Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 6584806">On the subject of dissociated mechanics, Justin Alexander released a further clarification of the concept a few years ago. I think he may have also talked about it again since then and evolved his position a bit. Where I personally found it useful, was it did help me identify something that seemed to be really troubling me when I played 4E (in the essay he is trying to explain the extremely negative reaction some folks have to the system). Some important points he made that get lost is he is not saying dissociated mechanics are anything new or unique to 4E, nor is he saying they are always bad or that they have no place. I think his point was more that some folks how lower thresholds of toleration for them (just like some folks might have lower thresholds of toleration for non-unified subsystems or involved mechanics like THAC0). Dissociated mechanics is one of many possible explanations behind reactions to 4E. For me it made a certain amount of sense. Imposing my own experience of that on others, doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Where it has been very useful for me is in design. I owe a lot to the idea in how I approach making games. I do generally find in practice that mechanics I might describe as dissociative tend to pull me out of the game a bit. Not everyone has that experience, not everyone will view the same mechanics as dissociative, but it is handy concept as long as one isn't using it as a bludgeoning instrument to ruin peoples' enjoyment of 4E (and I am aware some, including myself, were using it in this way). I do like Justin Alexander's writings at the Alexandrian. I've found his stuff unusually helpful in gaming. One of the reasons for it I think is he gives himself the freedom to take chances with ideas. He can definitely be on the passionate side and I understand that sometimes leaves a negative impression with folks if they disagree with him (heck I've had heated debates with him myself here and on other forums). But I do think his writings have contributed a lot to the hobby. I think for some reasons about 4E just have this tendency to take a dark turn, even when people start out trying to be friendly. At some point, one side offends the other, the other retaliates, and it just becomes this <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> for tat thing. I don't believe anyone is going in with that intention. I think people are just going in trying to express what it is they like or they don't like about the game, but it always seems to become this war where we have to convince each other that our way is the right way.</blockquote>

Verification