Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 5985857" data-attributes="member: 8461">I disagree with this, as I found 4E's conception of hit points (e.g. "will to keep fighting") more dissociated than those of previous editions (e.g. "wounds").I'm aware that people have a case to make that there's text in previous editions of the game likening hit points to "will to fighting," but the way my friends and I read the books they always sounded very forthright in saying that hit point damage was physical wounding.For what it's worth, the article is (or at least, I thought it was) very forthright in saying that dissociated mechanics have a place in RPGs - the game is an abstraction, so their presence is virtually impossible to eliminate.What I think the problem is for many players is the difference between dissociated mechanics regarding things that affect the characters versus dissociated mechanics in the things that the characters can do. For measuring things about the characters some dissociation seems to be understood as a necessity, whereas dissociation regarding rules for character abilities just seemed like too much for a lot of people.Of course, the degree of tolerance for that varies by individual, and there were plenty for whom it wasn't a big deal at all. Which is perfectly fine since, after all, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_gustibus_non_est_disputandum" target="_blank">de gustibus non est disputandum</a>.</blockquote>