[Torg] Possibility Spending

[Benjamin Grant]

>>> It is true that possibilities can be quickly lost, it is
>>> always an optional usage - and since the PCs usually
>>> outnumber the NPC possy rated villain 3 to 1, this usually
>>> means that if the PCs want it badly enough, assuming that the
>>> baddie has roughly the same amount of possies as they, each
>>> of them can lose 1/3 of their possibilities but in so doing
>>> make sure that the baddie gets no rerolls and their own
>>> rerolls will not be stopped.  It's pricey, but can be worth
>>> it.  Anyways, it's their option.
>>
>>No, it's not their option - not alone. It's the option of whomever
>>cares the
>>least about hanging on to their Possibilities.
>>
>>See, the P-rated bad guy has the option of spending Possibilities for
>>re-rolls in exactly the same way that the PCs do. That means that
>>either the
>>PCs have to allow him to get extra die rolls (that is, not counter) or
>>the
>>NPC can simply burn all his Possibilities to force the PCs to lose
>>about a
>>third of their Possibilities.
>>
>>And why wouldn't he? If he's outnumbered three to one, he's likely to
>>get
>>his butt kicked. Unspent Possibilities don't help if you're dead. The
>>best
>>chance a typical P-rated NPC has to survive will be to make the cost of
>>stopping him or at least preventing his escape so high that the PCs
>>aren't
>>willing to pay.
>>
>>I think, as a player, I'd be quite unhappy about that situation. It
>>makes it
>>far harder to keep Possibility expenditure down through smart play.
>>Burning
>>Possibilities just to wear down the opposition's Possibility stores is
>>a
>>mug's game, and something that allows the other side to force me to
>>play it
>>is very bad for me.

That's a very interesting point, and one I will be devoting much thought to.
It may turn out that although the standard rules permit this kind of play, a
house rule to amend that would be desirable.  You certainly have brought to
light a possible extremely deleterious effect of the rules as written.

>>
>>At least with the standard rule, the group has the option of spending a
>>couple of Possibilities to keep the bad guy suppressed until they can
>>finesse a means to put him down with Possibilities still in hand.
>>
>>Travis Hall

Of course, I continue to be persuaded that the standard rule is what permits
the state of affairs you describe above - but that may not be the subject of
this thread.  The subject of this thread is simply that, whether or not we
agree that spending multiple possibilities is permitted or denied by the
rules as written, it may bring more harm than joy to the game.

I will consider that matter separately.  It's a point well made.

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