Hey all, I'm brewing up a new game idea, and I'm pretty excited about it.  It started as something very traditional, but I've started taking it in some new directions.  More on that in a bit, but here's the Power 19.  Some questions I have for discussion are at the bottom.

1.) What is your game about?

Awesome Kung Fu action! With the gonzo meter turned up to 11.

2.) What do the characters do?

The characters are wandering kung fu badasses, fighting against other kung fu badasses. Hijinx ensue.

3.) What do the players (including the GM if there is one) do?

Participate in really tactical combats that focus on elements of the characters' backgrounds.

4.) How does your setting (or lack thereof) reinforce what your game is about?

The setting is Mystic Pulp China. Only the most trivial nod to realism, with awesome conflicts built into the setting for players to meddle in. Weapons of the Gods is a big influence here.

5.) How does the Character Creation of your game reinforce what your game is about?

Character generation involves two parts:

The Story portion involves writing three paragraphs: one about the character's Past, one about his Present, and one about his Future.

The Past paragraph covers his pre-adventuring life; anything that isn't covered by an in-depth resolution mechanic (Combat, Social Combat, or Magic) uses a simple roll- the number of dice one gets is based on how relevant it is to the character's Past.

The Present covers what the character is doing RIGHT NOW! This is where we get seeds for the first few adventures, so we know they're going to be grabby. (This is like, but not quite like Sorcerer's Kickers.)

The Future covers the character's Destiny- what's his long term motivations? This is where we get the threads that will define the campaign.

The first paragraph makes sure that a complex skill system doesn't distract from the real focus of the game (awesome fights), and the later two paragraphs make sure that the awesome fights are about stuff that's awesome.

The second portion of character creation involves fairly traditional character abilities, although streamlined for making the real tactical challenge play, not chargen.

6.) What types of behaviors/styles of play does your game reward (and punish if necessary)?

The game will punish not Stepping on Up for the combats- if you don't, all your character's hopes and dreams will get stepped on by the villains. It's very Gamist in that regard.

I'm not sure yet what I want to actively reward.

7.) How are behaviors and styles of play rewarded or punished in your game?

The reward mechanic is getting more advancement opportunities- higher stats, which can be used in combat, more special unique abilities, or the ability to write another sentence onto your past paragraph, representing non-combat abilities learned in play.

8.) How are the responsibilities of narration and credibility divided in your game?

Fairly traditional, with some extra player goodies, since getting to narrate awesome stunts and bouncing around and stuff is fun. I'm thinking something akin to 'stunts', with Director Stance being in the hands of the players as far as stuff like terrain and mooks are concerned.

9.) What does your game do to command the players' attention, engagement, and participation? (i.e. What does the game do to make them care?)

The basic aspects of the stories are provided by the players when they write their Present and Future paragraphs; the GM comes in, blends them together, and puts an awesome twist on it all. This makes people care, because the awesome showdowns are about what they already said they thought was awesome.

10.) What are the resolution mechanics of your game like?

Resolution involves rolling a character's trait in d6s, and counting 4+s, against either an opponent, or a fixed target number. Awesome special abilities do awesome stuff.

The combats have some very tactical aspects, but I'm not quite sure how to describe them succintly.

(Note- they're also derived from Age of Air, a game idea I was working on that just kind of hit a dead end.)

11.) How do the resolution mechanics reinforce what your game is about?

Rolling vast fistfuls of dice is really really carthartic.

12.) Do characters in your game advance? If so, how?

They get bigger numbers and more special abilities that let them kick more butt.

13.) How does the character advancement (or lack thereof) reinforce what your game is about?

I want the advancement to be a bit flavorable- "Yes- but did you expect that I knew the FLYING GOPHER TECHNIQUE?" Not sure how to do this yet.

14.) What sort of product or effect do you want your game to produce in or for the players?

I want characters to hear other character's concepts, play in game events, or just plain participate in battles where they look at each other, raise their fist in the air (throwing the horns is optional) and say "YES!!!!!!"

15.) What areas of your game receive extra attention and color? Why?

Hmmm... not sure how to answer this.

16.) Which part of your game are you most excited about or interested in? Why?

Right now, the maneuvering system, if only because I've been mulling it over the last few days. It's fluid, but still has lots of stuff going out. It's vaguely based on the locations and scribbled maps of Burning Empire's Firefight, but the way the map interacts with play is different.

17.) Where does your game take the players that other games can’t, don’t, or won’t?

It's going to be very in your face, personal Gamism, which I haven't really played a game that champions that for me.

18.) What are your publishing goals for your game?

Make a nice print on demand book, not lose money, and get money to buy more books. Seeing an actual play report somewhere would be awesome.

19.) Who is your target audience?

Fans of games like Weapons of the Gods who wanted something a little more balanced and less like paper-rock-scissors, fans of competitive games like Agon who want something a little more in-depth.

---

Thoughts for discussion:

A:  So how about that character creation idea?  I'm pretty jazzed about it, but I want to see how other people react.

B:  How can I actively reward the players for having their characters be awesome kung fu badasses?

C:  Are there any games out there I should take a look at that have similar design goals?

I think Power 19s scare people sometimes. That probably explains the deadening silence you received. I think this game idea is awesome and I hope you pursue it.

A:  So how about that character creation idea?  I'm pretty jazzed about it, but I want to see how other people react.

I think it's awesome. I need to understand better how the Story paragraphs translate to twiddly abilities though, or are they treated as unstatted flags? Will you provide procedures, guidance, or advice for how to write a good Past/Present/Future story? Is the Future a guaranteed thing or is it just a hope and dream?

I'd like to see Present and Future feed into some kind of formalized GM system for generating conflict. You said (in #6) that you stomp on a character's dreams if the player fails to step on up. I assume Future feeds into this. Perhaps the GM gets to rewrite or add one sentence of the player's Future when he fails, and the player may rewrite or add one sentence when he succeeds.

B:  How can I actively reward the players for having their characters be awesome kung fu badasses?

I think I just answered part of that (what is the nature of the reward?).

The other part is, what is rewarded? I get the impression you know exactly what kind of behavior you want to reward, yet in #6 you say you don't know. Do you not want to reward acting like a kung fu badass? Do you not want to reward extremely intelligent, creative, and opportune choice and use of tactical, strategic, and logistical character abilities? That is, if players Step On Up, their characters succeed, and they get new special powers that give them new chances to Step On Up versus more difficult challenges. It's an endless awesome circle, like in D&D.

You actively reward them by giving them more abilities that increase their badass potential. You actively reward them by giving them tougher challenges that test their new increased badassery.

C:  Are there any games out there I should take a look at that have similar design goals?

Dungeons & Dragons 3.5.
World of Warcraft.

And I'm totally serious.

It might help to look at HEROWARS ... player character creation in that system starts with the player writing a story about their character.
I have never tried it with a group, but it does sound like an interesting method.

Feng Shu is another game I would try out. I thought it really cornered the market in Martial Arts Badassery, but I might be mistaken. Certainly the concept of running along a stream of bullets being fired at your character to deliver a good kick in the face to the bad guy has to rate as a first class idea! Certainly when my group played Feng Shu our GM berated us for being way to cautious. We were playing a very tactical game ... and he just wanted us to go running in with feet and fists flying.. After having that explained to us we ripped into the system like banshees.

I'm not sure what mode of play is being aimed at, after all 'Participate in really tactical combats that focus on elements of the characters' backgrounds' happens in Capes as well.

How can I actively reward the players for having their characters be awesome kung fu badasses?

I'm pretty sure she said "step on up" in there, Callan. I'm assuming that's Gamist play, not Narrativist play with tactics.

Thanks everyone who replied, especially Adam for breaking the silence.

Adam-
Right now, the Present/Future paragraphs are big honkin flags.  They don't do much other than tell the GM what the adventures are supposed to be about.  I've been pondering a framework for campaign creation, where you have say a chain of five adventures scattered about focusing on a given character's destiny, and you mix all of them together.

If you have your future as "I will reforge the Empire," you'll have the chance.  It's the GM's job to throw oppotunities in your path to do this.  They don't have to be easy, and it's better if stuff you want is caught in the crossfires- because if you fail to Step On Up, the Imperial MacGuffin gets destroyed, and you need to find another way to enforce your claims...

I think you're absolutely right about the cycle of power.  And I think I've figured out exactly what it needs to be that triggers gaining bigger numbers and awesomer abilities on your character sheet- doing stuff based on your Present/Future hooks.

Vikingmage-

Is that the same as Runequest?  There's certainly some similarities going on.

Callan-

I'd call it Gamist play, something that I wouldn't call Capes.
And yeah, I'm totally with you on that.  Why are wandering kung fu badasses, well, badass?  Because they've got that extra drive that other people don't.

HeroWars is the Robin Laws rules-rewrite of Glorantha, Greg Stafford's world for RuneQuest. The game system is nothing like RuneQuest. It does have some very clever mechanics that take paragraphs and turn them into characters. You ought to check it out just for that. It's a Narrativist-supporting game though.

Ouch, I totally forgot about this thread :)

In short, this sounds interesting. I'd like to see this game.

How do you plan to deal with creating challenges for the players here? Is it the usual GM fiat thing, or maybe you plan some form of budgeting, challenge ratings or whatever? Also, how long do you expect preparing challenges to take? One of the things that drove me off games like Exalted or d20 (and Weapons of the Gods is probably similar in this regard) was that writing up interesting opposition with sufficient mechanical detail could easily take hours, and winging it in play never felt quite right to me.

Filip- I know exactly what you're talking about.  Back in college, I ran a 3.5 game for over a year that went from 5th level up to 15th.  I like my adventures to be epic in scope, so believe me I spent hours upon hours statting up bad guys for the next week's session.  I don't have anywhere near the time nor the inclination to do that anymore.

I'm likely going to need some sort of challenge rating system- if your group has had this much advancement, you want enemies that are about this tough, and a good list of stock antagonists ready to roll out.

What I hate about D&D is its weak challenge rating system. Sure, the rules give you guidance about what an acceptable challenge is for any given party and it rewards players proportionate to threat, but I think a Gamist game should have clear procedures for building "fair" encounters.

Dogs in the Vineyard isn't a Gamist game, but it has a clear procedure for building situation for the players and its rules let the GM go ALL-OUT on the players without holding back.

I'd like to see a game like yours embrace the ALL-OUT GM-vs-player Gamism with clear, fair rules to make that happen. The GM should come to the table with a handful of encounters and an evil gleam in his eye. He should be able to say, "I've cooked up a wickedly evil challenge for you tonight. Let's see if you survive!" and the players should rub their hands together and know that their survival is dependent on their own choices, not the GM being kind. The GM and players should play out their sides with full gusto and see who wins. Of course, the game should be tipped in favor of the players, because you do want characters to survive most of the time, but it can't be a sure thing. Players should be nervous in every encounter equal to their station.

Thanks Adam for fielding the Herowars question!

Selecting appropriate challenges for parties is a real nightmare. My game system is totally Gamist, with a number of our players loving the whole POWER concept. I find myself constantly needing to keep a track on their stats/magic items to prevent them walking over my challenges. I have foolishly put no limit on stats (like the MMORPG's) the difference between level one characters agility and a level 10 character could be 30 points. This builds epic HERO level characters which is what the players enjoy, but with the scale shifting upward all the time you need to be very careful about challenge setting.
I agree with D&D having a weak challenge rating system. I soon learned to ignore the daft "Suitable for a party of 6 Level 5-8 players" on the fronts of the scenarios in the 80's. I was always having to tinker with the scenarios to make them a challenge for my gamist players.

Willow (& Adam Drey),

Willow wrote: The game will punish not Stepping on Up for the combats- if you don't, all your character's hopes and dreams will get stepped on by the villains. It's very Gamist in that regard.

Ah, but you've lost.  Because not getting your hopes and dreams stepped on was the prize for victory.

A lot of games throw around 'winning,' as a term, but this isn't a game that has a 'win condition.'

Just some thoughts on the original post.
First, how to use character advancement in a flavorful way: Make it on the spot. Give characters 'character points' to buy better stats, but allow the spend at any point, even mid combat round.
Example:
GM: Yeah, you're getting battered by the evil Emperor Lo and his Lo Guard. Having killed your mentors and most of the villagers, he's trying to get the Rubies of Zod. John and Sam are at half health/HP/whatever, and the Princess Queen Zarta is in grave danger. What do you do?
Player: I spend all my exp from last adventure to raise my Kung Fu by one and get the Adroit Turtle Technique. "You haven't won yet, Lo. I have one trick my master taught me all those years ago. I will avenge his death! Adroit Turtle! Hi-yah!"

I've been pondering this for my own game for a while, and I like how it mimics martial arts movies. The characters will be battered senseless until they figures out the situation is grave enough to spend some Exp, then they cleans house.

2: As for the past/present/future thing, I like it, but I would tweak it. Make the PCs write two potential futures, one good, one bad. That way, they know exactly what they're fighting for. For example, if your good future is "Defend the kingdom from the greatest threat" the obvious 'bad' future is "let the kingdom fall to rubble under evil aggressors". Assuming the player has any investment in the setting, that will spark him to 'step up' and make sure he comes out victorious.

DanielM wrote:
2: As for the past/present/future thing, I like it, but I would tweak it. Make the PCs write two potential futures, one good, one bad. That way, they know exactly what they're fighting for. For example, if your good future is "Defend the kingdom from the greatest threat" the obvious 'bad' future is "let the kingdom fall to rubble under evil aggressors". Assuming the player has any investment in the setting, that will spark him to 'step up' and make sure he comes out victorious.

Hehe, nice one, Daniel. I think that'd be a good addition too - well, perhaps more than addition and instead what the whole game pivots around. And welcome to the forge! :)

Hey Adam, what might be even more wicked is the GM writes the good outcome and the player writes the bad outcome. Otherwise I'd push for player writes both - it's like setting your own bet at the races or at the casino, it's not really something someone else can do.