Design Goals for the CN: Ascend Dice Mechanics

A summary of 7 design goals I have for Ascend's Dice Mechanics.

1. Usable to resolve all conflicts. I want a mechanic that determines whether a person hit, got bluffed, how much damage, who wins an argument, which belief wins an internal conflict. One mechanic, with several layers, rather then several mechanics.
2. Easy to Grok game state. There is such a thing as too much information. Whether it be a proliferation of different sized counters in Magic, or multiple bonuses and penalties in D&D, having to keep track of, and perform multiple additions and subtractions makes for bad game play. Magic simplified by making all counters +1/+1. Combat Advantage is a way to simplify in D&D as it is always (unless modified by special character ability, something easy to manage for that player) +2.
3. Tracking that is tangible. One of the beauties of Magic is the Mana system, an easy to track and tangible means of resource management. Changes in the amount of this resource, the quantity used, etc, is easy to discern with no memorization. Marking is similar in D&D. Unfortunately D&D has so many game states, some of which are tracked, some not (Combat Advantage) that the game state loses its grokableness.
4. Upfront Player Knowledge. By this I mean that the Player rolls, and the Player knows whether they succeeding or not and by how much. There is no recitation to the GM the result and then a confirmation. Compare this to D&D where the die result is quasi known by the player. There are a multitude of options available to a player after the roll to modify it, if he knows whether he failed or succeeded and by how much. But it is not at all clear how or when, or even if this information is to be given to a player. Whether it is or not tends to vary by group, and thus the power of certain options varies. Beyond the frustration of the variability of certain options, making informed play decisions leads to a more enjoyable game experience.
5. Multiple and (more or less) open ended Success Tiers. Combat in WoD has multiple success tiers, with each additional success having an accumulative effect. Most other non-extended rolls in WoD have 4 tiers, critical failure, failure, success, and exceptional success. D&D combat has 3 tiers, failure, hit, critical hit, some of D&D has 2, and other parts a variable amount (ie, knowledge skill checks). There are multiple variations, and each have their place. For Ascend I want consistency in result tiers - failure and cumulative successes with game state effect.
6. Multiple Successes on every roll matters. There is a meaningful change in the game state any time the dice is roll, and the number of successes matters to the game state. But wait, aren't there times when a simple succeed/fail is all that matters? Yes, and in these instance I still want the amount of successes to affect game state.
7. Clear Distinction in the Dials. D&D has, generally, one dial. Bonuses and Penalties. But it has recently developed a second dial, number of d20 rolled. Certain Backgrounds, the Avenger, even the Elf/halfling rerolls. oWod had two, amount of dice rolled and the number needed for a success. nWod eliminated one of these. Dials modify the chance of success, and can be straightforward like penalty and bonuses, or more subtle like rolling an extra d20 and keeping the higher result. Having multiple, clearly defined, dials at a player's disposal allows more room for decision making.

I'll add to this list if more bubble to the surface, but this is a good start.