ProfessorK wrote:You mustve not done game theory then.
They get a card WHENEVER they do this.
The onyl spend a card in that critical "almost there ' situation. And they could still hit "almost there" situations anyway an NOT have the cards to handle thme if they don't do this.
Its an OBVIOUS net win.
Not so fast there. If the difference between the player's value and the target number is greatly skewed in the player's favor, you are correct in saying it is nearly automatic. But when you have a character with Cha 5 and no adds in Taunt is going against a Gloater with an 11 Taunt value, do you really want to risk both your attack and your Taunt getting -2 for the chance to draw a card? Sure, you might need to spend a card to get it, but then it's a trade of card for card, the value of which depends on what you spend vs. what you receive. And if it takes more than one card to get that one card, the odds of the trade being worth it go down considerably.
Also consider that, barring extreme luck, there's likely to be a Possibility thrown in too. In that case, you are trading a known quantity for a random one that may or may not be better. Consider also that most cards are situational, and it's possible that the card may not be useful simply because it's not affecting the right thing at the right time. So in light of these, I don't see multi-actioning for the Approved Action as "strictly better" than not doing so.