[Torg] Possibilities: Better Results Now VS Character Advancement

[travisjhall at optusnet.com.au]

winstoninabox <winstoninabox at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> While I certainly agree with the examples Sam, I don't agree that the 
> rules are situational or encourage poor character decisions.
> 
> Both the rules Jasyn and myself outlined to the players quite clearly 
> before the game how many PP would be returned each Act.

If that's the only effect that you're after, you don't need a new set of rules. You can just let the players see the part of the GM's section of the standard that gives guidelines for act awards.

But that isn't the only effect of some of the suggestions here, nor the effect to which Sam objected. He objected to the principle of giving replacement Possibilities to players who put themselves in a bad situation and spend possibilities to get out of it, while denying Possibilities to those who didn't have to spend Possibilities - something that, at least in some groups, is most often the result of smarter play.

> Then it's their choice to stand out in the open burning up PPs knowing 
> that only 2 or 3 will be returned later.

And what about the player who plays excellently, and thus avoids the need to spend 2 or 3 possibilities? Where'd his reward go?

I can see that a change in the rules might support a certain style of play, but I also see why the standard rules are as they are, and why some people prefer them.

Travis Hall