Hi!
  Luke Crane, John Wick, and Jared Sorensen came up with the Big Three questions of Game Design. Then, Troy Cristisick came up with the Power 19, a way to elaborate further on the intent of the original three:
1.) What is your game about?
Super powered humans standing up and making a difference. This is a world where there have always been supers (Hercules was real for instance). Not in the shadows, but in the open. Like rock stars, there are thousands of them, but the chance of encountering one of them is about the same.

2.) What do the characters do?
Face Challenges that threaten the heroes or the people that they care about.

3.) What do the players (including the GM if there is one) do?
The GM Plays the Villains and initiates Challenges for the Players and reacts to the Challenges that the Players make.

The Players play super powered humans and try and make a difference in the game world.

This is done through Challenges, which involves picking an Arena, Scope, selecting and narrating Traits of all characters involved, rolling dice according to Scope and then the players and GM buy game world effects with the points generated by the dice and traits.

4.) How do the various parts of your system reinforce what your game is about?
There is no result of "nothing happens" and the results are defined by the players as the results of their actions.

5.) How does your setting (or lack thereof) reinforce what your game is about?
The setting should enable the characters to stand up and make a difference, and not force them to hide in the shadows.

6.) How does the Chargen of your game reinforce what your game is about?
Character generation involves coming up with the a concept for your character, then enables you to make that EXACT character. The only character concept that is not supported is making a character that doesn't have any problems.

7.) What types of behaviors/styles of play does your game reward (and punish if necessary)?
Unlimited creativity is supported by chargen, and this extends into the story told at the table. The game should support traditional play, with a GM, character build strategies, solid resolution mechanics and predictable/manageable mechanics.

8.) How are behaviors and styles of play rewarded or punished in your game?
  Challenge resolution is defined by how the players change the setting/game world then backed up mechanically by allowing the players to substantively change the setting through their character's actions.

9.) How are the responsibilities of narration and credibility divided in your game?
  Credibility is defined by the Tags of the character Traits and the Effects purchased through the resolution mechaanics.

10.) What does your game do to command the players' attention, engagement, and participation? (i.e. What does the game do to make them care?)
  Even though the GM has a central role, player participation and narration is mandatory. And this is reinforced through the rules.

11.) What are the resolution mechanics of your game like?
  You narrate to explain what Traits are in play and then buy changes in the world with the points generated.

12.) How do the resolution mechanics reinforce what your game is about?
You don't have to roll for the little things, like "Does Batman make his Driving Roll?" You roll when you think you can change the world!

13.) Do characters in your game advance? If so, how?
Advancement is not a focus of this game. You could use the Effect rules to produce  advancement-like Effects in your own character though.

14.) How does the character advancement (or lack thereof) reinforce what your game is about?
If the effect of a challenge is to make yur character stronger, buy it with the appropriate Effect points. Otherwise, spend them to make the world a better place.

15.) What sort of product or effect do you want your game to produce in or for the players?
I hope that the mechanics (and not some settimgs prose) will make the players really care about this setting.

16.) What areas of your game receive extra attention and color? Why?
Creativity. A poster asked me how to make a character with Eyeball Control and we hashed it out in 3 posts that would have been less than a 5-minute convo face to face. And that is what I want for this game. Not to force the players to jigger their ideas into a rigid system, but to make the heroes they see in their mind's eye.

17.) Which part of your game are you most excited about or interested in? Why?
No laundry list of poers, templates, effects, advantages, disadvantages or any such thing.

18.) Where does your game take the players that other games can't, don't, or won't?
Their imagination. With my game, you never have to say, "OK, my character has X, but it has no mechanical affect"

19.) What are your publishing goals for your game? Who is your target audience?
  I'd like to do small press if I can line up a decent cover.

I hope this will be enlightening. Please feel free to leave a comment.

PS
  I am not a Forgie, or a dirty-hippy gamer. I have read about as many posts here as there and have accepted about as many theories/ideas from here as i did from there. And rejected quite a few from both as well.
  Not that it matters, I just don't want to get a reputation, lol

I think you need to be a bit more specific about what the characters will be doing. What sort of challenges are there? Are they small scale (Oh my! I've dented my car) or large scale (The world is about to end, again).

Why have you removed advancement? My players get a lot of joy seeing their characters improve over time.

How is player participation and narration made mandatory through the rules?

Are there any limits at all to the characters? Will power gaming be a problem?

These questions are not a checklist per se, where having an answer is enough. They are thought provoking that by reading your answers, the reader can really get a feel of what the game is about. I'd like to see you flesh some of the answers out.

Rob,
  Thanks for reading my Power 19.
  I guess I sort of glossed over the topics I have already posted on.
  There is a seperate thread for:
chargen: http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=10769
and
Challenge Resolution: http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=10773

  But basically, to answer your questions directly:
Why have you removed advancement?
 - OK, there is two things going on here. One is Genre emulation, meaning Super man has been the same power level since the mid 80s or so. Advancement happens in Supers stories, but it is usualy in leaps and bounds, not in a steady level progression. The other is that there is character advancement. It is just hidden in the Challenge Resolution Mechanics. If you wanted to add a new Super Power to your character, you simply have to win a Challenge by 405 points for that Super Power to be permanently added. That sounds like a lot, but using an existing Super Power and a good die roil should get you to about 200 playing solo, add two or three friends and you can get that many points easy. Adding less dramatic Traits like Powers or Abilities is much cheaper (permanently adding a Power to your character is 305 points).

How is player participation and narration made mandatory through the rules?
there are a couple of ways: 1) You can't use a power/trait without describing how/when/where your character is using it. And if you do win a Challenge, you have to buy the effects that your character's efforts had on the game world. Which would involve really understanding the story being told and how your character fit into it.

Are there any limits at all to the characters? Will power gaming be a problem?
I can't say this system is immune to "Power gaming" because I think that is impossible. But, I can say that a lot of the tricks used by Power gamers are thwarted by this system. For instance, when you buy a power or super power, you have to say what situations it is applicable to (Physical challenges, mental challenges, etc) and how powerful it is. But there are only 3 levels of power, Ability (Human possible), Power (Super human) and Super Power (earth shattering). And the rules gives you results based on how you answer this question, no more or less. What this means is, you can't say you have an human-possible ability, but then use it to chuck a tank at some guy. And you can't say you have Super Strength, but then not be able to open a jar of pickles.

I like your list of questions. It gets to the heart of your concerns, and so few people will just be that honest and ask those questions, thanks!

'power 19'? :eek:

Ghost,
  Um, I don't know what your post means. I hope this helps you understnad what I am doing better:
http://socratesrpg.blogspot.com/2006/01/what-are-power-19-pt-1.html

I have no problem with what you are doing, it's just the idea of a 'power 19' sounds very Dr Phil to me. I've read and listened to podcasts featuring some of these game designer types espousing these philosophies and I find it all somewhat disturbing. Especially the notion that games have to be about something: they don't.

Ghost,
  OK
  Yeah, I didn't come up with the name (I think its kinda over-wrought as well). And, like I said I am not a Forgie or whatever.

  I think that the final design does influence play. I mean, back when I played AD&D (1e), more than once the solution was either to kill peeps, take their stuff or both. I will admit I was a teenager, but I can't deny that the game design led to situations where everything in the system pointed at fighting.
  I got Secret of the Saltmarsh and it was so disappointing, because no one got XPs for all the cool story bits/background built into that module.

  Of course, the right answer has to be somewhere in the middle.
  Players never play a game EXACTLY as designed
  AND Players never ignore design and mechanical influence on play.

  It's has to be a mix. However, I can't control how people will take the game in a different direction (and I wouldn't want to if I could). But I can control what my design says and how it says it. Does that make sense?

  And if you want some evidence of that, look at d20 modern (with Arcana and all the addons) and compare it to M&M. These are built off of the same core rues. The same power level, even a super-similar setting (modern with a twist). But you play them differently and they are perceived as totally separate and unique games.

  Again, I will not defend the Forge, nor do I want to. But I will say that some of the stuff coming out there (if not taken to silly extremes) is useful to design. Just like some of the ideas here (if not taken to extremes) are very useful (like don't throw out something that works, just because you can).

  Anyways, I hope that helps explain where I am coming from.