[Torg] Possibilities: Better Results Now VS Character Advancement

[Travis James Hall]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: torg-bounces at justintimeadventures.com 
> [mailto:torg-bounces at justintimeadventures.com] On Behalf Of 
> winstoninabox
> Sent: Thursday, 13 December 2007 5:59 PM
> To: torg at justintimeadventures.com
> Subject: RE: [Torg] Possibilities: Better Results Now VS 
> Character Advancement
> 
> 
> > 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.
> 
> Certainly.
> 
> But remember that these rule changes were suggested because 
> in Torg spending PPs from the pool in game reduces later 
> character advancement.
> These changes are attempts to take away the indecision of 
> spend now vs. advancement later.

Yes, and reiterating that does not negate the objections presented. The
"indecision" results from a player having to make a difficult choice, and
some of us want that difficult choice to be there. You can want differently,
but your stating so does not mean that Sam is not also correct in his
assessment of how best to meet his own desires.

> Excellent play can be rewarded in the Adventure awards with a role-playing
bonus of PPs. It need not be part of the Act awards.

So do you propose giving each player who loses the act awards by playing
wisely and not spending Possibilities as a result the same award, at the end
of the adventure, as he would have gotten from act awards? And also allowing
him the same opportunities to earn additional Possibilities through other
good play as those who regularly save their own butts with Possibilities, of
course. If not, you're still taking away a bonus that such a player would
otherwise have earnt.

Really, a quick look at the maths is all that it takes to see that you still
propose reducing the awards for smart play that removes the necessity of
Possibility expenditure. You say 2-3 Possibilities per act (only if that
much is spent) and 8-11 per adventure. In a one-act adventure (or a two-act
adventure, if you don't give out an act award for the final act), if all of
your end-of-adventure 3-Possibility bonus is given just to make up for the 3
Possibilities that a character can earn through expenditure, the smart
player gets his award back. Add even one more act, and he falls behind what
he would otherwise be getting.

So sure, you can reward excellent play in the adventure awards, but you
haven't proposed a scheme that does so in a fashion that makes up for what
the good players might lose. Me, I prefer to allow the system to do its
thing and automatically reward players for smart use of cards, good strategy
and such, and just concentrate on manually rewarding the other aspects of
good play through bonuses, and conversely assessing penalties when such may
be required (which happens more rarely, in my experience).

Travis Hall