Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6011735" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Gotcha.&nbsp; Ok.&nbsp; I do agree that the the 4e DM advice, the explicit nature of the mechanics, the &quot;meta-imperatives&quot; and meta-resources built into the system can certainly be a burden to be overcome, or at least unwieldy, to some (many?) players when they are attempting to permanently sustain unperturbed, 1st person, actor stance immersion.&nbsp; I just hold that getting used to stance fluctuations so they become unconscious and do not perturb overall immersion within &quot;greater actor stance&quot; *, is about taste, exposure, will and execution.&nbsp; If it is not within someone's playstyle taste and they have never been exposed to meta-techniques/system mechanics that propagate narrative play, then they will likely not devote the will to learn to properly execute *.&nbsp; I suspect some can properly execute * but cannot, however, muster the will to develop the taste for it (I am a behaviorist advocate so I do hold the position that &quot;taste&quot; is as much, or more, a matter of will as it is some natural, organic process intrinsic to the person).&nbsp; Lastly, I suspect some are right happy with their taste in playstyle and don't give a wit about diversifying it with new elements and/or think those new elements are rubbish or extraneous.&nbsp; If someone has within their retinue a strong advocate of meta-mechanics, that advocate may expose them (and the rest of the group) to those meta-mechanics/systems.&nbsp; If that exposure takes and develops into playstyle preference (taste), or at least as a toolkit to achieve a specific end within the greater scope of the fiction/mechanical resolution process, then they will devote their will to master the craft and execute consistently.&nbsp; My guess is that somewhere within that muddled composition of taste, exposure, will and execution you will find the the infrastructure of the edition wars and people's visceral reactions one way or another. Well, the angle of that conversation would likely go round and round as I'm certain that both of us have seen it plenty before <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; Given what I've read of your posts, I don't think your issue is exposure, will or execution.&nbsp; My guess is that yours is merely a matter of taste when it comes to the micro-issue of &quot;meta-mechanics perturbation of actor stance immersion within exploration challenges.&quot;&nbsp; That's fair enough.&nbsp; I just hold that if your taste allows for it, and you set your will to action toward the end of execution (and some prior exposure would likely help this along), then you might be rewarded...taste-allowing.&nbsp; Wow.&nbsp; What a collection of caveats.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6011735, member: 6696971"] Gotcha. Ok. I do agree that the the 4e DM advice, the explicit nature of the mechanics, the "meta-imperatives" and meta-resources built into the system can certainly be a burden to be overcome, or at least unwieldy, to some (many?) players when they are attempting to permanently sustain unperturbed, 1st person, actor stance immersion. I just hold that getting used to stance fluctuations so they become unconscious and do not perturb overall immersion within "greater actor stance" *, is about taste, exposure, will and execution. If it is not within someone's playstyle taste and they have never been exposed to meta-techniques/system mechanics that propagate narrative play, then they will likely not devote the will to learn to properly execute *. I suspect some can properly execute * but cannot, however, muster the will to develop the taste for it (I am a behaviorist advocate so I do hold the position that "taste" is as much, or more, a matter of will as it is some natural, organic process intrinsic to the person). Lastly, I suspect some are right happy with their taste in playstyle and don't give a wit about diversifying it with new elements and/or think those new elements are rubbish or extraneous. If someone has within their retinue a strong advocate of meta-mechanics, that advocate may expose them (and the rest of the group) to those meta-mechanics/systems. If that exposure takes and develops into playstyle preference (taste), or at least as a toolkit to achieve a specific end within the greater scope of the fiction/mechanical resolution process, then they will devote their will to master the craft and execute consistently. My guess is that somewhere within that muddled composition of taste, exposure, will and execution you will find the the infrastructure of the edition wars and people's visceral reactions one way or another. Well, the angle of that conversation would likely go round and round as I'm certain that both of us have seen it plenty before :) Given what I've read of your posts, I don't think your issue is exposure, will or execution. My guess is that yours is merely a matter of taste when it comes to the micro-issue of "meta-mechanics perturbation of actor stance immersion within exploration challenges." That's fair enough. I just hold that if your taste allows for it, and you set your will to action toward the end of execution (and some prior exposure would likely help this along), then you might be rewarded...taste-allowing. Wow. What a collection of caveats. [/QUOTE]

Verification