1.) What is your game about?

It's about 'drawing lines' against certain issues based on personal values, and the consequences thereof.

2.) What do the characters do?

Characters are people caught-up in 'The 2nd U.S. Civil War', and decide what cause(s) they 'need' to get behind, where they set their own standards within the context of such a cause and what to do when the supposed boundaries of these standards are crossed.

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

There is no GM. The players themselves manage their character's dealings, frame scenes, explore the world and strategize around their character's inventory (which includes a crew of 'sub-characters', among other things).

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

The setting uses the Vietnam War as a building block, using it to bring a civil war in the U.S. to the front. Vietnam itself is an excellent historical example where an ideological line was drawn and there were very serious consequences for not fully thinking through what should be done if and when the line was crossed.

The fictional civil war illustrates the same concept.

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

Characters have a lot of power and resources at their disposal, and at a the same time, are largely enslaved by where they've drawn their own lines. Their flexibility (or lack thereof) will determine how well they're actually able to use all of their power and resources.

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

Planning and compromise. The game is certainly more simulationist in nature than anything, so the ability to efficiently manage resources will be key.

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

Loss of power and resources - or otherwise the crippling thereof.

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

It is divided largely evenly among players and GM.

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?)

Players are asked put their standards to the test. They are effectively challenged to say, 'Here are my strongest values. Take your best shot at making me compromise them'.

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

Rolling pools of D20s, counting successes against a TN.

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

Every time a player chooses to be involved (they are the aggressor) in a conflict where they authorize deadly force, their character must 'Draw a Line'; write down the reason they are getting involved in this conflict. Later, any player faced with a conflict (whether they are the aggressor or not) may, instead of committing their own resources to the conflict, cross-out (but leave legible!) any line any other player wrote down (narrating the way in which this conflict crosses that line) - substituting-in that players resources instead of their own, but still being the one to recieve the rewards of the conflict. Once the conflict is finished, the player whose line was crossed may opt to either re-draw the line if they won (write it down again fresh), in which case they may recoup from the fighting, or they may opt to leave it crossed (in which case they may not recoup from the fighting). If they lose the conflict, the line remains crossed, but they still may still recoup. Players may never in the session write down two of the same reason for starting a conflict, and crossed lines may no longer be used against them (their character loses this ideal). Players can only leave a certain number of lines crossed; if they exceed this number, their character loses any sense of self-identity and exits the game.

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

Yes. They can buy (and sell) cooler stuff.

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

Escalating in power is done most efficiently through the manipulation of other player's characters, by crossing their lines. When someone else is fighting for you, you gain 100% profit with no risk of loss.

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

A sense of, 'Gee... is 'X' really worth getting into this fght for?', and, perhaps, 'Y'know what? I don't care. 'Y' is definately worth this fight and all the consequences - I'm drawing a line.'

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

The setting, because it involves cool things I like playing around with as well as a murky atmosphere. The simmie mechanics, too, since right now I'm all caught-up and entranced by how BFM (Basic Fighter Maneuvering) goes down and just how full of blast and death modern day weaponry is.

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

I'm interested in the line drawing mechanic. I'm excited by the notion of how the rocking and rolling of combat will play out.

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

I haven't played a game that I felt represented modern day combat in the way I intend, so there's that. I also don't recall too many other titles that let a player say, 'Here, Jim. You fight this guy for me - because he's doing X, and you don't like it when people do X - and I'll take all the loot. Thanks'.

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

Small time. Posting a PDF up somehwere.

19.) Who is your target audience?

Guys/gals who enjoy simulationist (and a bit of... err... gamist?) play.

Okay; so the things closest to the front of my mind right now are:

a) I want to generate semi-random conflicts with 'gangs' of bad guys, and each bad guy would have a very significantly different type. Conflict I want to be very sim in nature, so the baddies need to have fleshed-out stats and the like. I'm thinking I could do it with symbol or color coded queue card piles, but I'm all about conserving table space and can see these as being a real hog. Tables and charts that you roll on would probably be too slow, given the number of conflicts and baddies likely to rear their heads. Any other ideas you guys know of?

b) I don't want the game to be, 'Corey draws a line, then everyone just uses Corey until he gets fed-up and leaves it crossed, then Sally has to draw one, then everyone just uses Sally, etc'. So, I'll have to playtest it to see how that one goes... but, in the meantime, perhaps I can be more proactive by imposing a logical restriction (the most obvious that I intend to implement is that no player that is already currently in a conflict can have a line crossed; they can't be everywhere at once, afterall). I want everybody to have one or two lines on their own sheets before they start manipulating each other, so I wonder if just a simple, 'You need to have X lines before you can cross anybody elses out' would suffice? Other ideas that are maybe more neat?