A Time of War 2nd edition?

[Daryk]

*snip*
Every BT RPG system to date has relied upon integration with the board game to the degree that the core rules have suffered.
*snip*

Paul's not wrong, but this particular point is completely disproved by 3rd edition (and not entirely supported by any of the others).

[Dahmin_Toran]

Yeah, that's why I'm done with this.

Very true, but I have to lean with Victor on this. I think ATOW is very salvageable. Just need some streamlining.

[Daryk]

Streamlining/reorganization, yes.  A new edition?  I don't think so.

[Dahmin_Toran]

I wholeheartedly agree.

[victor_shaw]

I wholeheartedly agree.

I have said this before and I will say it again.
"Streamlining" is my trigger word these days.
Every company (Including CGL(Shadowrun 6th)) that starts with the goal of the "S" word has destroyed the game they are trying to fix.
It has become a catch word for dumbing down a game for the general market and/or changing rules or setting for a different demographic.
Now clarification, and simplification used in a surgical way to fix specific issues would be a better way to say it.

[Daryk]

I can see why that would be a trigger for you, but I don't see that level of danger until I hear the words "new edition".  The good news is other threads have stated Destiny will be "alongside" AToW, and that works for me.

[victor_shaw]

The tactical combat system doesn't really do that, though.
For actual mech on mech combat (or combat vehicles or whatever) you DO use the tabletop rules, you can just use your RPG skills once you convert them (though the fact you have to convert them is a bit annoying.  Having modifiers work the opposite way between TT and AToW can be a bit confusing to newer players), and your character's HP rather than the generic 6 hits and you're dead  Though I WOULD like to see better rules for how to use stuff like sensor operations (the TO rules for sensor checks don't really work well with skill levels)

I see Sensor Ops. as a battletech scouting mini-game.
The truth is that once engaged in the heat of combat Sensor Ops. is not all that useful and you rely more on use your gunnery and piloting skill to carry you through.
IMHO, Sensor Ops. is about being able to use your sensors to find the enemy while avoiding being found yourself, either by using it in a double blind system or just as a roll your GM makes you roll during the RPG session.

Sensor Ops. Works well with the double blind sensor rule from Tactical Operations.
Using the Ranges and Modifiers presented and the Sensor Ops. skill.

[Giorgio76]

I would happily pay for and buy multiple copies of a revised ATOW 2E, with all the errata, clarifications, and highly requested features/streamlining that would follow an open beta period for feedback. ATOW is a good system, but it can be made better and easier to use without making a complete new edition.

[Orin J.]

I'm only looking at this from the perspective of "Games i could teach new groups to", but AToW desperately needs to be edited with clarity in mind more than any rules need to be changed for me. Much of the book assumes you understand when the text is important and when it's just going over edge cases, and almost every table leans heavily on confusing abbreviations. the inset text blocks also tended to confuse anyone reading more than help.

I've had to explain how everything works a number of times the few groups i felt confident enough to get them to try the game not because the system is particularly prickly but because the descriptions are so friggin' pendantic they confuse people.
A short reminder in how to be concise and when to make it easy to tell where important rules are rather than wrapping everything in a huge text block would be useful for the editorial guy on the next version. Along with a few swipes over the head with a newspaper when they start explaining why they did it. The rules themselves aren't really the issue in my experience.

[victor_shaw]

As I stated over on the MW:D thread the only thing I found redeeming in the book was the new Mech-combat system.
I think it would work well with some modifications as a RPG based vehicle combat system for AToW.
It would also work well as an optional damage system for Alpha Strike, to handle the issues of lost flavor when mechs are converted to AS. 

[victor_shaw]

As to the out-of-print issues.
As I had said earlier according to CGL they are waiting for the results of MW:D before they proceed with AToW.
They wanted to get an idea of what people liked and didn't like before they try to tackle this one.
So we are looking at, at least 2020 before anything goes forward on AToW and wither it will just be a reprint with errata and minor changes or they take it further then that.
Sorry to say till then the PDF is all there is going to be.

[Giorgio76]

snip

Thanks for sharing that info; based on that it looks like MW Destiny is going to be my MW RPG for the foreseeable future (I am cool with that, as long as I can get people playing!). :)

[Dahmin_Toran]

Thanks for sharing that info; based on that it looks like MW Destiny is going to be my MW RPG for the foreseeable future (I am cool with that, as long as I can get people playing!). :)

Let's hope...my Battletech/Alpha Strike group is creating characters this weekend.

[Ursus Maior]

As I had said earlier according to CGL they are waiting for the results of MW:D before they proceed with AToW.

Hm, I explicitly remember them saying that MW:D was not supposed to supersede AToW, but offer a different option. That was during the KickStarter. Where again did you hear your version of the story?

[victor_shaw]

Hm, I explicitly remember them saying that MW:D was not supposed to supersede AToW, but offer a different option. That was during the KickStarter. Where again did you hear your version of the story?

Direct quote from CGL in response to my question about the future of AToW.

"So for now ATOW will wait until we have the MWD Beta out and feedback from the community on what was liked and what needs reworked. Once we have a good feel for MWD, we will revisit ATOW." Catalyst Game

[Giorgio76]

I will restrain from further comments about a revised or 2E of ATOW RPG until:

A-The MWD Beta test is over.

B-ATOW RPG is available as a POD option.

[Maelwys]

I will say one thing. Sometimes I do wish for additional detail in ATOW. Of course, now that I've researched this, I'm wondering if its a case for errata...

For instance, the Neural Lash has lower availability and legality ratings as the Neural Whip, the same damage, longer reach, uses less energy, and is 250 c-bills cheaper, and is 1/3rd of the weight. Both have "Do not add STR Damage" listed.

So why would you ever take the whip?

Of course, 3rd edition tells us that the whip has additional properties when used to torture someone. It also has an incapacitating attack which doesn't seem to have translated to ATOW (perhaps errata?)

So while I don't think ATOW needs too many more details, I can certainly understand why some people do.

[monbvol]

There are a number of items in the equipment section that I am reasonably certain something got left out, some stats were put in the wrong place a long time ago without being fixed, or are otherwise in serious need of revision to make useful.

[victor_shaw]

So I figured it would be time to start coming up with what we want to see from A Time of War 2nd edition in more then just general terms.
While I have done a lot of work on my schools conversion, I still see it as a stop-gap maneuver till such time as we get a AToW 2nd edition.

I have some ideas that I think could work for AToW 2nd edition.
1. The system needs to have its point totals trimmed down, 5,000 points is to much.
2. They need to abandon the battletech direct integration, and go for something more inline with the Mech-combat system from MW:D.
3. I think that attributes/skills/traits should be separated point pools like the old priority systems.
4. My feelings on the lack of depth in AToW characters are well know so I will avoid going over it again.

this is just some ideas I have.

[RifleMech]

If there were another edition I would hope that;

1) The individual/platoon combat be handled better. More troopers should mean more damage, not less.
2) That vehicles be 100% legal in TW.
3) Include Black Powder weapons. It's a tech gap that bugs me. We go from melee weapons and bows and arrows to Gatling guns. Where's the muskets?
4) Include ancient siege weapons. If we're going to have formations of archers and such, why not give them some support weapons like catapults, Hwacha, and cannons?

[Kit deSummersville]

4) Include ancient siege weapons. If we're going to have formations of archers and such, why not give them some support weapons like catapults, Hwacha, and cannons?

We have stats for both the Catapult and the Hwacha, as well as all sorts of cannons.

[RifleMech]

We have stats for both the Catapult and the Hwacha, as well as all sorts of cannons.

We do?  :o   Where? :-\ I can't find them.  :'(

[Daryk]

Take everything Kit says with a grain of salt (or two)…  ::)

[RifleMech]

Well...my popcorn could use more salt.

[Kit deSummersville]

We do?  :o   Where? :-\ I can't find them.  :'(

Catapult, Hwacha, bunch of cannons.

[victor_shaw]

Catapult, Hwacha, bunch of cannons.

I think he was referring to the ancient artillery pieces not the mechs.

[nckestrel]

I think he was referring to the ancient artillery pieces not the mechs.

Yeah, the response was a joke. Most of Kit's posts are.

[Kit deSummersville]

3) Include Black Powder weapons. It's a tech gap that bugs me. We go from melee weapons and bows and arrows to Gatling guns. Where's the muskets?

I believe the AToW Companion has rules for archaic weapons. If not there, it's somewhere.

Yeah, the response was a joke. Most of Kit's posts are.

Only 15-20% of them.

[RifleMech]

I believe the AToW Companion has rules for archaic weapons. If not there, it's somewhere.

Sorry. I'm not finding them. All I see are:

Archaic Sword
Zweihander Sword
Jousting Lance
Whip
Primitive Bow 
Vintage Pistol (Automatic)
Vintage Assault Rifle
Vintage Machine Gun
Vintage Minigun
Vintage Gatling Gun
Wire-Guided Missile Launcher

There are no earlier fire arms like Flintlocks and Muskets. There's also no siege weapons such as catapults,Hwatchas, volley guns, or cannons. I'm not counting Rifle Cannons as they're more modern. I'm also not counting the Make-shift Rifle. Even firearms as old as the Arquebus are quality production weapons that took skill to produce.

I don't know about stats for each and every type of firearm and siege weapon but a couple examples would be nice. Maybe rules to alter them by era or something? And I know it's weird to ask about Black Powder weapons and older siege weapons but if we can have platoons of archers why not platoons of Musketteers with volleyguns and cannon for support weapons?

[Paul]

Because theres maybe 5 people on the planet who want this? And youre 20% of that group.