Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="D'karr" data-source="post: 5995705" data-attributes="member: 336">I'm not making a judgement call about anybody's game.&nbsp; People can enjoy what they enjoy, and it does not matter to me.However, when someone makes the claim that a particular mechanic is disassociated, and another one isn't and provides examples of both, then it seems appropriate to contrast the examples to determine what in particular about the &quot;mechanics&quot; is causing the &quot;issue&quot;.&nbsp; In this case the claim is that the enjoyment at the table is hampered or diminished, and that this happens because the mechanic is disassociated.At that point the example can be examined, and it demonstrates how their immersion is broken.&nbsp; I'm quoting what the poster said within the context of the &quot;disassociated mechanics&quot; discussion, not as a judgement value on their person, or their game.&nbsp; In that quote you can replace any instance of you with &quot;the player&quot;, or the general meaning of &quot;you&quot; instead of the particular poster.Both HP and encounter/daily powers are being discussed within that context.&nbsp; In the example, the player/DM is extending himself, and the &quot;game narrative&quot; for the purpose of immersion at the table.&nbsp; This is done so as to &quot;cover&quot; one type of mechanic (HP) and help it remain immersive within the narrative space of the game.&nbsp; It would then be incongruent behavior, within that same context, to purposely break the immersion at the table for another mechanic (encounter/daily powers), and then proceed to blame the mechanic for the resulting disassociation.&nbsp; &nbsp; The impact/significance of the immersion, in the example that was quoted, was broken by the actions of the player/DM, not by what the poster is referring to as a &quot;disassociated mechanics&quot;.&nbsp; Based on that context, if the player/DM is the one purposely breaking the immersion, it follows that it is not the particular mechanics &quot;forcing&quot; any form of disassociation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="D'karr, post: 5995705, member: 336"] I'm not making a judgement call about anybody's game. People can enjoy what they enjoy, and it does not matter to me. However, when someone makes the claim that a particular mechanic is disassociated, and another one isn't and provides examples of both, then it seems appropriate to contrast the examples to determine what in particular about the "mechanics" is causing the "issue". In this case the claim is that the enjoyment at the table is hampered or diminished, and that this happens because the mechanic is disassociated. At that point the example can be examined, and it demonstrates how their immersion is broken. I'm quoting what the poster said within the context of the "disassociated mechanics" discussion, not as a judgement value on their person, or their game. In that quote you can replace any instance of you with "the player", or the general meaning of "you" instead of the particular poster. Both HP and encounter/daily powers are being discussed within that context. In the example, the player/DM is extending himself, and the "game narrative" for the purpose of immersion at the table. This is done so as to "cover" one type of mechanic (HP) and help it remain immersive within the narrative space of the game. It would then be incongruent behavior, within that same context, to [B][I]purposely [/I][/B]break the immersion at the table for another mechanic (encounter/daily powers), and then proceed to blame the mechanic for the resulting disassociation. The impact/significance of the immersion, in the example that was quoted, was broken by the actions of the player/DM, not by what the poster is referring to as a "disassociated mechanics". Based on that context, if the player/DM is the one purposely breaking the immersion, it follows that it is not the particular mechanics "forcing" any form of disassociation. [/QUOTE]

Verification