"At the break of day on the 15th we were far outside the lines of our breast works, attacking; firing volley after volley into them as they huddled by their camp fires. Having taken them by surprise, with less than 16,000 men we waded through the snow and routed 60,000; capturing over 10,000 stands of small arms, six pieces of artillery, and a great many prisoners, many of them BAs. Gen. Buckner had opened the way for our escape, but instead of that he was ordered by our chief commanders, Floyd and Pillow, back to the reinforced prefab shelters we had left the day before.

"The Union had been receiving reinforcements every day, until now his forces numbered over four to one of our worn-out, frozen soldiers. Even the BAs, with their winter fur, were bitten by the cold. During the night of the 15th a council of war was held. The same was communicated to the Union general, who proposed surrender. General Forest was in the council and refused to surrender. He contended over a bullhorn that the way was open for us to march out and he moved his command, hovering close to the ground in their choppers, all along our lines of works. This was the first intimation we had that we were prisoners of war. So we had nothing to do but stand around our fires and talk of our experiences and narrow escapes during the four days of carnage."

--Letter sent by Milton Asbury Ryan, Captain, of Co. G, 8th MS Regiment (Tolson Guard), CSA, from prison on 2065-06-16

"I don't need your civil war
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor"

--Guns and Roses

Prelude

[Excerpted from the controversial textbook Postmodern North America, published in 2102 by Manifest Press]

The 21st century was the golden age of genetic engineering and, until the Second Civil War, a golden age for human beings. Europe led the innovation at first, but the lobbyists for the biotech firms in the United States managed to get the Supreme Court to declare biotech law to be a state, rather than a federal, matter. Some states were very restrictive on biotechnology, while others welcomed it. Even in restricted states many biotech firms managed to keep themselves legal by restricting themselves to animal and plant DNA, avoiding human genes entirely.

The first intelligent, bioengineered animal (BA) was developed in Texas in 2021, a talking chimpanzee by the name of "Billie", to the protest of religious groups. In the years that follow, different states took different stances on the status of intelligent animals, from treating them no different than under pre-2021 law to near-citizen status (tho no animal had the right to vote in any state), to the complicated rules and regulations of Maine which differentiated between bioengineered animals based on IQ, genetic profile, and whether the BA walked upright or not, though by 2040 nearly all BAs were anthropomorphic.

Generally, the Southern states treated BAs as simply that: Animals. The South had used BAs to re-build the South along idealized, agrarian (but high-tech) lines, and the concept of the Southern gentleman had come back into vogue. This process would have had more detractors if it had not happened so slowly, and if Southern racism, sexism, and homophobia had not virtually disappeared during the process, though it has been argued that such negative impulses were merely redirected at the BAs. Regardless, in the New South, the Southern Gentleman farm-owner, listing over 100 BA workers on his tax forms every year, was as likely to be a Afro-American lesbian as a white heterosexual male.

(It is important to note that while it is now common to call those New Southern farms "plantations", considering the parallels to the pre-Reconstruction South, at the time referring to farms which used BA labor as "plantations" was considered inflammatory, and indicated one had an agenda. The metaphor is still very apt, however.)

The laws of the North were varied. They generally gave BAs more autonomy and rights, but not as much as a full citizen, since doing so might require the federal government to get involved. In many states BAs were not allowed a college education, so as to ensure human beings held the more lucrative jobs. However, the autonomy accorded BAs in the North increasingly led to friction between the North and South, and more and more people were lobbying for BAs to be treated somewhat like Resident Aliens, with nearly all the rights of a human citizen excepting only the right to vote.

This issue split the Democratic party along geographic lines, and caused the Religious Right to leave the Republican party when a pro-BA rights candidate, Joseph Alverson, took the party nomination. His election to President set the stage for the South to rise -- and fall -- again.

Timeline

[Excerpted and paraphrased from the controversial textbook Postmodern North America -- several parts of the timeline have been skipped over]

November 2060 - Joseph Alverson is elected president by a narrow margin.

December 2060 - South Carolina, declaring the actions of the United States during and after the Civil War to be illegal and invalid, secedes from the Union. It is followed almost immediately by Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee, North Carolina and Texas: all are states heavily dependant on "work animals" for their economy. A new Confederate States of America is formed with Joseph O’Reilly, a West Point graduate and former U.S. Army officer, as President.

January 2060 - As Internet discussion on the topic of the legality of the new CSA rages, several states join the New Confederacy, often for their own, idiosyncratic reasons, relating to the increased freedom states are accorded in the Confederacy: New Mexico, Arizona, Hawaii, Nevada, Utah and Southern California. (The state of California splits during arguments about whether or not to join the Confederacy.) The CSA now has 17 states, while the US retains 33 states, not counting North California, which becomes part of Oregon by the end of the month.

In the meantime, Alverson is sworn in as President of the United States of America.

April 12, 2061 - At 4:30 a.m. Confederates under Gen. Peter Edwards open fire with three attack helicopters upon Fort Sumter in Charleston, South Carolina, in a deliberate re-creation of the shots that started the first Civil War. The Second Civil War begins.

Rumors on the Internet that the Confederates attacked with the battle cry of "Get out you Confederate money, boys" are quickly debunked. The closest thing to a battle cry was General Edwards' statement over an open comm channel, quoting Manilius: "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." (It is foolish to fear that which you cannot avoid.)

April 13, 2061 - Information warfare between the North and South renders most "smart" weapons, including satellite weapons, useless for the rest of the war.

April 15, 2061 - US Congress re-activates the draft.

April 16, 2061 - Robert R. Parkenson, son of a hero of the anti-terrorist brigades of the early 21st century, and a 25-year distinguished veteran of the United States Army and former Superintendent of West Point, is offered command of the Union Army. Parkenson declines.

April 19, 2061 - President Alverson issues a Proclamation of Blockade against Southern ports and Southern airspace. For the duration of the war the blockade limits the ability of the rural South to stay well supplied in its war against the industrialized North and its robot factories, though air traffic via "neutral" Mexico gives some relief.

April 20, 2061 - Robert R. Parkenson resigns his commission in the United States Army. "I cannot raise my hand against my birthplace, my home, my children." Parkenson then goes to Richmond, Virginia, is offered command of the military forces of the CSA, and accepts.

April 25, 2061 - Senator John Rhodes, an Afro-American Republican from Alabama, manages to pass a law which changes the Confederate battle flag slightly, "to repudiate its connection with slavery". (See Figure 10)

Sept 22, 2062 - Preliminary BA Citizenship Proclamation granting BAs near-citizen status (sparing only voting rights) issued by President Alverson.

Jan 1, 2063 - President Alverson issues the final BA Citizenship Proclamation "freeing" all BAs in territories held by Confederates and emphasizes the enlisting of BA soldiers in the Union Army.

In a stunning counter-move, declaring "this war is not about BAs, it is about the right of individual states to determine their destiny", President O’Reilly of the CSA declares that any BA that serves a five-year stint in the Confederate military forces without a dishonorable discharge will get full citizenship in the CSA, including voting rights. "But the cowards who do not fight will remain merely animals."

May 4-8, 2063 The Union Army under Gen. Hooker is decisively defeated by Parkenson's much smaller forces at the Battle of Chancellorsville in Virginia as a result of Parkenson's brilliant and daring tactics and the bravery of the Fighting Hounds, a mostly-canine all-BA division of fighter pilots. Hooker retreats.

July 7-10, 2063 - The tide of war turns against the South as the Confederates are defeated at the Second Battle of Gettysburg in Pennsylvania, when the North reveals several new kinds of BA "shock troopers" bioengineered from insects and scorpions. Confederate soldiers call the new BA troopers "buzzers" after the noise they make.

July 4, 2063 - The tide turns further against the Rebels as "buzzer" troops inflict nearly 90% casualties on Confederate troops in the West.

July 13-16, 2063 - Antidraft riots in New York City include arson and the murder of BAs by destitute humans.

Aug 10, 2063 - The US President meets with BA-rights lobbyist Brian Larkins, who pushes for full equality for Union BAs, but Alverson refuses to allow them the vote. "Unlike the rebels, ours do not have to fight. So they will not have the vote."

May 1, 2064 - The beginning of a massive, coordinated campaign involving all the Union Armies.

Aug 29, 2064 - Democrats nominate Fredrick T. Bush for president to run against Republican incumbent Joseph Alverson.

Sept 2, 2064 - Atlanta is put on alert, fearing that the nearby Union forces will attempt to capture it on the anniversary of Atlanta's capture in the first Civil War.

Sept 31, 2064 - The Rebel forces in Atlanta go off high alert status (back to "normal" wartime status) after it seems that the Union does not intend to attack.

Nov 1, 2064 - The Union army take Atlanta forces by surprise, capturing the city. "Atlanta is ours, and fairly won," General Ian Wilkerson tells Alverson via cell phone. The victory greatly helps President Alverson's bid for re-election.

November 2064 - Alverson is re-elected president, defeating Democrat George B. McClellan. Alverson carries all but three states with 55 percent of the popular vote. "I earnestly believe that the consequences of this day's work will be to the lasting advantage, if not the very salvation, of the country," Alverson tells supporters.

Some question the validity of the election on the grounds that the CSA states, which are officially still recognized as part of the Union, were not included in the count. These dissenting voices are soon hushed up under the auspices of certain wartime laws, including the Terrorist Act of 2019.

Dec 15-16, 2064 - General Ulysses Goffman's Rebel Army of 230,000 is crushed at Nashville by Federal forces, including "buzzer" troops under Gen. George H. Thomas. The Confederate Army of Tennessee ceases as an effective fighting force, though several units take to the bushes.

Feb 23, 2065 - A peace conference occurs as President Alverson meets with Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens at an undisclosed location in Virginia, but the meeting ends in failure - the war will continue.

March 25, 2065 - The last offensive for Parkenson's Army of Northern Virginia begins with an attack on the center of Union forces at Petersburg. Four hours later the attack is broken.

April 2, 2065 - Despite the Rebel forces on high alert, Union forces begin a general advance and break through Rebel lines at Petersburg. Confederate Gen. Ambrose Reynolds is killed, but not before Reynolds evacuates Petersburg. The Confederate Capital, Richmond, is evacuated. Fires and looting break out. The next day, Union troops enter and raise the Stars and Stripes.

April 4, 2065 - Gen. Robert E. Parkenson, in a surprising move, orders all Confederate forces disbanded, and to fight a wholesale guerilla war against the North. "After four years of arduous service marked by unsurpassed courage and fortitude the Army of Northern Virginia will not at this time be compelled to yield to overwhelming numbers and resources," Parkenson tells his troops. "Our fighting spirit lives on."

General Parkenson also declares all BA troopers to be full citizens of the Confederacy. "With your aid, victory is in our grasp. We made you tougher and stronger than mortal men. The United States will have another Vietnam on their hands, and this time the toll will be even greater."

The Premise

"Freedom implies responsibility." PCs generally take the part of Confederate BA Troopers. Part man, part animal, fighting a difficult and dirty guerilla war, they have every reason to dodge responsibility for their actions: Instinct, their status as second-class citizens, the horrors of war, and the fact they are, in a sense, made rather than born. Vietnam meets the First Civil War, and terrible, terrible things are going on out there. Are you willing to take responsibility for what you do as a free individual? The idea here is to illuminate human ethics through an inhuman, but sympathetic, character.

Rise Again is designed to be a situation where the characters are struggling to uphold a system of ethics in a difficult situation. That is, one is not free until one spends time thinking and acting according to one's ethics, rather than relying on knee-jerk reactions, which are as much a prison and anything made of stone and iron. The ethical issues that the game is intended to invoke include but are not limited to:

* racism
* sexism
* jingoism
* homophobia (heterosexism)
* animal rights (including the issue of what it means to be human)
* autonomy and self-determination (both individually and in government)
* the interface between ethics and politics
* scientific ethics (progress and technology)
* what it means to be a man-created intelligence (what happens when we "play God")
* honor (especially in the face of war)
* basic respect for others ("gentility")
* the ethics of war (Geneva accords)
* the way civil war tears up families (the oft-quoted "brother vs. bother" aspect of things)

Yes, these are controversial, hot-button issues, and I'm aware of this, and sensitive to this. Slavery was and is an unmitigated evil. But that's what makes the situation of the New South, which is more morally grey than the Old South, interesting. It is expected that the players will handle these issues in a mature and sensitive fashion.

Character Creation

1. Every character has five basic Traits, and 45 points to distribute between them. No Trait may be higher than 19 or lower than 1. For each Trait, one should pick an adjective, noun, or phrase (called a Descriptor) that relates to specifically what one would think of when considering the character and that Trait. It may be an explanation of what that Trait is for that character, or the way the character is when succeeding in a check based on that Trait, or just a personality quirk associated with that Trait. The Traits (and sample Descriptors) are:

LORE: This represents the character's knowledge, education, and experience. It can represent anything from a formal college education to "the school of hard knocks". Sample Descriptors include: "West Point Graduate" "Street Smart" "Well-Read" "Old Enough to Know Better"

INSIGHT: This is the character's ability to acquire and process information, whether on a conscious or unconscious level. It's perception, mental quickness, and intelligence all rolled into one. Sample Descriptors include: "Spotting Ambushes" "Fast-Thinking" "Intuition"

GUTS: This is the character's ability to deal with horrible, disturbing things, and the ability to remain calm while performing a nasty task under stress, particularly during combat. A Guts check is used to determine if the character can shoot someone in combat: If the character is calm, then everything else follows. It is also rolled when, say, the character encounters horribly mutilated bodies, to make sure the character can remain calm. In cases such as those, on a failed Guts check, the character will usually attempt to remove himself from the situation that caused the Guts check. Descriptors can for Guts can include how one deals with stress, and sample Descriptors for Guts include: "Steely" "Business-Like" "Gallows Humor"

MEAT: This relates to everything purely physical about the character, mainly the ability to take damage and the character's raw, physical strength. Generally, the former is more important than the latter, see the Combat section below. Sample Meat Descriptors include: "Beefy" "High Pain Threshold" "Oxlike" "Wiry" "Battle-Scarred"

RESPONSIBILITY: This is arguably the most important Trait. Every character should have an ethical system, even if it's something as sketchy as "don't screw over your friends". The Responsibility Trait represents the ability to stick to one's guns, ethically speaking, under pressure, and not compromise. During the course of the game, one's Responsibility Trait will go up or down depending on the character's actions, though it can never go above 19 or below 1. Responsibility is especially important in preventing a Lapse (see below). Descriptors for Responsibility usually relate to the most important principles that the character holds dear, such as: "Loyalty" "Honor" "Patriotism" "Egalitarianism"

2. Pick a species package. This will have a small effect on your Traits, and perhaps give you a bonus or penalty in certain situations. Again, no Trait may be modified above 19 or below 1. Sample species packages follow.

HUMAN
No changes to Traits, no special bonuses or penalties. Optionally, the GM may allow a human character to add or subtract 1 from a single Trait.

DAWG
Technically, a dawg is not 100% canine, being a mix of canine and primate genes to create an upright, humanoid, canine entity. Dawgs are prized for their loyalty and for their ability to co-ordinate within a group due to their pack mentality. Dawgs are just as varied as the canines they are engineered from.

Dawgs may add or subtract 1 to their Responsibility, depending on the player's preference. Their sense of loyalty can make an individual more responsible, or it can blind them to the excesses of their leaders. Dawgs also get a +2 bonus to any check involving their sense of smell. (Usually this is an Insight check.)

KAT
Like a dawg, a kat is a blend of feline and primate genes, creating an humanoid feline. Kats are prized for their ability to operate alone with little supervision, and, in military circles, for their excellence as commandos.

Kats subtract 1 from Responsibility and add 1 to Insight. (Anyone who has owned a cat should understand why.) Kats also gain a +2 bonus to any check involving stealth.

HAWK
The term "hawk" is generally applied to all avian BAs, many of which do not contain any hawk DNA at all. Most hawks are a complicated combination of avian, reptile, and primate DNA resulting in a humanoid, feather-covered creature with a bird-like head and no wings. Hawks are prized as pilots, since they have an instinctive grasp of three-dimensional space.

The scientists who created the various types of Hawks tried real hard to "engineer out" hollow bones, but were only somewhat successful. All Hawks should reduce their Meat by 1. Any check relating to piloting a flying vehicle (including aerial combat and bombing runs) by a hawk has a +5 bonus.

RILLA
The word "Rilla" was originally the name given by a particular Japanese company to a gorilla-based BA "model" intended for heavy lifting, but like "cola" it became a general term for any primate-based BA, even the spider-monkey based scouts employed by the CSA. Rillas are notable in that their genetic modifications are the least radical, consisting only of a boost to intelligence and a change to the vocal cords allowing speech. It is rumored that unlike most BAs, Rillas are not sterile at birth, but are sterilized after they are grown; every corporation that produces Rillas claims the rumor is false.

All Rillas have a -1 to Insight. They are deliberately designed not to be too smart. Every Rilla has a +1 to Guts or Meat, player's choice. Rillas also get a +5 bonus to any check involving climbing or swinging from an object, and can manipulate things with their feet just as well as they do with their hands, even if that wasn't true for the original animal.

3. After your Traits have been appropriately modified by species, one must calculate a sixth Trait: Instinct.

INSTINCT: Instinct is equal to 20 minus the character's Responsibility. This is always the case: For every point Responsibility goes up, Instinct goes down, and vice-versa. This represents how in touch the character is with their basest, most animal nature, the way the character behaves when all civilization is thrown out the window. It is best thought of as an abbreviation for "Killer Instinct". Any successful Instinct check can be used as a bonus to any Guts check, through the Rule of Currency (see below): If you're in touch with your animal nature, it's easier to do the sort of brutal things war requires of you, or dismiss such brutality as unimportant. The Descriptors for Instinct usually indicate the way the character is when "out of control", such as: "Cold" "Wild and Screaming" "Feral" "Savage"

Also, when using the Rule of Currency to gain a bonus to a Guts roll, after the die has been rolled and the Instinct check is a success, the player has the option of doubling the bonus gained to the Guts check, at the risk of a Lapse (see Lapses, below).

Example of Character: Joe decides he is going to play a Dawg named Rover. He decides Dawg is an extreme CSA patriot who believes that the most noble thing one can do is sacrifice himself for his country. He used to work on a farm, but joined the army as soon as war broke out. Years of hard battle have not dampened his enthusiasm. Joe decides Rover's patriotism often blinds him to larger issues, serving as an excuse for irresponsible behavior, and so he decides to subtract 1 from his Responsibility. After assigning points to his Traits and subtracting 1 from his Responsibility (as per his species package), Joe calculates Rover's Instinct based on his Responsibility and picks Descriptors for all his traits. The resulting character looks like this:

[code]Rover -- Quote: "I'll be damned if the Yankees are going to get past me."
LORE: 5 "simple country wisdom"
INSIGHT: 10 "intuition"
GUTS: 10 "grim determination"
MEAT: 12 "energetic"
RESPONSIBILITY: 7 "patriotism"
INSTINCT: 13 "angry"
+2 to any check involving smell [/code]

Basic Mechanic

When the character wants to do something that the GM feels requires a roll, the player rolls a d20, seeking to roll equal to or under the appropriate Trait, such as Guts in order to hit with a gun. This is called a "check".

When the roll is successful (i.e. is under or equal to the Trait), if a degree of success is needed (such as when invoking the Rule of Currency, see below, or for descriptive purposes), the number rolled is the degree of success.

If the player rolls a number exactly equal to the Trait in question, it's considered a critical success: The player should be allowed to describe a spectacular success on their character's part. For the purposes of the Rule of Currency, a critical success has a degree of success of 20, which is normally not possible.

Bonuses or penalties may be applied to a check, to represent an unusually easy or difficult task, or as a result of the Rule of Currency (see below). They usually vary no more than 5 in either direction, though extremely difficult tasks might have a penalty as high as -10. A bonus is a temporary increase to the Trait in question for the purposes of that one check only, and a penalty is a decrease in the Trait for that one check only.

The GM should also keep the character's Descriptors in mind when calling for checks. An action that is particularly in-line with the character's Descriptors (even if they're associated with a different Trait than the one being used in the check, though those Descriptors should count less) should be worth at least a +1 bonus, and possibly more, depending on appropriateness and how much the GM wants to emphasize Descriptors. Similarly, actions that go against the character's Descriptors may incur a penalty.

No bonus or penalty, no matter how it is derived, may modify a Trait below 1 or above 19. There is always a chance of success or failure.

Example: Joe tells the GM he's going to have Rover flip over the crumbling gravestone of a Union soldier from the first American Civil War. The GM rules this is a fairly difficult task, as the stone is heavy, albeit crumbling, so there is a -5 penalty to Rover's Meat for the purposes of this check, meaning Rover's Meat is effectively 7 for this roll. Joe rolls a 6, which is not quite a critical success, but successful enough to flip over the gravestone in the GM's opinion.

The Rule of Currency

There are many cases where the success of one check affects the success of another. For example, a character may make an Insight check to find the best location to set up a sniper's nest, giving that character a bonus to the Guts check to shoot the enemy commander when he strolls by. Also, the chain can continue, and can include penalties as well as bonus: The result of the Guts check to shoot the enemy commander causes a penalty to the Meat check the commander makes to survive the shot.

The way it works is this: Take the degree of success of the original roll, divide by 4 (round up), and apply that number as a bonus or penalty, as appropriate, to the next roll. Remember that no bonus or penalty can modify a Trait above 19 or below 1.

If the first check is a failure, the penalty or bonus to the next roll (usually a penalty, but it's the GM's call) through the Rule of Currency is slightly more complicated to calculate: Subtract the number rolled from 21, and divide the resulting number by 4, rounding up.

No more than one bonus or penalty, from one previous check, may be applied to a check due to the Rule of Currency. It should be possible to set up the different checks in a clear "chain" as to what check affects what check, which in turn affect another check.

The situations where one check applies to another check using the Rule of Currency is determined by the GM. The GM is encouraged to be flexible on this issue and to listen to player input regarding the Rule of Currency.

Note that if the Rule of Currency has not yet been invoked to give a bonus or penalty to a Guts check, the player can always choose to check Instinct before checking Guts and apply the Rule of Currency, though a failed Instinct check will result in a penalty to the Guts check.

Example: Rover is moving through the woods when the rounds the corner on the trail he's following and finds himself face-to-face with a Union soldier. The GM tells Joe to make a Guts check to draw his sidearm and fire. Joe opts to roll his Instinct beforehand and invoke the Rule of Currency. Joe rolls a 14, barely missing his Instinct check, resulting in a penalty of (21 - 14)/4 = 2 (rounded up). So, for the purposes of this roll, Rover's Guts are 8. Joe rolls an 8 on 1d20 -- critical success! Joe describes shooting the Union soldier in the head. Invoking the Rule of Currency (see also the Combat section below), the GM penalizes the Union soldier's Meat roll to remain standing by 5 (20/4, since it was a critical success). The soldier normally has a Meat of 10, modified to 5 by the Rule of Currency. The GM rolls a 6 for the soldier: He falls Down.

Lapses

Under stress, it is difficult to maintain one's sense of self, to remember to pause and think about the moral implications of one's actions. It is much easier to act on instinct.

If there is a stressful situation going on but the player has the character continue to act in a way that is consistent with the character's ethical system, where the character is continuing to take responsibility for his actions, the GM may call for a Responsibility check, especially when there is an obvious advantage to an ethical compromise. If the check succeeds, the character acts as the player specified. If the check fails, the character suffers a Lapse.

When suffering a moral Lapse, the player loses control of the character and takes the easy way out. The character kills a prisoner rather than taking the prisoner with him, fires at civilians, or whatever seems appropriate at the time. Usually the most brutal or ruthless action, in context, is taken. All of the players of the game except the player whose character is experiencing the Lapse, plus the GM, vote on what the character would do, based on the situation and the character's background. The GM breaks ties, but the player who normally runs the character has no say whatsoever.

After making any rolls called for by whatever action that takes place during the character's brief Lapse of judgment, the player who normally controls the character makes another Responsibility check. If it succeed, the character realizes that he's suffered a Lapse, and reacts to this fact as the player feels appropriate. If the check fails, the character's Responsibility is permanently reduced by 1 (and the character's Instinct goes up); whether the characer notices or not is up to the player.

Also, if the player opts to have the character engage in some heinous act like firing on civilians or rape, the GM has the right to demand an immediate Responsibility check, with a penalty appropriate to the seriousness of the action. Again, the GM is encouraged, but not required, to take player input on this matter. If the Responsibility check is successful, there is no further effect: The player may rationalize the act as he thinks appropriate for the character. If the Responsibility check is a failure, then the character's Instinct is permanently increased by 1 (and his Responsibility drops).

Similarly, a particularly responsible and ethical act, such as risking one's life to save a child, may cause the GM to call for a Responsibility check. Once again, the GM is encouraged to take player input on these matters. If the check succeeds, the character's Responsibility goes up by 1 permanently (and his Instinct drops). If the check fails, there is no further effect: Sometimes one acts heroic reflexively, and is unchanged by the experience.

In addition, after rolling Instinct to gain a bonus to a Guts check through the Rule of Currency, after the Instinct roll is made the player has the option of doubling the bonus to the Guts check he is normally entitled to. However, if this option is exercised, after the Guts check is made (and any results of that check adjudicated, such as in battle), the player must immediately make a Responsibility check for the character or suffer a Lapse: the character has dipped too far into the well of his own brutality, and must suffer the consequences.

The player can opt, at any time a Responsibility check is called for, to not roll, automatically failing. This is the equivalent, for all purposes, to rolling a 20 on the die. Some people choose to embrace their damnation.

No matter what happens, Responsibility can not go below 1 or above 19, and the same goes for Instinct. No one is perfect, and no one is beyond saving. (A character with a Responsibility of 1 will find a way to destroy themselves eventually anyway.)

Combat, Damage, and Healing

Combat is obviously of major importance to "Rise Again". However, it is supposed to mainly be a backdrop for the moral decisions that the characters are making, so the system is fairly abstract.

At the start of any given battle, every character should make a Insight check, perhaps with a bonus from a previous check of some sort through the Rule of Currency (such as when the characters have set up an ambush) for initiative. The characters act in order, starting with successful checks with the highest degree of success and going down, and moving on to the failed Insight checks in order from highest number rolled to lowest. Use Insight to break ties, or roll off. Or, optionally, the GM could have each player roll 1d20 and add their Insight and any bonuses for the Rule of Currency, having characters act in order from highest total to lowest total.

The GM can have everyone roll initiative every "round" of combat, or just use the same order every round for the entire battle. The latter is suggested for speed and ease of play.

To hit someone, whether with a fist or with a missile, requires a Guts check. The GM may access appropriate penalties for range, targeting computers, and so on, if the GM and players are interested in that sort of thing. Like any Guts check, if the Rule of Currency has not yet come into play, the player has the option of rolling Instinct first to get a bonus (or, in the case of failure, a penalty) to the Guts check.

The person hit immediately makes a Meat check, with a penalty determined through the Rule of Currency, based on the Guts check to hit. There is also an additional penalty based on the weapon:

[code]Fists 0
Small Sidearm (pistol) -1
Large Sidearm (rifle) -2
Heavy Weapon (grenade) -3 and up[/code]

If the character fails the Meat check, they are Down. The character falls and is out of the combat. If the character makes the Meat check, they are Tagged. Players should keep track of how many times they are Tagged. For every time the character is Tagged beyond the first, this is an additional -1 penalty to any subsequent Meat check, in addition to whatever other penalties exist, until they go Down.

After the combat, if a character is Down, they should make a Meat check, with a -1 penalty for every time they were Tagged beyond the first, as usual. If the check fails, the character is dead. If the check succeeds, the character must make a second Meat check, again with penalties for being Tagged. If that second check succeeds, the character wakes up, and the number of times they are considered to have been Tagged goes up by 1. If the second Meat check fails, the character permanently loses 1 Meat. The character must then make another Meat check in order to wake up, as above, with the possibility of losing more Meat. If the character's Meat drops to 0, the character dies.

Optional Rule: In some cases, for the purposes of the system above, the GM may consider a character that has "woken up" has merely stabilized, and does not actually wake up, per se, remaining unconscious until someone makes an effort to wake them, or they receive more adequate medical care. Go with what seems more dramatic and/or convenient, or what causes the most moral problems for the other PCs.

After battle, if the character was Tagged but did not go Down, once the character has a chance to pause and rest for a moment, the GM should call for a Meat check, with appropriate penalties for being Tagged. If the check succeeds, the number of times the character is considered to have been Tagged goes down by 1, which may mean the character is no longer Tagged. If the check fails, the wounds catch up to the character, and the character goes Down -- see above.

Regardless, a character who is Tagged or Down can receive first aid. A successful Lore check for first aid can reduce the number of times the character is considered to be Tagged by 1, or can be used with the Rule of Currency to give a bonus to a Meat check the character is about take, especially in the case of a Down character that is receiving first aid and trying to wake up. First aid may be attempted on a given character once per battle and once after the battle (and only if the character was Tagged at least once during the battle); subsequent first aid attempts, while perhaps comforting to the victim, have no effect, and the character may carry their Tagged status into a new battle. After first aid has been exhausted, only proper medical care can help the character.

When the character receives what the GM considers to be a proper amount of medical care and/or rest, he can make a Meat check, with appropriate penalties for being Tagged and appropriate bonuses for the quality of the care. If the check succeeds, the character is no longer Tagged. If the check fails, the number of times the character is considered to be Tagged is reduced by 1, which may heal the character completely. If not healed completely, after an appropriate amount of time under medical care passes, the character gets another Meat check as above.

I like it. Much more clean.

Couple very small comments:

I'd lose most of the references to Union, and instead go with something more "modern" like Federal. Some die hard "good ole boy" might still use Union, but I think the northerners and the confederate brass would officially use Federal. I do suspect, however, that the south, being the south, would probably leap at the opportunity to ressurect the CSA.

I'd also cleans out the last references to things like "volleys" and "breast works" neither of which have any real place in modern warfare.

I think you missed one edit...at least the name of the democratic candidate seems to have changed names in mid election.

I'd make the attribute names much more gritty and "futuristic". Meat is great. Lore is too...elfy. "Grey Matter" is the best I can come up with at the moment, but theres probably something better than that.

I like the resolution system. Give some consideration to borrowing from Pendragon and allowing the number to be modified above 20. If you are unfamiliar with Pendragon, it also uses a roll d20 under the score technique with matching the scores being criticals. The idea is to roll as high as possible without going over, and scores above 20 are treated as 20 with the difference added to the die roll...so a d20 vs. 23 becomes d20+3 vs. 20.

I look forward to seeing more.

xiombarg wrote:
DAWG
Technically, a dawg is not 100% canine, being a mix of canine and primate genes to create an upright, humanoid, canine entity. Dawgs are prized for their loyalty and for their ability to co-ordinate within a group due to their pack mentality. Dawgs are just as varied as the canines they are engineered from.

It is rumored that unlike most BAs, Rillas are not sterile at birth, but are sterilized after they are grown; every corporation that produces Rillas claims the rumor is false.

When the roll is successful (i.e. is under or equal to the Trait), if a degree of success is needed (such as when invoking the Rule of Currency, see below, or for descriptive purposes), the number rolled is the degree of success.

When suffering a moral Lapse, the player loses control of the character and takes the easy way out. The character kills a prisoner rather than taking the prisoner with him, fires at civilians, or whatever seems appropriate at the time. Usually the most brutal or ruthless action, in context, is taken. All of the players of the game except the player whose character is experiencing the Lapse, plus the GM, vote on what the character would do, based on the situation and the character's background. The GM breaks ties, but the player who normally runs the character has no say whatsoever.

The player can opt, at any time a Responsibility check is called for, to not roll, automatically failing. This is the equivalent, for all purposes, to rolling a 20 on the die. Some people choose to embrace their damnation.

After the combat, if a character is Down, they should make a Meat check, with a -1 penalty for every time they were Tagged beyond the first, as usual. If the check fails, the character is dead. If the check succeeds, the character must make a second Meat check, again with penalties for being Tagged. If that second check succeeds, the character wakes up, and the number of times they are considered to have been Tagged goes up by 1

After battle, if the character was Tagged but did not go Down, once the character has a chance to pause and rest for a moment, the GM should call for a Meat check, with appropriate penalties for being Tagged. If the check succeeds, the number of times the character is considered to have been Tagged goes down by 1, which may mean the character is no longer Tagged. If the check fails, the wounds catch up to the character, and the character goes Down -- see above.

Hey Kirt,

With this rewrite, it just got way more interesting to me. The one episode of Space, Above & Beyond that I've seen has an artificial human in the position of having to turn off the life support power to other artificial humans in suspended animation, among which is a woman he's just learned is genetically his sister, illicitly, because the records aren't public. It was fantastic television. I think they moved the program from that timeslot though, because I never saw another episode. The idea of being an artificial creature, alone really, without true family, among those who really do have family, amid situation so pervaded by family-motivated decisionmaking, is the compelling aspect of your setting to me.

I think I agree with Ralph about the attribute names though. Are BA's created as adults, or semi-adults, and loaded with artificial knowledge somehow? If so, consider "Glaze" as a replacement for "Lore," the substance basted onto the meat, and maybe "Seek" as a replacement for "Insight."

Paul

Okay, I'm going to reply to two posts at once so I'm not posting over and over again, like I did on the last thread. ;-)

Ring Kichard wrote: It occurs to me that these animals (not just Dawgs, but all the BAs) should have a brand as well as a species. I don't know if brand would have a mechanical effect, but it would be an interesting piece of background. Different brands might have different reputations, leading to snobbery and prejudice even within the ranks of a single "species" of BA (e.g. Sears(tm) brand Dawgs get looked down upon by Purebreedz(R) who are rumored to have been made on the sly with Human DNA)

It is rumored that unlike most BAs, Rillas are not sterile at birth, but are sterilized after they are grown; every corporation that produces Rillas claims the rumor is false.

I suppose we could ask them....

There is a problem with the skills as written, and while it doesn't break the system, it is unfortunate. Consider Rover with his Lore 5. He's got a 1/4 chance of a successful lore check, and furthermore he has a 1/20 chance of stellar success. So far, so good. But consider what happens if he tries a task with a difficulty penalty of -5, or if he'd only had a skill of 1 (shudder): he would not be able to gain a normal success, only a critical one. Not a tremendous thing, but one worth noting.

Suppose you're playing with a group of players that are more than happy to hose their characters for the sake of the story being told. A player might very well have something interesting to say about his character's lapse, and should probably be allowed to vote, at the least.

I can, however, understand the motivation behind separating the character from his or her player to show the total divorce of the character from their normal rational process.

Combat, btw, looks mighty lethal. I know it's a war, but lordly do the characters have a high chance of death. (I don't know if I should shiver or giggle)

If that second check succeeds, the character wakes up, and the number of times they are considered to have been Tagged goes up by 1

Emphasis mine. Is that a typo?

As far as the whole system goes, it's fairly straightforward and seems very playable. People are going to ask, so I might as well be the first, how do you (do you at all) see this fitting into the GNS model?

I can't wait to play a Dawg of War.

Paul Czege wrote: With this rewrite, it just got way more interesting to me. The one episode of Space, Above & Beyond that I've seen has an artificial human in the position of having to turn off the life support power to other artificial humans in suspended animation, among which is a woman he's just learned is genetically his sister, illicitly, because the records aren't public. It was fantastic television. I think they moved the program from that timeslot though, because I never saw another episode. The idea of being an artificial creature, alone really, without true family, among those who really do have family, amid situation so pervaded by family-motivated decisionmaking, is the compelling aspect of your setting to me.

I think I agree with Ralph about the attribute names though. Are BA's created as adults, or semi-adults, and loaded with artificial knowledge somehow? If so, consider "Glaze" as a replacement for "Lore," the substance basted onto the meat, and maybe "Seek" as a replacement for "Insight."

I have no idea how I missed Valamir's post.

Valamir wrote: I like it. Much more clean.

I'd lose most of the references to Union, and instead go with something more "modern" like Federal. Some die hard "good ole boy" might still use Union, but I think the northerners and the confederate brass would officially use Federal. I do suspect, however, that the south, being the south, would probably leap at the opportunity to ressurect the CSA.

I'd also cleans out the last references to things like "volleys" and "breast works" neither of which have any real place in modern warfare.

I think you missed one edit...at least the name of the democratic candidate seems to have changed names in mid election.

I'd make the attribute names much more gritty and "futuristic". Meat is great. Lore is too...elfy. "Grey Matter" is the best I can come up with at the moment, but theres probably something better than that.

I like the resolution system. Give some consideration to borrowing from Pendragon and allowing the number to be modified above 20. If you are unfamiliar with Pendragon, it also uses a roll d20 under the score technique with matching the scores being criticals. The idea is to roll as high as possible without going over, and scores above 20 are treated as 20 with the difference added to the die roll...so a d20 vs. 23 becomes d20+3 vs. 20.

I look forward to seeing more.

xiombarg wrote: I have a passing familiarity with Pendragon and I considered that. But if you have a 20 in something it's not possible to fail, right? That bothers me.

The thing about the skill of one, though, is that you'll get it roughly 1/20 of the time. Seems kinda frequent if the rationalization is that it's a bloody miracle. I'm inclined, though, just to ignore it unless a clever solution pops up.

I'm kinda torn on the 20+ question.

On the one hand, I support open endedness, and don't really like hard mechanical limits imposed by rules.

On the other hand, I support the idea that you could succeed or fail at anything any given attempt (It's the simulationist in me).

I guess the deciding factor for me would be the system’s overall similarity to Pendragon. I know I’d feel silly if I created a system and it had all been done before.

And on a final note, where in the world am I going to find gamers in Maine to play this?

(If this is a bit rambly, I blame fatigue)

I must say it does look interesting. I agree in general with the other commentators.

In addition I don' recall this but maybe some units are Sponsored like

"Dr. Phipper's Prunecola's Hounds of War"

Essentially you have southern corporations paying for soldiers to wear certian brand imagery--so when they are succusful it helps sell their product--which would fit in with the Brands, and Corporate culture of slavery as well.

Sidhain wrote: Essentially you have southern corporations paying for soldiers to wear certian brand imagery--so when they are succusful it helps sell their product--which would fit in with the Brands, and Corporate culture of slavery as well.

Ring Kichard wrote: And on a final note, where in the world am I going to find gamers in Maine to play this?

What do people think of "Savvy" instead of "Lore"? It means what I want: personal knowledge, and it has a vaguly military feel to it (to me).

In consideration, I'm still having trouble thinking of a better term than "Insight". Insight is supposed to cover native intelligence, the ability to process information, mental quickness, perception, and intuition. Anything learned is Lore (or Savvy), but anything else mental is Insight.

I considered "Head" for "Insight" (and for Lore), but the dirty puns that are possible there kinda bother me... What do people think of "Judgement" or "Discernment" instead of "Insight"? I also considered "Ken" or "Kenning", but that's sort of "elfy" as well. I also considered "Eyes" instead of "Insight" to go with "Meat", but I don't think it covers everything I mean.

I'm mostly just brainstorming here. Opinions?

Savvy I like.

How about Instinct for Insight. Seems to fit the animal motif and work for humans as well.

Ingenuity might work...but that has a distinctly northern spin.

Valamir wrote: How about Instinct for Insight. Seems to fit the animal motif and work for humans as well.

Ingenuity might work...but that has a distinctly northern spin.

How about Smarts? Or Sense?

Either one makes a nice alliterative pair with "Savvy." Of the two, I like "sense" better as it directly implies both perception (ability to sense things) and judgment (ability to choose the sensible option).

- Walt

wfreitag wrote: Either one makes a nice alliterative pair with "Savvy." Of the two, I like "sense" better as it directly implies both perception (ability to sense things) and judgment (ability to choose the sensible option).

xiombarg wrote:

I'd also cleans out the last references to things like "volleys" and "breast works" neither of which have any real place in modern warfare.

Any suggestions as to what to replace them with?

BTW, did you notice the reference to an infowar I threw in there as an excuse not to deal with certain things? ;-) I also think it's realistic, as the CSA military is really just the US military in rebellion, so both sides have the access codes to the satellite weapons, which invites burnout.

Mike Holmes wrote: Warning, what follows are the rambling ravings of a blatant Simulationist grognard.

First, who gets the federal armed forces? One huge difference between the Civil War of the ninteenth century and yours is that the vast majority of forces at that time were militia, and not professionally trained.

Fortunately, you've given control of both Texas and California to the South. That goes a long way to explaining any equipment parity as these states are both overrun with military facilities. Still, I give the North the advantage in equipment before all is said and done. Possibly most important, every ship goes to the North.

This is very important, because of the likely nature of the war. First, land invasion would be extremely dificult if not impossible, not to mention pointless. This war would not be conducted as wars in the past have been. Imagine trying to take control of the landscape from a populace as heaviliy armed as the US public is. Also consider the bad publicity; much worse than the Civil War, many more brothers would be shooting at brothers today. Again, perhaps there is a paradigm shift that I'm unaware of, but without one I do not see a traditional land battle occuring at all.

Instead I see battles with the intent of eliminating the heads of state from each side. In order to restore power in an area, the mantle of authority would have to be retaken. This means lots of surgical activity. Which requires a few opening moves.

The most important would be air superiority. Air assets being mobile as they are would also be amongst the least retained assets of a rebeling government. They would simply be flown north upon news of an impending rebellion. Along with whatever they could carry. Again, the South captures some stuff, but superiority seems unlikely. And, as stated previously, the naval support for any operations would remain almost entirely in the hands of the North.

Once the federal government has re-established air-superiority, the South is forced to fight that guerilla fight. If, somehow, the South were to win then the situation would be reversed. In any case, with modern technology you are unlikely to see anything like the warfare of the ninteenth century with forces slowly pushing around the country. Even without the consideration of air power, the presence of good roads everywhere and the mobility of armed forces (every militiaman raised has a car) make it so that whatever actions taken would occur suddenly.

Anyhow, this is where it seems very unlikely to me. Either the populace submits when the North gets control of the centers of power in the South or the North realizes the futility and either gives up early, or never even attacks. Worse, given the relatively stable democracy of the US (which still has some states rights), which would adapt to make such unrest very unlikely, I don't see a rebellion actually occuring.

So you need to really drive home the issues that divide the country, and why they end up being so regional (why don't they use BAs in the plains states? why do they need them at all?). And then you need to have a coherent idea of how the war goes. Consider that all my above ideas are based on current technology, not technology sixty years from now. Which might just make war as we know it completely obsolete.

Given your assumed level of Genetic Manipulation, I'd think that bio-weapons at the very least would be more effective than your "buzzers" sound. And who knows what else might be developed? If you're going to go with such a setting with any seriousness at all, you need to give some reall consideration to what has happened in the interim technology-wise.

xiombarg wrote:

Mike Holmes wrote: Warning, what follows are the rambling ravings of a blatant Simulationist grognard.

Well, then, my first response is the game isn't really simulationist.

Well, would the (anti-)globalization strangeness that Bill White suggests be enough of a paradigm shift to cause more US military to go renegade? I was seriously considering slipping that into the third draft.

Okay, noted. But you don't think a couple of futile land attacks would happen? Remember, even generals are not 100% rational. I mention this because I don't want to lose my flavor text. ;-)

Also, would New Hampshire joining the side of the CSA, as Ring Kichard suggests, change anything? Particularly if I stuck a major biotech firm there, with all sorts of juicy defense contracts?

Okay, so far as I can see this is mosly an argument for the war to be shorter, going to guerilla war sooner. I can certainly support compressing the timeline a bit.

Also, I'm tempted to hand-wave this issue. Several "the USA breaks up" backgrounds in RPGs and fiction, both in future histories and alternate histories, just assume tensions get to a certian point and then things snap, since the authors are more interested in dealing with the logical consequences of what happens after.

As for "why use BAs", my answer is: Cheap labor. You don't even have to go out of the country to get it! I see BAs being viewed in a lot of places as a sort of piece of farm equipment.

Also, maybe they don't use BAs in the Midwest. After all, they're on the side of the North.

As for your example of future warfare, the Datawar is supposed to take a lot of that out (at least as hardtech goes),

plus it is an assumption of the background that while genetic engineering has gotten very sophisticated, they still can't engineer behavior, or else the BAs would have no free will.

As for, say, "Hyper-Anthrax", there is the idea is that it's tougher to engineer diseases that effect multiple species (especially when those species may be designed to be disease-resistant), and on top of which: Do you want to release a disease in a territory you consider yours, and risk it mutating out of control? Not good. There's a reason biological and chemical weapons are not in common use by the US today.

Well, I give some reasons above why that might not be as relevant or effective as you think. Killing all the humans and leaving the BAs probably doesn't sound like a good idea to either side. ;-)

As for the buzzers, they pretty much exist for flavor, and as alien, amoral entities to contrast the PCs against. Even the worst, most brutal non-insectoid BA isn't as bad as a buzzer. In terms of the system, buzzers are the only creatures that can have a Responsibility of 0.

I want enough about the technology to make it seem realistic, but not so much that the PCs have to assimilate a large amount of new information to understand what's going on. Other futuristic backgrounds have gotten by without worrying about this too much.

Essentially, I want it realistic and detailed enough to create the situation I want for the game, and to meet most people's criterion for suspension of disbelief. Now, that might mean it doesn't quite meet your suspension of disbelief, but as long as most people can deal with it, that's cool. I have thought about a lot of this stuff, and made the concious decision not to deal with it.

Now, if you want to be really helpful, you can tell me how to modify the initial flavor text so it sounds more realistic, and then take a look at the timeline when I get the third draft up.

At first (and second) glance, they appear to be workable to me, but the way its written right now is...well... unpolished. I could see a casual reader or new player getting lost, even if the average Forger understands exactly what you are saying.

I'm working on the third draft as I write this. I hope to have it up sometime late tonight. It should integrake Mike and Laurel's comments, with a more realistic (and compressed) timeline and perhaps a better explaination of the mechanics. Thanks, everyone, for the feedback so far... Keep it coming!

xiombarg wrote: Also, as a simulationist grognard, what do you think of the combat system?

Mike Holmes wrote: All in all this looks a lot like a system that I'm working on called FantaSea, as it happens. Another case of convergent design.

All right, lets see here.

I think some good points have been raised about the modern structure of a military making division within the ranks difficult. Armies are structured, now days, to force allegiance to the top brass. A quick solution to the dilemma that this poses is to start the revolution at the top.

Suppose the President and Vice President and a couple of the major political players all get killed or rendered incompetent somehow. While the constitution is supposed to set up a clear line of succession, do you want to take orders from the Secretary of Agriculture?

The idea here is to divide the military at the top and split it apart. Maybe the half goes with the VP and the other half thinks she orchestrated the disaster that killed the President and so sides with the Undersecretary of defense, or something. The two sides consolidate their power politically in roughly North South lines and things boil over from there.

Other ideas might be another contested election a la Bush Gore, with a resolution that makes 2000 look clean, or insanity in the oval office.

As for taking all the satellites and advanced weapons systems out of the war, if you don't choose to toss them out at the top (say someone burns the command codes and some group acts to keep them burned) nothing says loving like an EMP burst.

I like the idea of biotech firms being the strength of New Hampshire. Maybe NH had the laxest biotech laws allowing for the most in-depth experiments. Maybe they start making Rillas nearly indistinguishable from humans fighting for the CSA as spies or they start making some sort of virus effective on insect based life. Who knows? ;- )

And I really like the idea of a reverse underground railroad.

So that's how I ramble, today. Ug, need food.