Traveller 2300 VS 2300 AD

[Havocatalyst]

I recently picked up Traveller 2300 from a used book store and began to read the rules. Everything was going fine until I got to the combat section . I could not even to begin to understand the damage aspect of it. So I did a little googling and found that GDW re released T2300 as 2300AD based more on the twilight 2000 world. Now I was wondering if the 2300AD rules are more like Twilight 2000 or if they kept the combat and such pretty much the same. What did they change in 2300AD from T2300?

 

[TWILIGHT]

Hi there! First off (to the best of my knowledge) the combat system is mostly the same but 2300AD contains a much better, much more detailed explanation and example. (I think! It's been 10 years since I read them as I play 2300AD using the BRP rules from Cthulhu for ease of play)The setting is the same and both sets are extrapolations of the T2K setting. Sadly they're not like the T2K rules (i'd have preffered that as I love the combat rules in that game).
Now for the changes:
Better layout, more detail, LOTS of extra images, much more professional and attractive product in my opinion. GDW also wanted to change the title from TRAVELLER 2300 to 2300AD because it was felt that the original title was misleading and was thought to confuse the 2300 line with a TRAVELLER setting, which it isn't. It's not even set in the same timeline/milieu.
I THINK thats it. I'm sure/hope that someone more familiar with the actual rules can point you to a better explanation! T2300=cool, 2300AD=LOVED UP!

 

[shanksow]

Now I was wondering if the 2300AD rules are more like Twilight 2000 or if they kept the combat and such pretty much the same. What did they change in 2300AD from T2300? [/QB]

Well now thats the whole rub, isn't it?

When they first came out with the game, I too was fooled into thinking it was going to be Twilight 2000 rules set in outer space.

WRONG.

Felt like GDW punched me in the gut with this game/combat system. I too could not figure out what they were trying to do.

At least I could understand Star Cruiser enough to play it.

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by shanksow:
When they first came out with the game, I too was fooled into thinking it was going to be Twilight 2000 rules set in outer space.

I originally thought it was a historical era of the CT OTU using the Twilight 2000 rules

I ignored the rules (kept the setting though), and instead did my own adaptation of T2000 rules.
We played T2300 using those house rules, modern horror, cyberpunk, MegaTraveller (the setting) for a couple of years.

 

[Havocatalyst]

Originally posted by TWILIGHT:
(I think! It's been 10 years since I read them as I play 2300AD using the BRP rules from Cthulhu for ease of play)

Now this I would love to see. BRP is my favorite system and I have played it the most. Can you give me a description of your conversion to BRP?

Thanx all for your posts!

 

[epicenter00]

Just to add to what the above posters said, the biggest differences between Traveller: 2300 and 2300AD are matters of theme. GDW clarified the rules, gave you examples, and so on in 2300AD, but the biggest difference is the theme.

T:2300 was like "hey, here's a Traveller-like game set in an extrapolation of the Twilight: 2000 universe!" so you had nods to all of the typical Classic Traveller themes like trade, exploration, and so on.

2300AD has the tag-line "Man's Battle for the Stars" and as the name suggests, it's more narrowed down to a military-themed look. The Kafer invasion is a big deal, they got rid of that God-awful "comic book" style art they were fronting and replaced it with a grittier look in many cases. And they omitted the SK-19, though they still referred to the weapon.

---

As for the combat system, yeah, it has problems (the whole system has some huge problems - though GDW always had odd problems with their game systems having no reference to reality at some points in the case of 2300, if you want a good laugh, look at the throw range for characters though the ease with which you can hit something in the game is pretty good too), but I always liked it more than T2k's mostly because you could actually kill someone with a .22 pistol in a single shot.

 

[Havocatalyst]

There are 3 things I want from a gaming system, easy to explain, easy to play and easy to adapt. GDW had a real winner with the T2K 1st edition and I know of atleast one person, and there are probably many, that have used the 1st ed rules for many other things. It would seem to me that as GDW went along they began to move away from the role-to-hit-role-for-damage systems to something much more complicated or obscure. There is nothing wrong with a "funky" system that does not use the RTHRFD system as long as it meets the three criteria set out in the first sentence above. I like Twilights idea of using BRP because, IMHO, it fulfills the criteia I look for in a game system.

 

[aramis]

Once grasped, the 2300 combat system is quite nifty. I can walk players through it, but can't "explain" it terribly well.

The process is (best I can figure, and it works for me, from memory)

Roll to hit.
Roll location of hit
Optional: Roll severity, but can not exceed severity of location. If severity not rolled, simply use severity by location.
Check penetration.
If fractional penetration, roll 1d10 versus fraction, check table for result.
If stuns exceed Life, you are KO'd.
If Wounds exceed Life, you are dying.

The differences between T2300 and 2300AD are as most said: better examples in the latter, more meat, less quality of the physical product (no covers). Setting is almost identical, and focus shifts to more militaristic.