The game is designed to be played on a few levels, so I'll answer these questions twice.

The first response is a superficial look at the game.
The second response is a deeper metaphysical accounting of the game.

1.) What is your game about?**

A reality TV show focuses on hunters of the supernatural, in a similar vein to the world-wide cult TV show "Cops". The regular people of the world argue over whether the show is real or not in much the same way that they do about the world championship wrestling. The hunters are imbued with minor supernatural powers of their own to level the playing field against the paranormal criminals they hunt.

TRUTH.
It is a game about those who reveal it, and those who conceal it.
It is also about those who seek to define it, and those who are defined by it.
What is the truth? What is subjectivity? Can you believe the hype? Can you afford not to when your existence has become defined by that hype?

2.) What do the characters do?**

The characters are operatives for a global corporation/publicity machine named Quincunx. They exist as supernatural bounty hunters, claiming rewards from unknown sources in exchange for tracking down and neutralising entities which simple should not be. On one side, they encounter mythical beings, urban legends, religious figures and other strange creatures. On the other side, they acquire the funds necessary to continue these tasks by seeking sponsorships and making public appearances for their fans. Each character is defined by their feats of daring and their fame in the public eye. Yet they must also keep their heads level in the face of this chaos, they must maintain their connections to the mundane world around them lest they need to be removed from society themselves.

Every character is caught in a web of relationships that they must uphold. To gain power or knowledge they must use these relationships to their advantage, but the stronger a relationship gets, the more intrinsically they become tied to it. The more a character is tied to a relationship, the easier it is for enemies to use it against the character. It is a game of balance and risk. How much do the characters want to expose themselves for the chance at gaining a bit more power?

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

There is a traditional player GM split, but more of the narrative responsibility falls into the hands of the players than in many games. The players control a single operative and an array of company support staff. The GM controls the remainder of the world, providing colour and background stories for the players to interact with through their characters. Players takes turns with the spotlight focused on their operative, and while one player is being focused apon, the other players may choose to assist using their own operatives or by using company support staff. In this way, the players choose which leads to follow and set the direction of the game, interacting with the storylines that have been set in place by other players or by the GM.

Through their characters, the players are forced to confront issues of morality, drama and paradigm. The game aspires to raise questions about systems of belief and to delve into the collective subconscious through the narrative of play. Players may introduce storylines that pose questions for themselves to answer, they may raise issues for other players within the context of the game, or they may pose dilemmas that the group can work through as a whole.

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

Characters are defined by a series of traits. These traits derive from their racial heritage, their religious beliefs, their membership in certain subcultures, their occupations, their personal outlook on the world. All of these traits have layers to them, and characters may ascend their ranks in the traits by delving deeper into the groups or belief patterns associated with the trait. Very little is what it appears on the surface, and the whole setting is about revealing the truth concealed beneath the hype and the spin.

Everything in the game is about relationships and beliefs. The stronger a characters beliefs in a particular area, the more they will associate with that pattern and the stronger their influence will be in this area. Characters associating too much with the supernatural will start to resonate with the energies of the paranormal, and this is reflected by picking up the relevant traits. Conversely characters who focus too much on their fame will follow a different path of destiny. Other characters could focus on paths such as their families, their beliefs, or mundane occupations. Everyone is a combination of all these factors.

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

Characters are defined by two things; firstly a matrix that defines their internal desires, drives and talents, and secondly their connections to the world around them. The matrix is divided into rows marked as aspects, and columns marked as elements. The crossing point of a row and column is referred to as a node. Players choose a dominant aspect and a dominant element at character creation (marking a box in each row and column's relevant node, and gaining two marked boxes where these intersect). This matrix defines areas where the character has innate talents and doesn't need to call on their allies or connections.

Beyond the matrix, all characters have a number of points to spend on their allies, connection, beliefs and mystical talents. All of these require the character to draw from beyond themselves to accomplish feats that would be impossible for a mortal to pursue on their own. All of these external forces bring traits to the character, and these traits may be used in various ways as advantages or disadvantages depending on the situation.

No character is invulnerable on their own. No man is an island. The character generation system is designed to really integrate a character into the world of play. All characters will have a connection to the Quincunx Corporation, but beyond that, virtually anything is possible. Characters could be reformed werewolves or vampires tracking down criminals to their own people, they could be fire-and-brimstone preachers with a strong religious belief and a hatred of the paranormal, or they could simply be people with some useful skills who happen to have been in the right place and the right time (or the wrong place and the wrong time depending on how the character views their circumstances). The aim of the game is to create fully realised characters with motives and agendas tied into the world around them. 

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

Every time a character pursues one agenda, they find that another starts to weaken. The character matrix is defined by pairs of opposing elements, and when a character performs a lot of actions associated with one element they find their value in this element start to rise, but the opposing element starts to fall. For every two points of gain somewhere, a point is lost somewhere else. So characters who focus too extensively on one tactic find that they become exposed to other tactics. Similarly, characters need to keep tabs on their connections to the communities around them. Every trait restricts the actions of a character in some way, either preventing them from performing one specific task, or requiring them to perform another task. The more connections a character has to the outside world, the more they will be expected to act in certain ways (or risk losing the bonuses associated with being a member of that group).

Players with strong ideas of their character will probably gain advantage from the system while those who "cast themselves adrift on a sea of opportunity" will flounder. The game is about dynamic individuals who help to shape reality through their fame and their actions, it's not a game about slackers who expect everything to be done for them. The game seeks to provide the opportunity to define a character in light of the obstacles they face, it seeks to force players into making the choices that will define their characters in this manner.

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

Characters who follow the actions of their traits gradually become more closely associated with these traits. A goth who chooses to only wear black doesn't necessarily fit in with the community, but once they start regularly listening to the music associated with the subculture, visiting the right nightclubs and reading the current books circulating among the crowd, then they start to know how to talk the talk and eventually walk the walk. Not everything is appearances, but once a person takes on the appearance of a group, starts acting like the group, and starts understanding the mindset of the group; are they really all that different from the group they've been trying to infiltrate?

If that character has forsaken all of their contacts with other communities and now only associates with goths, then they might as well be a goth. They'll have to start all over again with another group if they want to forge a relationship with another group (or if they want to re-establish contact with their old friends). On the other hand a character who maintains contact with their old friends has a dual set of actions to uphold (things are harder for them to balance, but they gain the advantages of both groups).

On top of this, characters are beset by fame. If they take actions against the status quo of their trait, then it is quite likely that everyone will find out about it and the repercussions will be fierce.

Characters are expected to make a stand. They should hold a truth as sacred to themselves and defend it at all costs. This may put them into conflict with other characters, and it will definitely put them into conflict with many of the groups that exist in the shadows of the game world. This is neither good nor bad, it is merely a way to generate new stories and conflicts that will further help to define the character in the context of the world around them. 

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

On the whole, the GM maintains the continuity of narration and credibility through the course of the game, but this is by no means his sole domain.


The game is divided into scenes and in each of these, the narrative is a three way struggle between the player of the current focal character (referred to as the active player), the GM and the supporting characters. The player of the focal character defines their intended task for the scene, the GM sets the scene, and during every scene there is a chance that the focal character will face an issue relating to one of their traits. This will be incorporated into the scene by the player seated to the left of the active player (or the next player around if this player has chosen to be active in the scene as a supporting character).  

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?)

Everything in Quincunx has ramifications. Whether an action is eliminating a supernatural menace, dealing with fans, or simply trying to have some private time alone with the family. Everything affects a characters connections to the world around them and a player has to seriously consider not only what best for their character, but what the character would be willing to sacrifice for the greater good of the world around them? Even if this ends up with the decision that the character wouldn't sacrifice anything for those they connect with...

The nature of scenes in Quincunx means that only a single character is focused upon at any time, and his would seem to diminish the importance of other players while the active role is not in their hands. While this is true to an extent, all players have support roles that they may introduce into any scene, and all players have the chance to introduce elements associated with the focal characters traits. Characters learn that through their differences they have the strength to face a variety of tasks, yet these differences also provide tension within the group. Through unity the group remains cohesive, but it starts to lack the diversity needed to confront the diversity of foes around them. The balance chosen by any group helps to define their characters in one way or another.

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

All characters roll 3d6 for every scene, and this is opposed by 3d6. Any die rolling a 4 or higher counts as a success, and every success allows a player to narrate an action into their scene. The character matrix provides a number of automatic successes to characters if they perform actions that they have shown an affinity for in the past (typically 1 to 3 successes). Possessing specific traits may grant modifiers to die rolls, additional dice or additional successes. But this is just what a character is able to do on their own.

By interacting with the world around them, characters may draw upon extra dice in their scenes. There are stories at work in the game, and if a character successfully confronts these stories, they may strip dice from the story to use for their own purposes. The more they engage the stories around them, the more chance they have to gain these dice. If a character chooses not to engage these stories, then it is only a matter of time before these stories come to engage them.

Once a character uses any of their additional dice in a scene, the dice become exhausted. A rest interval needs to be called to replenish these dice, but once a rest interval is called, all of the stories at work in a game also replenish their exhausted dice (or gather more dice of their own).

Beyond this simple mechanic, there is the element of fame. An intrinsic part of Quincunx, at the start of every scene, a pair of dice are secretly rolled to determine if the characters actions are viewed by the public on television. If they are viewed they get fame, if they are viewed and are successful in their task they get even more fame. If they are viewed and they have done something wrong, they suffer a moral backlash and new complications enter the story. Once gained, fame may be used to reinforce sponsorships, or make it easier to replenish exhausted dice (after all more people want to help you when you're famous even if that help is offered just to gain a bit of fame for themselves).

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

Characters can only do so much on their own. Those who draw on the world around them can do a lot more, whether they draw on friends, tools, or mystic powers. The extra dice they gain from these connections to the outside world help to identify the way the character interacts with the world and help to define them in context.

Everything about the game relates to a characters context within their setting. How do they handles their connections to the people around them? How do they look after their tools? How do they hone their talents? What helps them and what hinders them? What changes to their life paths are made after a moment of crisis?

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

As described earlier, characters change their matrix over the course of a game. They simply mark the number of times they use each element and each aspect. They may place a new check-mark in a node belonging to their highest element, and another in a node belonging to their highest aspect (these may not go in the same node). The node combining lowest element and aspect combination loses a check-mark (of this is already at zero, then choose another node of the lowest element or aspect). This occurs at the end of every session, providing a 2-steps-forward-1-step-back progression that defines where the characters current priorities lie.

In addition to this gradual development, characters gain improvement points within their traits every time they face an issue associated with their trait. A Jewish character is faced with a plate of hors d'oerves with ham in them, and knows it would be considered incredibly rude to turn down the food while in the presence of the local mafia leader. Does the character choose to sacrifice their faith (and possibly be seen on TV doing so?) or do they risk the wrath of the mafia?

Any time the characters beliefs are called into question and they are forced to make a moral decision, they gain points that prove their resolve (and gain points toward improving the bonuses associated with that trait).

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

See Above.

See Above.

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

I want the game to produce three dimensional characters, rather than stereotypes. The more a character interacts with the world around them, the more they will be defined. And conversely, the more that characters views the world, the more the players will learn about the communal setting they are developing.

The game is designed to encourage a sense of community, within the context of an individual, the context of the playing group, and hopefully a community between the various groups that are playing around the world. The Quincunx website I'm developing is another step in that direction.

The game should raise questions, ethical dilemmas, moral quandaries, paradigm descriptions. At the superficial level it's about confronting supernatural beings, but what are these supernatural beings? In most cases the supernatural beings interacting with the characters are outsiders with belief patterns that exist beyond the scope of mortal reason and science, but that doesn't necessarily make them wrong (especially given that they've got supernatural powers to back up their arguments). Many of the prey that the characters have been charged with tracking down are outcastes from their paranormal communities, but why are they being hunted? What does this mean to the characters? Are they just following orders and getting a bit of fame and wealth on the side?

Players should remember that things are rarely what they seem, and moral dilemmas abound. But sometimes an apple is just an apple. 

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

At the surface, the supernatural beings receive the most colour. This entails describing the creatures, their cultures, their beliefs and their place in society (both their own society and the greater society of humanity). This is to show that the characters are carefully linked to the world around them, but so are the paranormal criminals they hunt. For every action, there is a repercussion waiting to occur, and a carefully interwoven story should cause ramifications to develop from the most unexpected locations.

Secondly, the Quincunx Corporation needs to be described in as much detail as possible, because this is the one clear part of the system that is different from our world.

The whole setting is designed to be a similar to our own world as possible, so much so that the website I've dedicated to it makes numerous links to Wikipedia and other real world entities. The setting is designed to be close enough to our reality that the moral questions invoked actually mean something to the players involved. The players can't simply step away from the game without really thinking twice about how the world really works.

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

The things that really fired me up about this game was the interaction of reality TV and the supernatural. Like a clash of cultures between the old world of myth and the new world of hype. The clash of cultures concept is something I've been toying with for a long time, but it was the injection of the reality TV angle that really spark the creative juices.

I've long looked for something that would emulate the book "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance", I know that the early versions of Mage:the Ascension from White Wolf were based pretty heavily on that book and it's sequel, but there was something missing. The characters often seemed at a disconnect with the world around them, and that was really frustrating. I wanted characters in that context, but characters that really cared about the world they fought for.

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

Marvel-style superheroes, where the emphasis is actually on the characters beliefs and links to the world around them rather than emphasising the cool powers. Actually, if you're familiar with the comic...it hopes to emulate the kinds of stuff you see in David Mack's "Kabuki".

I’ve seen a few games attempt the connections to the in-game world, but haven’t really seen many that have pulled it off successfully…and certainly nothing with the community spirit I’m hoping to achieve.

I’m trying to create levels of connection that I haven’t see in other games.
Connection between characters.
Connection between characters and the game world.
Connection between players and their characters.
Connection between players across the world in telling a communal story.

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

A game. A website. A comic. A global interactive fiction.

I’m currently working on a comic book which will be the major source of in game colour for the setting. It’s a story about the original five operatives of the Quincunx Corporation and how they deal with fame and notoriety while they struggle against supernatural criminals continually trying to take over (or destroy) the world. The game will be a free (or very cheap) product designed to help others get into the world I’m creating for communal storytelling.

Hopefully a few more people will get onto the bandwagon and start generating fan-fic or relating their in-game adventures on the forums associated with the website in development.

19.) Who is your target audience?

Those who are looking for something more.

I’d love for this to be a crossover product to get comic book readers into roleplaying, because that is a huge market with the right general demographic. Most of them are aware of D&D but I’d like to really get them into independent gaming, and hopefully use my own game as a doorway to other great indie games.

Interesting, I recognise a lot of the stuff you talked about before in there, presumably beliefs are now integrated into the relationship mechanic?

I don't quite get the 3d6 vs 3d6 thing; what effect do the opposing 3d6 have? Do they wipe out successes? Do they require actions to be sacrificed to narrate defences?

I love the rest mechanic; it's one of the things I liked about killzone: You have regenerating health, but so does everyone! This means that all conflicts can work from the same starting point, and there is an added effect about defensive verses aggressive fighting: If you just let the battle end, and do not push your advantage, then you're back to square one, and when on the receiving end you can choose to pull back in order to be able to recharge and try again.

Also the same mechanic encourages position changes, where you go into a conflict not in order to kill them, but to reposition yourself so that you have an advantage, and can defeat them next time. This mechanic put into a broader perspective should produce a nice amount of skirmishing rather than attrition based tactics, especially if there are defensive tactics that require you to sacrifice position to survive.

Actually that sounds an awful lot like attrition, but the nice thing is that it is attrition at a higher level, constructed out of the main conflicts in an indirect way, and can be combined with set combination mechanics to provide a really interesting strategic formula. Something for your higher scale game perhaps, or you could allow the players to come up with special ways of bringing together communities so that relationship traits could stack in a clever way, so rather than just synergistically using the two traits, they actually help the communities to integrate. Of course, this would create extra friction at the spiritual level, which you'd also have to deal with.
But I was originally thinking about those artefacts or places of power or something I remember from an earlier thread, are those still in it? Or were they actually something I suggested?

How does the game encourage connection between characters? I haven't seen much of that yet.

Lets' start with the 3d6 thing....

The 3d6 vs 3d6 thing is a new development that I'm playing with based on some fairly extensive rounds of playtesting.

Originally the game started with players deriving successes from their matrix, with a single d6 added.

Early in the game...
Jack is performing an action where his matrix automatically provides 1 success, and he rolls a die. Charlie is performing an action where his matrix automatically provides 2 successes, and he rolls a die.

At best, Jack can describe two things he does during the scene (or can describe how his actions counter 2 of Charlie's actions). At best, Charlie can describe three things he does during the scene (or can describe how his actions counter both of Charlie's actions, plus he gets another action to play with).

If that single d6 rolled a natural "6", then the player would be able to take a die from the communal pool, thus adding to their personal strength and ability to manipulate the world and the narrative.

This is good in a way, and it really highlights a certain aspect of play that I'm trying to get across. If a player wants to take on someone more powerful, they can only get by with a little help from their friends. They need to call on their relationships with the outside world to face threat beyond their ability. 

But I found that this actually slowed things down far too much, and it didn't allow for the rest mechanic that I really wanted to incorporate into the game. It also made many of the earlier game scenes very staggered and not very interesting. Try to perform a single action, maybe two, get it countered by an opponent, move on to the next player. A combat is literally a few passing swipes in a basic scene before suddenly being over. As the game moves towards it's climax, the players will have accumulated more dice (so will their adversaries), but if no-one rolls a natural 6 for a while the game can stagnate a bit.

Having everyone start with 3d6 kicks things off with a bit more of a running start.

If a natural 4+ gives a success and allows a player to perform an action during a scene (12.5% chance of no added successes, 37.5% chance of 1 success, 37.5% chance of 2 successes, 12.5% chance of 3 added successes). That's without adding any funky powers.

Thus, early in the game Jack could now have 1 to 4 successes to use for introducing his actions (most likely 2-3). Charlie could now have 2 to 5 successes (most likely 3-4). Charlie still has a pretty strong upper hand.

If Jack rolls well and Charlie rolls badly, Jack can cause a few problems to Charlie.
If Charlie rolls well and Jack rolls badly, Charlie can seriously damage Jacks position in the story.
If they both roll equally well, Charlie will always be a success ahead and do more damage to his opponent.

It has the two-fold effect of smoothing out the granularity a bit, and giving players more chances to roll natural 6's (and thus impact the storyline more dramatically from early on). Player now get roughly a 42% chance of getting an extra die during that first round rather than a 17% chance. Having more dice to play with makes the game a bit more strategic, allows the chance to add quite a bit more colour and action during a scene, and I've noted that (on the whole) people just like to roll handfuls of dice. It's a bit anticlimactic to roll a single die, especially when characters are trying to do something dramatic.

Added thing I haven't mentioned so far...

It's something I'm toying with.

Scenes are divided into 4 levels of focus: Vague [1], Unfocused [2], Focused [3], Visceral [4].

All players start with 2 spotlight tokens, and once everyone has had a scene they are replenished with 2 more as the scene cycle begins anew.

When a player initiates their scene, they indicate how much focus they want to put on this scene by spending the spotlight tokens. Early in the game will be filled with "vague" and "unfocused" scenes as the players research what is happening around them and scout out the local world. As long as they keep doing these less focused scenes, a player will gradually accumulate more spotlight tokens, eventually building up enough to buy a "focused" or even a "visceral" scene.

The types of scenes have two immediate impacts.

The more focused a scene is, the more impact it can have on the overall storyline. Certain abilities switch on as the scenes become more focused...

In a vague scene, a player doesn't use any of their supernatural powers; they just roll all the dice, and compare their result to the opponent's pool of successes. The higher pool gets to apply a series of actions to the loser equal to the difference in successes.

In an unfocused scene, some minor powers can be used; and the dice are rolled one by one, inserting and removing events based on the results of individual dice. The most that you can do in an unfocused scene is inconvenience or cause minor injury to your opponent.

In a focused scene, all powers are at a characters disposal, dice are rolled one by one, and now players can take risks to themselves in order to gain more temporary dice (this is where the notion of "how much are you willing to sacrifice?" really starts coming into its own). The most that you can do in a focused scene is cause a major injury or remove your opponent temporarily from the storyline.

In a visceral scene, there are no holds barred; all powers are available, sacrifice is possible and things can literally get deadly. It is possible to completely remove an opponent from the storyline during a visceral scene.

The second impact of various scene types is the likelihood it will be seen on TV. Unfocused scenes are rarely seen on TV because research doesn't make for good ratings, visceral scenes on the other hand are almost always screened. Since fame is derived from appearing onscreen, as soon as someone decides to lay the smack-down, everyone comes to the party. 

This supports the idea that there will be plenty of bloodthirsty scenes inter-spaced with chances to recuperate, research and gather resources.

I haven't fully had the chance to playtest this aspect of the game, so I'm not sure if it's overly complicating things.

Synergies and Strategy

Yes, that's one of the key aspects of the game. But not in a 4e D&D kind of way.

There will be plenty of cultures, belief patterns, occupations and racial groups in the setting where there is a good deal of overlap. A strong sense of justice [belief] could be common among police [occupation], but it could also be common among bikers [subculture] or even priests [occupation]. They'd each have a different sense of justice, but there would be an overlap here as the ideals aspired to are parallel.

My theory to help tie characters and communities together is through the traits. A character can assist another character with whom they share a trait, their patterns of morality are similar enough that they are able to work together. A single trait shared allows a character to offer a single die to the character currently in the spotlight, multiple traits allow multiple dice to be shared (up to one per trait). If two characters have opposing traits, then a shared trait is cancelled out.

Using the previous example, a police officer might have "Justice" as a belief and "Law Enforcement" as an occupational trait. A biker might have "Justice" as a belief and "Criminal" as a cultural trait. While they share the "Justice", the "Law Enforcement" and "Criminal" are certainly opposed. The cop and the biker couldn't share dice unless they had something else in common. If they had any more opposed traits, they'd actually have an instant dislike to one another, their views of the world would be at such odds that it would be hard for them to even act neutrally to one another.

Some traits will be defined as opposing, but if they don't specifically oppose they have no effect on one another.

Wider groups are defined by a cluster of traits, and that where the overlap to the larger scale of the game comes in. In this larger format you control a gang of individuals, manipulating the stories from behind the scenes through your "minions". Gangs fight gangs, cultures wage war over the destiny of humanity. Artefacts and locations are sought for their power (perhaps allowing easier recovery rolls during rest intervals to reflect low key benefits rather than flashy dramatic effects...since this is in better keeping with the world being developed.)

Favours

Since I've appropriated the rest interval concept from John Harper's Agon, I've thought about taking another idea from that game as well.

I like the idea that you can call in help from your allies and get them to assist you with their dice, this is done in exchange for a future favour that you'll owe them. Game play could start with a web of favours being owed between the various charaters, but it's more interesting that the web of favours will evolve and develop over the course of the narrative.

This could be an added way to tie together characters without common traits, or to reflect characters that have gained and lost traits in the past (developing unusual friendships and alliances in the process) before game play began.

I haven't thought too deeply on this yet...

There's still quite a bit of work to go. Smoothing out some ideas and really getting some intense playtests happening, but I think I'm still on track to have an ashcan out by GenCon Oz in September.

Any other questions, I'll be glad to answer. 

I probably wouldn't have players pay for visceral scenes; the very fact that they risk more stuff to take advantage of the scene means that they are already paying for it in a probabilistic way out of their characters other resources. Now it could be that the existing cost/benefit stuff balances too much on the side of the visceral, but in that case you could just increase the existing negative incentives.

On the other hand it might be that you want to give the GM a tool to balance the tone of the campaign, if the visceral stuff is getting out of hand. If so I'd have to look at it in a different way, although I'm not sure whether that is the best role for the GM, or indeed the game designer.

On the dice mechanic, it's pretty interesting, presumably you have enough counters among the abilities to avoid the clockwork soldiers feeling. How much can be achieved in a single action? I ask because it's something I've come across when trying to remove "degree of success" from games; sometimes it doesn't feel right that you should have to narrate multiple actions for certain intents, even if the rules require it not to be possible in a single action. It's ok once you realise that the "single crack shot" just won't be able to bring that beast down, but I wondered if you'd considered how to say that to people. Once we started playing the other way, our games became a little more like wushu, but with more of Vincent's "rightwards arrows".

Also, in the vague version, how much chance does the underdog have in your experience? Because presumably if he gets no actions he cannot even narrate his character leaving the fight, so must stay there and continue to get pummelled. On the other hand I suppose if those little actions cannot add up to larger effects, so he could stay there all day without too much worry! It's just a little strange. Presumably if someone wants to get away, they would have to escalate into a higher intensity, which I actually like, but I would like it more if the loosing player still had some narrative influence on the scene rather than just going "I'm off to the toilet, tell me what happens to my guy", which is a risk with the current one. One simple solution; you give one player one action and the other one plus the difference between the rolls. It's a bit cludgey though.

Also on the traits, you could bear in mind that you are already playing traits off one against the other, so this extra trade-off for differing traits could make direct assists very rare. On the other hand maybe I got that wrong: Are you using quantified traits? Or is it just presence and absence? Because if you have justice 7 and criminal 1, then it seems a bit harsh that you cannot work with the police, a police informer comes to mind. But presumably you still allow more indirect assists. It seems like assists could be a big group cohesion mechanic, but I can't see if it does that yet.

I think the artefact function you suggested makes a lot of sense, they could be the spirit level equivalent of sponsorship! Much more on the strategic level than streight power-ups.

Cool, now we're starting to delve into the deeper mechanisms of the system.

The payment of scene types was a conscious choice for a simple reason. Allowing players to get a more even share of the limelight.

But there are two things I'd like to highlight about the increased focus in scene types, I might not have worded them in the best way earlier:

Higher cost scenes allow more options to the players. A player can choose to have their character take a risk in a focused or visceral scene, but that option simply isn't available in a vague or unfocused scene. Players aren't paying to risk their characters, they're paying for the chance to exert even more influence on the events at hand. This extra influence comes in the form of more strategic options being presented, more powers becoming available, and more ways to really get into the finer detail of the events.

The second aspect is the advantages or penalties a character can potentially get out of a scene. The more they are willing to spend on a scene, the more damage they can do to their opponents, and conversely the more damage they open themselves up for. At the vague level, characters are basically researching the situation, if they fail horribly, they might alert their opponent to the investigation (which wouldn't damage the character directly but would allow their opponent to gain a strategic benefit in later scenes). At the unfocused level, the character is capable of damaging their opponent through taking out their minions, physically disrupting plans or even causing minor injuries to the mastermind behind the scenes (injuries could be psychological, social, physiological, or other...). As the scenes get more focused, the character is able to do more damage to their opponents, but the same amount of potential damage can be dealt back to them. In this way, a careful character can do a lot of  behind the scenes work, avoiding all sorts of risks but not really getting too far with their agenda. A rash character can wade headlong into battle, and rip apart their enemy, but they've got a chance of being ripped apart themselves.

I'll also add at this point that if a player can justify their character being present, they can spend a single spotlight token to appear as an offsider in someone else's scene (no matter what the level of scene focus). Players will want to do this because if a scene is viewed on TV, then everyone appearing in the scene gains a bit of fame.

Degrees of success versus declared actions per success

This has sort of been touched by the comments above, but I'll expand it a bit further.

The basic nature of the game allows characters to interact with the world around them through machinations and plots. They need to reveal and destroy a plot to get to the person behind it. They can instigate their own plots to prevent people from getting to them. The scope of a plots is clearly defined by the size of the dice pool associated with it. A minor scene might only be worth one or two dice, a grand and elaborate conspiracy might have twenty or more dice behind it.

When a character interacts with someone else's plot, their target may choose to step in or not. In this way a secret mastermind can allow someone to confront their plot without revealing themselves (instead they perform their actions to bolster to plot from behind the scenes), in this case the plot uses only it's dice to counter the effects of the players. A more blatant adversary can step into the scene, and suddenly the story is resisting with the adversaries automatic successes, plus any dice in its pool (but once the adversary has revealed themselves, they become open to direct attacks within the scene).

Dice in pools represent equipment, allies, special forms of knowledge/skill, sponsorship benefits, etc. Both characters and adversaries are trying to accumulate as many of these as possible to further their own goals and destroy the plans of those around them. 

A single success does one of three things, it allows a temporary bonus later on, it eliminates a die from the opponent's pool or it inflicts an injury on the opponent. Each of these is narrated as an action within the scene.

If a scene is vague, then injuries to opponent's aren't possible.
If a scene is unfocused, then most of the dice will go toward extra bonuses and eliminating dice, because only a single injury may be inflicted.
If a scene is focused, then successes may inflict multiple injuries, temporarily taking opponents out of the story.
If a scene is visceral, then opponents are permanently removed from the story if multiple successes get through.

If a victim of an attack has dice left to play with, they may sacrifice these dice to absorb their injuries as long as they can justify this through the narrative (my bodyguard took the shot, my prepared mystic amulet restored my willpower, my house has a secret trapdoor that allows me to get away).

Basically, if a victim is hit with one successful strike they suffer a penalty to the element and aspect they used in the scene. If either is reduced to zero they are temporarily removed from the game, if both have reached zero, they are dead. This gives most starting characters two or three "hit points" depending on the skills they use (plus the dice at their disposal), and it gives many of the supernatural beings four or more "hit points". Yes it's favoured to the supernatural, but that's why they've got "SUPER" at the beginning of the name. Characters should be trying to accumulate as many dice as possible to stack the odds in their favour before they wade into a conflict with the creatures of the shadows.

Killing blows should never be described until the successes actually remove the last point from a target's element or aspect.

The description of this idea is something I've been working on over the last couple of weeks, and something that will require quite a bit of playtesting to refine.

Traits

Traits are binary. Either you've got them or you don't. Traits are associated with paths, and it's the paths that give you a sliding scale of benefits.

In the example of a police informer, maybe this individual is trying to actively rid himself of the criminal tag. So he finds a cop with whom he shares a couple of other traits. The informer has "justice" (because he's decided to put things right), "criminal" (which he may or may not be trying to get rid of), "football" (he plays in an amateur competition on weekends), and "Asian" (his racial upbringing). He probably has a couple of other traits but that's enough for the example.

He has a few options available...

One cop has the traits "treachery" (an example that might oppose justice) and "cop" (which opposes "criminal").

• Worse case scenario: the cop hates football and Asians. Four traits against. The criminal just senses that this cop is going to betray them.
• Typical scenario: the cop's other two traits don't really interact with the informants. Two traits against. The criminal will probably try to find someone more sympathetic.
• Best case scenario: the cop also plays football and is Asian. Two for, two against...Even score. The criminal might know this cop through common social circles, but isn't too sure if this is the right person to reveal the truth to.

Another cop has the traits "justice" (sharing this with the informant) and "cop" (which opposes "criminal"). These even out so we look at the other traits...

• Worse case scenario: the cop hates football and Asians. Two traits against. The criminal knows that if things were a bit different, this cop could probably be trusted, but race and hobbies are just against him.
• Typical scenario: the cop's other two traits don't really interact with the informants. Totally even. The criminal probably doesn't share much in common with this cop, if the circumstances were right they could probably trust this cop, but they'll have to bide they time for the right moment.
• Best case scenario: the cop also plays football and is Asian. Two traits positive. Again, the criminal might know this cop through common social circles, and due to common interests they have a sense that this cop is someone they can trust...someone who can help them.

Given that most characters will be defined by at least half a dozen traits (including such things as racial heritage, religion/philosophy, occupation, hobbies, elemental affinities, virtues and flaws), simply having the trait or not will get complicated enough. Trying to add sliding scales of complexity to the trait system might add more "realism", but is getting a bit too crunchy for my liking.

I hadn't considered the idea of indirect assists, but it makes sense in the context of the game. One character could certainly try to accumulate successes to provide a benefit to another character's dice pool. They question is why they might want to...and that's something I'll have to think about.

Thanks for the feedback.

V