregard for the needs of others
King = Deceitful: A liar and maybe a traitor if the opportunity presents itself
Ace = Charismatic: A leader who others are naturally drawn to and want to follow. Likely to have a large and extremely loyal following


There are almost zero mechanical bits in these descriptions in the T2K rulebooks. The idea is that some NPC's will be created in advance and will likely have motivations and goals already determined by the DM, but random encounters and background NPC's that are suddenly brought to the fore mean the DM needs an easy system to determine what drives them and in turn how they would react to the PC"s. I think this system serves that purpose quite well. It's also mentioned that for groups it's best to determine the motivations of the leader or leaders only and not worry about the grunts, a good piece of advice. Some of these motivations may seem contradictory but resolving that contradiction can lead to some very interesting characters. Say you draw "Brutal" and "Wise" - to me that screams "Barbarian Chieftain" or maybe Tribal Champion who advises the chieftain. Or maybe a smart crime boss with a really short fuse.

It would be simple enough to assign mechanical bits to each of these results to more closely tie them to the particular system you run. For something like 3rd or 4th edition D&D it could be as simple as some +2's or +5's to certain skill checks like intimidation or diplomacy or even a bonus to Will defense vs' certain attacks. That's the kind of thing I would likely decide on the fly rather than tie it into the table, but that's something each DM could determine themselves. It might also be useful for setting the difficulty level for some PC skill checks - "Stubborn" would be tough vs. diplomacy, "Violent" would be resistant to Intimidate, etc.

How else is it useful? Well if the local crime lord is Violent and Greedy that's something the PC's can find out with a little legwork or some streetwise rolls and from that they might determine that trying to threaten him is pointless but offering him 25% of their take might enlist his aid. If someone is Pompous but Loving then maybe a hostage situation is the key to gaining their aid or obedience. This kind of thing is incredibly helpful if you're trying to run a game where violence is not the only answer. Now I'm a big fan of games where the main goal is to break things and hurt people but some games are not all about that. Even games where it can be, like say Shadowrun, can benefit hugely from putting this kind of info into the game as it opens up those other channels besides gunplay.  If the local Yakuza Boss is Honorable and Greedy well then we have at least two obvious approaches here once we find that out. Most of these motivations should be pretty obvious to those around the NPC and thus detectable by the PC's with some effort - money, carousing, streetwise skill, whatever your game provides.


I've used this system in several campaigns over the years - T2K of course, Mechwarrior, and Rifts.  It is especially helpful if you're a DM who is used to running games with a ton of races where attitude tends to be expressed on a racial level - Dwarves dislike Elves, Klingons hate Humans - because it can be tough to make NPC's distinct when everyone is human. This system can help enforce some differentiation among groups in your campaign. Also, if you keep drawn cards out during a session, you reduce the likelihood of duplicate results which helps ensure some variability in the motivations. That's not always an issue - I remember when I drew two war leaders in one session and they ended up being leaders of rival gangs in an area - but if it matters to you it's one more way to handle it that's better than a table roll.

I could also see using it to liven up those Fantasy and Sci-Fi games where cultures tend to be monolithic. I've not used it with D&D but after reviewing it again I just may try it as it does have a pretty nice range of attitudes and using two cards gives a more complex personality than many "roll on this table" approaches to the problem. Maybe THIS Klingon is Ambitious but Generous. Maybe this Elf Merchant is Violent and Lustful. Maybe this Demon Prince is Pompous but Wise and can actually tell the PC's something useful about their quest. Part of it is painting a picture of the world, part of it is coming up with interesting characters, and part of it is shaking up expectations. I can also see that if you do not like the broad range applying to all races, maybe you limit it for some, as in "When drawing motivation for demons, ignore all Hearts". This would limit some of the stranger options but would still leave a lot of variability among personality types. If my D&D players end up going Against the Giants I would probably use the full range as I see giants as having a broad culture, but supernatural things like demons or undead might benefit from some trimming.

Anyway, that's my nugget for the day - an old system many may not have played and probably would not think to search for handy role-playing material has an easily-adapted system that's useful no matter what kind of campaign you're running. I could see it being used in everything from Supers to Vampire to Fantasy Game X. Think about it and see if might add something to your game.

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Some Love for the Post-Apocalyptic Game

I haven;t posted much about them because I haven't been playing or running them, but one of my favorite RPG genres is the post-apocalyptic game. One big attraction of these kinds of games is the ability to run around with ridiculously overpowered weapons with no powerful authorities who can take them away from you which is a lot of fun most of the time.

The first PA game was Metamorphosis Alpha which was set on a huge generation ship somewhere out in space where things have gone somewhat wrong and now there are mutants and berserk robots running around the ship. I love the concept and I want to run that exact scenario someday, but it was not the first PA game I played.



My first PA game was Gamma World, 2nd edition. A friend bought it, his brother and I made up some characters, and then he ran it for us and it was awesome. I still have some of my characters from that game, including Roard, the mutated lion who was strong and could use a sonic blast every so often but had was vulnerable to water. He spent most of his time in plate armor and carrying a two-handed sword but he was not averse to laser weaponry when it was available. We wandered through ruins, fought bandits and raiders, took on the Legion of Gold, and eventually dropped a neutron bomb on a fortress of the Knights of Genetic Purity - not many games include nuclear weapons on the treasure tables but Gamma World does!



We stayed with Gamma World through 3rd edition and the color chart. I was OK with the mechanical differences (though I still liked 2E just fine) but I thought the background changes were annoying. The different levels of results allowed them to add in some cool effects like disintegration or stunning when certain weapons got a Red result. The most frustrating thing was that if you played it as-written then starting characters had a really hard time hitting anything.



The 4th edition came out in 1992 and made more mechanical changes. It dropped the chart and centered around d20 rolls (fairly similar to Alternity and 3E D&D which were still some years away) but it added classes of all things! I wasn't thrilled by this, preferring earlier versions' classless and even levelless design, but mechanically it was a much smoother system for a long term campaign so we played a ton of it too. Despite the reputation of being a silly game we usually played it as straight as one of our D&D games. It wasn't like we were playing Toon or Paranoia or something. GW characters were fairly tough and you could usually expect to be playing with them for a long time.



Down the road there was the Alternity (5th) edition and the outsourced d20 (6th) edition, neither of which I ever played.  There was also Omega World in Dungeon which was a pretty good translation I thought. Now we have the one based off of D&D 4E which looks like fun but which I have not purchased yet. I don't know when I would run it and if I had the time I would rather start people new to the game out with an older version, maybe 2nd.  I still own copies of 1st edition through 5th edition so there's hope yet, just not this year.


 The other "big" PA game I played a bunch was Twilight 2000:




 We got into this in the late 80's a few years after it had been published but it was still being supported. Despite being lumped in the same general genre this was a very different game from Gamma World. Weapons were deadly, characters were fragile, and supplies were limited.

Coming from GDW, maker of historical and modern wargames, you would think it would be very realistic and in a way it was but it had some odd abstractions. Instead of meticulously tracking each round of ammunition (potentially important in a game with a ton of automatic weapons and ammunition no longer being manufactured) the game tracks ammo in 3-round groups, so a 100 round belt of ammo is 33 shots in the game. It was a little weird because you get situations where a 7-round pistol only has 2 shots. It's an oddity in an otherwise hard-realism game because all of the real-world measurements have to be translated into this 1/3 number and of course you get questions of rounding. In the end, you're still tracking a bunch of ammo, it's just that the numbers are divided by 3. I never understood the rationale behind this but while it was jarring at first, we eventually grew to ignore it.

The game used a percentile system for rating skills and task resolution was a simple 3-level system: Easy = Skill X 2, Average = Skill X 1, Difficult = 1/2 Skill. This could be brutal as the best you could start with was 80% in a skill and most would be lower than that. This gave a very good chance of failure on average or difficult tasks, whether sneaking up on someone or shooting them with an M16. There was no hero point mechanic or anything similar, so you just had to live with various outcomes.

Despite some of these issues the game was fun as an exercise in survival. We determined that quite a bit of the time your state at the start of the game was as good as it was ever going to be - uninjured and well-supplied - and it was all downhill from there. gear was used up, lost, or stolen. Vehicles would break down. Ammo would be expended and not replaced. Your first big battle or two would be spectacular, but after that the missiles are gone, characters are hurt or dead, you've probably lost a vehicle or two and can no longer transport everything you had - it was a long downward spiral for the most part. Occasionally you might find a base or a warlord you could join and improve conditions, but it was rare or inevitably had some drawbacks. I would attribute this to DM style but it happened with multiple DM's and even when I tried to run it I found this to be true. It makes for an interesting counterpoint to D&D's upward progression in power and acquisition of stuff with a regular downward progression and shedding of stuff. It's an interesting game though not a particularly cheerful or lighthearted one.

It was very well supported with adventures that also served as regional sourcebooks. Post-war Europe was covered heavily at first and then the line moved back to America and covered most of the country in a series of books as well. Armies of the Night (New York City), Red Star/Lone Star (Texas), Airlords of the Ozarks (Arkansas/Missourri) all led to some really fun situations.

One other note - the art is very good, being almost all pencil works by Tim Bradstreet. I think the single artist using a single style approach gave the game a very consistent and realistic look, exactly what the game needed.




First edition was the "80's" edition, so in 1990 Twilight 2000 2.0 was released with a horrible (though definitely attention-getting) cover and made the impressive triple score of a) alienating most of the existing players by completely changing the rule system, b) completely failing to draw in new players with some exciting new mechanic or approach to the genre and c) picking absolutely the worst time for a WW3 game to come out as the Berlin Wall came down in 1989 and the Soviet Union fell apart in 1991.

 The rules changed over to a d10 system where stats and skills were rated 1-10 and then added together to resolve tasks and it was bad. Nowhere near as granular as the old system and making stats just as important as skills threw a lot of players off. Automatic weapons fire was rolled with a set chance to hit, regardless of skill and while it might be realistic it didn't sit well with players who were proud of their 90% in Combat Rifleman and found that it didn't apply to one of the major parts of combat in the game. All in all it's a really good example of how to de-satisfy a vocal and passionate fan base with unrequested changes.

The rules were also dull - not that 1st edition was flashy, but 2.0 was just...dull. One of the outcomes of a new edition should be renewed excitement about the game and some positive buzz - there was none. The cover looked like it belonged on  either a Star Wars adventure module or a Paranoia supplement. The interior artwork was largely reused Tim Bradstreet work form 1E which while good it was not new or flashy or anything cinematic - unlike the cover. Combat was very by-the-numbers with no special maneuvers or  chrome rules. It ended up playing pretty similarly to the original edition in a lot of ways but it required one to learn a whole new set of rules - why bother? There was just nothing new or innovative or exciting about the game, nothing that it did better than the old one or made new players say "I want to play that".

Finally the timing while probably not foreseeable just killed the game.  I sometime wonder if post-world war 3 gaming is as much an artifact of the 80s as cyberpunk and giant robots, as the younger set just does not get it. Zombie apocalypse -sure. Nuclear war between superpowers - "oh that's not going to happen". It's a weird little historical divide that I didn't think about at all at the time but that I have noticed more as time marches on. Anyway interest in the game outside of the already-indoctrinated dwindled rapidly as the 90's went on.

GDW retooled the game as Merc 2000 by setting the same mechanics in a less-devastated world which would allow players to be soldier types without requiring a nuclear exchange first, but it just was not that interesting for most T2K fans. They liked their anarchy and their alcohol-burning tanks and running missions for corporations in other countries was too much like Shadowrun minus all the fun stuff.

They also released a reworked edition of the game about 2 years later as Version 2.2 - this included a new version of the same system using a d20 instead of a d10 and it was much better and had a more robust skill system - I actually liked this version quite a bit and it's the same one that went out with Traveller New Era and was an update to Dark Conspiracy much like it was for Twilight. While it got some positive buzz among the players I knew it was not enough to save the game (or GDW) and it died when the company went under about 1994.

The last PA Game I have some experience with and love for is Deadlands: Hell on Earth


This is a great game with interesting (if a little clunky) mechanics featuring radiation priests, paladins, cyborgs, mutants, mad scientists, and zombies. It's everything the western version of Deadlands had + vehicles and automatic weapons. There's more of a supernatural element than in most PA games that feature a strictly technological view of things but that's kind of refreshing and helps give this universe its own flavor. Among the many supplements is one that includes an adventure that is an homage to Escape from New York, earning the whole system massive cool points with me from that alone.

When I first got it I created a bunch of characters and wrote up some short adventure scenarios and I have actually run a short campaign. I called it "Ghost Rock Blues" and wrote up a really cool introduction (think Star Wars crawl) and started the PC's off trapped in a ruined retail store in the middle of winter as a horde of walkin dead closed in. The survivors headed west and ended up doing some exploring and losing one characters running car before the game ended about 6 sessions in.

If you're a d20 fan there was a version of it made for d20 which is remarkably complete for being a one-volume treatment. There was also a separate creature book too, and it's worth finding this version if you have a group that really likes their d20 system. There has not been an official Savage Worlds version yet but I expect we'll see it someday.

Other PA games:

Aftermath - I own a copy of this and as you may have heard it is indeed ridiculously (and needlessly IMO) complex. If you think T2K is for babies, this is the game for you. Never ran it, never played it. Some of the adventures are very cool though  and I have used them for other game systems. The Australian trilogy is a particular favorite of mine.

Morrow Project - I own an adventure for this but that's the closest I have ever come to it. I've never read or even seen the rules so I really can't say much about it other than it exists and has its fans.

Autoduel - this was a GURPS supplement based on the Car Wars universe and if you like that (think Road Warrior or Death Race if you are unfamiliar with it) then you will really like this. The background and character options are very cool, the only problem comes when trying to run car combat using the GURPS combat system - you are much better off just running it in Car Wars. It's a similar problem to Mechwarrior/Battletech in integrating personal combat into a game focused on vehicular combat but it can be done. There's no nuclear exchange and not many mutants but civilization has collapsed and the countryside is now a lawless wasteland between hi-tech fortress-towns. Let me put it this way: If you think the idea of a passenger vehicle called a "Busnought" is cool then this is worth a look.

Rifts is a PA game but it is part of a different trend so I will cover it in another post.

After the Bomb was Palladium's entry into the genre (before Rifts anyway) and it's actually pretty good. I own all of the books for it and I played around with it once and it is a lot of fun. It's a little like Gamma World but not quite as random and can actually make a coherent campaign if you choose to do so.Road Hogs is an especially flavorful supplement if you get interested.

Darwin's World was an early d20 entry that I picked up in its first edition incarnation. Once they went to 2E using d20 Modern (which I never got into) I quit following the line. it fell into a sort of middle ground, being less "out-there" than Gamma World but more out there than T2K. The best thing I've heard about it recently is that a new Savage Worlds edition is coming out and that should be pretty interesting.

Mutant Future is a recent retro clone of Gamma World 1st/2nd edition and it's pretty cool though I have not run or played it yet. I expect I will in the future. You can download it here.

Final thoughts:

The post-apocalyptic role-playing game has been a rare animal, nearly dying out in the late 90's and 2000's  after being a fairly significant part of the RPG scene in the 80's. The only game that's been in print for most of that period  is Gamma World and it's been through about 7 editions in 30 years. We're in a bit of a renaissance right now with both GW's big shiny box for new-school fans and Mutant Future being available for old-school fans and Savage Darwin's World coming available as well. The one thing I keep seeing anytime one of these game comes up is that it's mainly an older crowd that cares about them. To some degree people will play what's available and these were never the dominant titles among RPG's. If most groups out there are playing D&D or Pathfinder and many players never played these kinds of games anyway then finding one is going to be difficult. In the age of the internet though, I doubt any of them will ever really die. My 2011 is booked up but given the background hype I may make 2012 my Year of the Apocalypse and run some GW or some Mutant Future for the apprentices and maybe even the main group too if they're interested.

I'd love to hear others' experiences with these if anyone reading has played them - leave a comment!