[Torg] Possibility Spending

[Benjamin Grant]

RE: [Torg] Possibility Spending
>>>
>>> If the die roll is cancelled, it seems pretty
>>> obvious that possibility was not in fact spent on *any*
>>> action - and until one is able to spend a possibility
>>> on an action, one does not run afoul of
>>> the limit.
>>
>>No. This is your addition to the rules. As per the rule I quoted,
>>spending a
>>Possibility to counter has no effect whatsoever on the original
>>expenditure
>>of a Possibility - not on whether it was spent, nor on what it was
>>spent on.
>>Not unless you expect the rules to explicit state all the imaginable
>>effects
>>which do not apply in any given situation.
>>
>>I do not find your addition to be obvious, nor at all implied by the
>>written
>>rules.

It is not an addition, it is written in plain English in the actual text.  I
do not know how to make it more obvious to you.

>>
>>> The possibility was spent - not arguing that point - it just
>>> wasn't spent on an action, as required for the limit to be invoked.
>>
>>The rules do not state that the expenditure of a Possibility to counter
>>results in the first Possibility spent no longer having been spent on
>>the
>>action.
>>
>>> Having one's die roll cancelled results in the
>>> possibility NOT being spent on any action.
>>
>>Then I'm sure you can find the rule that says that.
>>
>>> We are only discussing what the
>>> text actually does say all on its own.
>>
>>Fair enough. By that standard, please quote the rule that states that
>>spending a Possibility to counter results in the first Possibility
>>spent (by
>>the acting character) has no longer been spent *on the original
>>action*.
>>
>>Travis Hall

Actually, you need to quote the rule that states that the possibility is
considered spent *on the original action* even when no affect on the value
of the original action attempt results.  Otherwise, it seems quite clear
that in plain English that we are given no reason in the actual rules as
written to consider the possibility actually *spent* "on any one action".

It is entirely possible, and seeming more and more likely, that you seem to
not agree with this, although I haven't seen any good reason why.
Nevertheless, this may wind up being an instance where two people read the
same text and both take away subtly different meaning from it.  I obviously
believe my reading of the text to be more accurate, but I am not sure there
is any way for such a fundamental disagreement to be resolved.  If we both
look in a box and I say I see an apply and you say in disagreement that you
see a fruit, and no meeting of the minds seem possible - we may just have to
agree to disagree on the "obvious" meaning of the text.

Either way, that's fine.  It doesn't really matter all that much anyways -
you are going to playing how you are going to play, and so am I.  We both
seem to believe that our interpretation is clearly accurate.  Nothing seems
to be gained from further discussion, so I am not sure what the benefit of
continuing would be.  Still, if further discussion is your wish, for now, I
will consent to do so.

Thanks.

-Benn Grant
eFix Computer Consulting
benn at 4eFix.com
603.283.6601