You can try anything in any game of D&D and the DM can say whether it works or not. These abilities though are there to illustrate when it is truly effective. Some choices in the game may have been bad. No question. But the entire game is not predicated upon dissociative mechanics.
I don't think that having the DM say if something works or not makes 4E different from any other edition of the game. If you say, "Well, I can't use Comeback Strike when I'm tired," and then later on - before an Extended Rest - you get some magical zap of energy, the DM can rule that you've got an extra use of Comeback Strike.
This is similar to what I have done in my 4E Hack: instead of having Martial Encounter Powers available once per encounter, the player (with DM supervision) creates an game world trigger that must be met for the Exploit to be used. If that trigger is met, the Exploit can be used at-will.
I could do something similar for the Trip rules in 3E: Describe your trip attempt; from that description, the DM determines if you use Str or Dex, if it's an unarmed or weapon attack, the modifiers to the Trip check, and if the target can Trip you in return on a failed Trip check.
If you rely on the DM to associate the mechanics then the DM can associate 4E's mechanics.
However, I agree with the sentiment in this statement: in earlier editions "the entire game is not predicated upon dissociative mechanics." I think there is something different about 4E. I'm not exactly sure why. Could it be the frequency of these dissociated mechanics - that it's easier to imagine what's going on with a 3E Trip attempt vs. wanting to use Steel Serpent Strike again in the same encounter, but not being able to? (I think that's the name of the 1st level Fighter Encounter Power that lets you knock your target prone on a hit.)
For example: I changed the Encounter Exploits in my 4E Hack to rely on Triggers - "Triggered Exploits" - but I left Daily Exploits as they are. The fact that you can't use your Daily Exploit again until you refresh* it never seems to bother anyone. Maybe it's because that's one of the few places dissociated mechanics crop up, and it's easy to ignore. The game is no longer predicated upon dissociative mechanics.
* - Refreshing requires six hours of carousing or completing a Quest. Maybe that puts Daily Exploits into the explicitly metaphysical realm, and that helps us handwave the dissociation?
When you think about multiple daily powers that disappear one at a time, there is no consistent reason for their existence. A trip mechanic is just me trying to get good at tripping. (By the way I never was really all that fond of trip mechanics and would have left that entirely in the improve realm but that is just me).
I agree with the first sentence. Not so much with the second.
Which makes me think that there's something I'm missing about dissociated mechanics. What is it about the Trip rules - which don't really have a connection to the game world, or else they'd be written differently (as above is one such way) - that isn't dissociated, while Daily Powers are?
Maybe:
If the player can make a choice that the PC cannot: Dissociated mechanic.
If the player
cannot make a choice that the PC can: Abstracted mechanic.
If the player makes the same choice that the PC does: Associated mechanic.
That would make sense for things like magic: no one knows how you're moving your hands or throwing your bat guano when you cast fireball. You just do. The player wants to cast fireball, the PC wants to cast fireball. Association.
