Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5640172" data-attributes="member: 54877">The effect you described can be liberating, if used in the spirit with which it is intended.&nbsp; However, &quot;disassociation&quot; implies something very much the opposite, both in its use by TA and in the original pathological meaning.&nbsp; Taken to its extreme case, disassociation implies--among other things--a personality somewhat imprisoned in the owner's skull--expressly, not free to act in ways in which the personality ultimately desires.&nbsp;One of the characteristics is replacement of decision points with process--even when this might not be the best way to handle the situation.&nbsp; I had a conversation yesterday, with someone suffering from the psychological condition, about the trouble a &quot;locked in&quot; process can cause when the normal parameters for the process are not fully applicable.&nbsp;Bringing it back to the less serious gaming side, the thing about process-based simulation methods is that they are as much of a double-edge sword as narrative methods.&nbsp; When the process allows you to work efficiently, it is &quot;liberating&quot; in that it lets you get on with the game in a way that is satisfying.&nbsp; When the process locks you in, you obviously get something more confining (the only way I can &quot;make discombobulated&quot; in the story is to use a mechanics explicitly tied to tripping or perhaps confusion).&nbsp; A narrative method that replaces a limiting mechanic is liberating--if you care about the limit.&nbsp; A narrative method that leaves the choice up to you, perhaps making you stop longer than you care to, or cause analysis paralysis due to the options, is confining.&nbsp; &quot;Limits are freeing&quot; is about avoiding analysis paralysis by imposing a structure.&nbsp; &nbsp;In either case, applying narrative mechanics as a process method are nearly always going to have all of the bad sides of both methods, and neither of the good sides.&nbsp; You've, in effect, got a limited choice process that nonetheless suffers from analysis paralysis and other open-ended issues because the limited choices are not part of the process.&nbsp; &quot;Make up something appropriate--in the simulation process sense--that causes this creature to be prone.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5640172, member: 54877"] The effect you described [B]can[/B] be liberating, if used in the spirit with which it is intended. However, "disassociation" implies something very much the opposite, both in its use by TA and in the original pathological meaning. Taken to its extreme case, disassociation implies--among other things--a personality somewhat imprisoned in the owner's skull--expressly, not free to act in ways in which the personality ultimately desires. One of the characteristics is replacement of decision points with process--even when this might not be the best way to handle the situation. I had a conversation yesterday, with someone suffering from the psychological condition, about the trouble a "locked in" process can cause when the normal parameters for the process are not fully applicable. Bringing it back to the less serious gaming side, the thing about process-based simulation methods is that they are as much of a double-edge sword as narrative methods. When the process allows you to work efficiently, it is "liberating" in that it lets you get on with the game in a way that is satisfying. When the process locks you in, you obviously get something more confining (the only way I can "make discombobulated" in the story is to use a mechanics explicitly tied to tripping or perhaps confusion). A narrative method that replaces a [B]limiting[/B] mechanic is liberating--if you care about the limit. A narrative method that leaves the choice up to you, perhaps making you stop longer than you care to, or cause analysis paralysis due to the options, is confining. "Limits are freeing" is about avoiding analysis paralysis by imposing a structure. In either case, applying narrative mechanics as a process method are nearly always going to have all of the bad sides of both methods, and neither of the good sides. You've, in effect, got a limited choice process that nonetheless suffers from analysis paralysis and other open-ended issues because the limited choices are not part of the process. "Make up something appropriate--in the simulation process sense--that causes this creature to be prone." [/QUOTE]

Verification