Hi Andrea.
Thanks for your review! I appreciate that.
Considering Rust/Storm mechanic, I'm aware of that and I don't think that's actually an issue. When the group decide to abstain from spending more than "[3 x player count] - 4" in order to avoid The Storm, still it does mean that their resources became even more scarce.
And the previous paragraphs. "October Rust" doesn't have three-way oracle-like resolution, because it simply doesn't need it in my opinion. Every conflict you take, has built in cost: except of a case "Theme 3 vs Obstacle 3, minor intent", you always need to either spend your resources (trappings, rust points, one use of a background) or be forced to accept at least one die, so at least +1 month. In other hand, "Yes, and" or "No, and" always has that "but/however" ingrained in the engine. The uncertainity lies in details: how player/GM elaborates their stake (if given narrative rights), how GM interprets Forces of Evil ideas, how the fiction interacts with Scale of Intent, etc. It works by a clash between intents of both sides...
It creates a limit for actions through out the game, and securing "100% success/your intent" is possible just to a certain moment. OR is designed to grind out player characters.
Considering scene count, October Rust enforces at least three framed scenes by a structure (pre-Final Question play, Final Question, Epilogue Questions). In practice (and by instructions in the book), each Force of Evil can work as a different scene. Epilogue Questions can be written in a way that they'll need two separate (short) scenes for them, because of "you can't answer both EQ in one conflict" rule.
In practice, I'd expect like 5-6 scenes, depending on player count.
Anyway, thanks for feedback. The rulebook itself still needs more clarification in certain areas, or at least make few mechanics more transparent to a reader.