If you can make up reasonable sounding task statements (or rolls if you are OST folks - Old School Traveller) and keep the game and combats flowing without too much document diving, you'll have a much more dynamic feeling game. It will have a sense of momentum.

This is a keen insight which often leaves me puzzled when there is an in depth discussion of the ways in which this or that rule "doesn't work" or seems to be "in conflict" with some other bits of the rules.

The "primary principle" you've identified here suggests that the "answer" is such instances is something like "Yep, that bit's not quite right; here's an opportunity for the referee to exercise their essential discretion." (In other words, this is why the "referee" role cannot be effectively automated out of existence.)

Any resulting "disagreements" about a proposed resolution would seem to be mostly about differences in the inherent subjectivity of that referee discretion.

YMMV,

David

"Let's see yours. Draw--soul! Inspection--soul!" - Foxx Travis (H. Beam Piper), "Oomphel in the Sky"