Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6597106" data-attributes="member: 22779">Of course it's arbitrary.&nbsp; Dissociative is only applied to things you don't like.&nbsp; It's tautological.&nbsp; I don't like X.&nbsp; Therefore X has to be dissociative.&nbsp; The problem with that is dissociative is a pejorative term.&nbsp; You're trying to claim you don't like X because X is objectively bad or wrong in some fashion, rather than simply not to your taste.This is why you don't find Power Attack dissociative, despite the fact that it fits every single criteria that you, yourself, claim for dissociative mechanics.&nbsp; You like Power Attack, therefore it cannot be dissociative because you don't like dissociative mechanics.&nbsp; Dissociative mechanics becomes a convenient shorthand for &quot;stuff I don't like&quot; while at the same time sounding like you actually have more justification for your dislike other than simply personal taste.&nbsp; I've come to really, truly appreciate the OSR crowd of Dragonsfoot.&nbsp; They're at least consistent in disliking something.&nbsp; I find it frankly baffling that anyone who so strongly dislikes 4e would find 5e perfectly palatable.&nbsp; There's just so many 4e mechanics in 5e.&nbsp; If dissociative mechanics bother you, then why on earth would you like 5e?&nbsp; Or 3e for that matter?&nbsp; If you were an AD&amp;D/OSR fan, then I'd understand perfectly well.&nbsp; It would make complete sense.&nbsp; But, for some reason that I can never, ever fathom, 4e gets the big thumbs down for doing the exact same things that 3e and 5e get praised for.&nbsp; It's baffling.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6597106, member: 22779"] Of course it's arbitrary. Dissociative is only applied to things you don't like. It's tautological. I don't like X. Therefore X has to be dissociative. The problem with that is dissociative is a pejorative term. You're trying to claim you don't like X because X is objectively bad or wrong in some fashion, rather than simply not to your taste. This is why you don't find Power Attack dissociative, despite the fact that it fits every single criteria that you, yourself, claim for dissociative mechanics. You like Power Attack, therefore it cannot be dissociative because you don't like dissociative mechanics. Dissociative mechanics becomes a convenient shorthand for "stuff I don't like" while at the same time sounding like you actually have more justification for your dislike other than simply personal taste. I've come to really, truly appreciate the OSR crowd of Dragonsfoot. They're at least consistent in disliking something. I find it frankly baffling that anyone who so strongly dislikes 4e would find 5e perfectly palatable. There's just so many 4e mechanics in 5e. If dissociative mechanics bother you, then why on earth would you like 5e? Or 3e for that matter? If you were an AD&D/OSR fan, then I'd understand perfectly well. It would make complete sense. But, for some reason that I can never, ever fathom, 4e gets the big thumbs down for doing the exact same things that 3e and 5e get praised for. It's baffling. [/QUOTE]

Verification