diff -r 3164c82ac16e -r bdef1afd1170 draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.txt --- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 +++ b/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.txt Wed Aug 30 21:32:44 2006 -0400 @@ -0,0 +1,1549 @@ + [1]The The Internet Home for Independent Role-Playing Games + Forge [2]About the Forge | [3]Support The Forge | [4]Articles | + [5]Reviews | [6]Resource Library | [7]Forums + + Ritual Discourse in Role-Playing Games + + by Christopher I. Lehrich <[8]clehrich@bu.edu> + +Introduction + + Theoretical analysis of RPG's remains largely cut off from other + theoretical discourses, a situation that tends of itself toward sterility. + Two reasons for this isolation predominate. First, RPG theorists come from + a wide range of educational backgrounds, and as such have no shared body + of theoretical models or discourse on which to draw. Second, RPG theory + hopes to serve a constructive function, rather than a purely analytical + one: where the anthropologist for example traditionally understands + herself as necessarily exterior to the people and situations she analyzes, + the RPG theorist wishes to employ the results of his analysis to improve + his own gaming. + + The former difficulty need not concern us unduly. So long as theoretical + models from outside current RPG discourse receive adequate formulation and + explication in RPG terms, only an a priori hostility to other theoretical + constructs would dismiss them out of hand. It is worth considering that + such hostility does appear mutual -- that is, much RPG discourse + formulates itself in opposition to academic theoretical discourse, while + many academics continue to express disdain and scorn if not outright + hostility for role-playing games as an activity -- but resolution of this + can only come about in a historical situation as yet hard to imagine. Thus + I shall set the issue aside, stating only that I intend to explain fully + whatever theoretical constructs I deploy. + + The second problem, however, inheres in the nature of RPG's themselves. A + purely theoretical analytical model of RPG's, i.e. one without any + practical application whatever, will generally be received poorly, if at + all, within RPG communities. Indeed, even RPG theorists who go to + considerable lengths to formulate the practical implications of their + models are sometimes derided as airy pseudo-intellectuals. Fortunately, + some recent RPG publications by members of the theoretical community have + received accolades,[9][1] and this will presumably have the long-term + salutary effect of legitimizing theoretical work within the hobby at + large. + + At the same time, analyses of RPG's have come to formulate practical, + essential divisions and categories, and argued that these may be + unbridgeable. For example, Ron Edwards's tripartite GNS model rests upon + the notion that the three categories must remain discrete in order to + avoid paradigmatic clash and attendant misunderstandings among players, + leading in turn to poor play. That is, a group of players with strongly + Narrativist tendencies should be wary of playing a strongly + Gamist-structured game, or introducing into the group a player with such + an approach. While "hybrids" -- games that effectively serve more than one + of the three major play-types -- are conceived as possible, a central + point for Edwards is that Narrativist-oriented play is not well-suited to + Gamist-oriented games, and that groups who attempt such may need to revise + the game extensively to fit their needs. Similarly, a single player who + cannot conform to the paradigmatic norms of the group in which she plays + will probably find herself continually at odds with other players, leading + to social conflict; this player would be best advised to find another + game.[10][2] + + In his recent article "Story and Narrative Paradigms in Role-Playing + Games,"[11][3] John Kim argues that underlying such categories we find two + approaches: "Collaborative Storytelling" and "Virtual Experience." These + tend, like Edwards's categories, to remain divided. In what Kim calls + "Paradigm Clash," we find a naturally-occurring conflict between + perspectives: + + To the storytelling point of view, the experiential view seems to result + in an unnecessarily limited set of techniques. . . . Experiential play may + also seem passive, letting events happen rather than actively controlling + them. . . . [Conversely,] To the experiential point of view, storytelling + play seems to be creating a product for a nonexistent reader. . . . + Experiential players faced with storytelling play may complain about + breaking suspension of disbelief, or lack of depth. + + Conflict arising from disjuncture, narrative or otherwise, is not only + theoretical. Most gamers have experienced it, and one great strength of + Edwards's model (derived from the earlier Threefold Model developed in the + Advocacy newsgroup[12][4]) is to emphasize recognition and classification + as means to avoiding the problem. In both his and Kim's models, players + and groups who recognize their preferences in a categorical sense can + select games to fit their desires, or revise them so, leading to enjoyable + play with a minimum of fuss and trouble. + + While I support this general constructive point, and do not presently wish + to challenge the classification itself (a much-contested issue), I suggest + that a hard-line division within analysis leads toward weaknesses in a + general understanding and formulation of how RPG's really function. By + drawing on some theoretical models outside of RPG's, I would like to + propose a more unified model of RPG narrativity. + + A word about practicality: I do not, in the present article, formulate the + practical implications of this model for game design or play. I do not see + this as a weakness in itself: if the model serves analytically, it can + have synthetic value. But the two operations have at least a notional + distinction, and can operate well in isolation. If theory must face a + practical proof-critique, then all analysis is already crypto-synthesis; + logically speaking, there is thus insufficient distance postulated to + ensure the validity of the analysis. In short, without the ability to + distinguish at least heuristically between theory and practice, + theoretical work can never have real logical force, lending weight to the + criticisms mentioned at the outset. + + A further point: I intend to propose a ritual model for RPG play, based + upon recent understandings of ritual within the academic discourses of + anthropology, sociology, and history of religions. This model would appear + to fall squarely into the common discourse of analogy as theory, of + proposing that RPG's are "like" something else in order to help emphasize + a point otherwise unclear. Such analogical reasoning is founded upon an + essential methodological principle: the analogy is not identity. Thus + response to the proposal is constrained to two related moves. On the one + hand, one may move to expand the analogy, picking up additional aspects of + the metaphorized object or activity and further relating them to RPG's; on + the other, one may move to limit the analogy, demanding that the metaphor + not be taken to the point of absurdity.[13][5] + + Some find this mode of analysis useful, primarily in a creative sense. If + one "gets" the analogy, in its logical extension and intension, one thinks + about the hobby in a somewhat new way, perhaps leading to new creative + engagement with design or play. But if one does not "get" the analogy, the + tendency, naturally, is to dismiss it as unhelpful, or to reformulate it + endlessly until one does "get it." Either way, the reason to analyze such + a metaphor is generally synthetic, to create new ways of engaging with the + hobby. In other words, the proposal of yet another analogy serves no + analytic function. + + In proposing a ritual model of RPG's, I do not wish to add another analogy + to the lists. I do not mean that RPG play is like ritual at all; I mean + that it is ritual. Therefore classical and recent tools of ritual analysis + apply fully to RPG's, for analytical purposes, for making sense of RPG's + as something other than an entirely isolated hobby, indeed for seeing + RPG's as a human cultural product not particularly distinctive to modern + society. If to some this seems a claim that RPG's are not special and + extraordinary, I suggest on the contrary that this grants to RPG's a + legitimacy and "specialness" attendant upon their roots in wider humanity + and culture.[14][6] + +Ritual + + An obvious first step in proposing this model is the formulation of a + definition of ritual. Unfortunately, perhaps, such definitions have been + the focus of extensive debate for more than a century now, with no clear + end in sight. More models have been proposed of what ritual "is" than many + readers might believe. I have no intention of summarizing this whole + history; I will instead simply propose a starting-point. + + The above-mentioned disjuncture between "Collaborative Storytelling" and + "Virtual Experience" parallels, in a number of respects, two recent + emphases in ritual theory. + + Virtual Experience correlates well with Ronald Grimes's and Victor + Turner's focus on "performance," which ultimately amounts to a notion of + total involvement in ritual activity.[15][7] In ritual, according to this + perspective, humans engage the totality of hearts, minds, and bodies, + setting them to work creatively and dynamically to produce effects within + the social and mental worlds of the participants. Thus in zazen (Sitting + Zen), one does nothing but sit, generally in an approved posture; one's + mind and heart should be similarly focused on nothing but sitting, not in + the sense that one should think continuously, "I'm sitting," but rather + that one's mind should be in a state parallel to the body's state, + thinking nothing, resting, yet remaining alert and awake, receptive to + outside contact. In the Catholic Eucharist (Mass), to take a quite + different sort of example, liturgical tradition emphasizes that the + communicant should be fully involved in the process, such that when the + miraculous transformation of the substance of wafer and wine + (Transubstantiation) occurs, and when in fact the communicant receives + these into the mouth, it is not only one's body that receives the body and + blood of Christ, but the totality of body, mind, and soul. Thus this + understanding of ritual emphasizes what in RPG terms is called + "immersion," a total involvement in the activity. Failure on this score + would be seen as ineffective (zazen), impious (Eucharist), or shallow + (RPG). + + The Collaborative Storytelling model is less obviously commensurate with a + ritual model. Two directions, however, support this formulation. First, + there is Claude Levi-Strauss's structuralist interpretation of mythic and + ritual thought as bricolage, and second, there is the movement largely + associated with Pierre Bourdieu, Sherry Ortner, and Catherine Bell toward + understanding ritual as "practice" (or "praxis" in the more overtly + Marxist formulations).[16][8] + + Levi-Strauss's idea, in simple terms, is that cultures think like oddly + artistic hobbyists. [17][9] Imagine you have a basement full of stuff from + which to build whatever you like. You have bits of old machines, things + your neighbors threw out, scraps of wood, and tail-ends of old projects, + as well as the taken-apart bits of all your old projects. Now you decide + to build something, and you have some ideas -- aesthetic and practical -- + about how that should be done; you are very skilled and talented, and can + see possibilities in all sorts of things. But you do not have a Home Depot + available, or you consider it "cheating" to go buy things. At any rate, + you have to build the thing you're going to build from what you already + have in your basement. + + A nice example is a Rube Goldberg cartoon, though those are deliberately + silly. You fly a kite, and the kite string pulls a lever, and this pushes + an old boot, and that turns on your iron, and the iron burns some old + pants, and smoke goes into a tree, and.... A brilliant example is the + recent Honda advertisement called "the cog," which can readily be found on + the Internet.[18][10] The point is that one constructs an elaborate + machine out of bits and pieces already owned. + + Levi-Strauss's point is that each object used contains its own history; + that is, the iron has already been used for something and the bricoleur + then gives it a new use. The iron, to focus on the single example, is a + local source of heat; it can burn pants, or make a grilled-cheese + sandwich, and of course can press a shirt. But it cannot be a + refrigerator. And if, clever person that you are, you pull the heating + coil out of the iron for some project that requires a heating coil, your + iron now contains the history of its usage: it is now a heating coil and a + heavy weight. + + Every sign in myth and ritual, says Levi-Strauss, is like this iron, and + every living mythic culture is like this bricoleur. When faced with a + (social) situation, an intellectual problem of whatever kind, the + bricoleur begins by running through his memory (the basement) to see what + he already has that can be used to solve the problem. He then builds the + machine that solves the problem, in the process incorporating the entire + history of every object in question, and furthermore altering (however + slightly) each object so used; when he goes to build something else, later + on, the current project will be part of the history of each object. + + Technically speaking, every sign is thus constrained and yet free. On the + one hand, it is not constrained to the degree of a percept, a particular + contingent mental encounter with an actual object; this percept is what is + called a "perception" in the formalist model to which Kim refers. A + percept is entirely constrained, because when a person looks at a given + object on two successive occasions, his or her mental equipment has + altered -- to use a cliche, one cannot enter the same river twice. At the + same time, a sign is not fully liberated, as is a concept, an idea arising + in reaction to a particular person's connections to a percept: when I look + at the lamp on the table, I may think of my grandmother (who perhaps owned + a similar lamp), and thus "grandmother" is a legitimate conceptual link, + but no such connection may arise for you, and even if it did, it would be + a different grandmother. So a sign (Levi-Strauss means the Saussurean + version of the sign) is both constrained (the iron cannot be a + refrigerator) and free (it can do a whole range of things involving local + intense heat). In Levi-Strauss's linguistic analogy, this iron is a sign + in the same way as a word is: the word "iron" can mean a range of things + (the metal, the instrument) but it cannot mean anything at all. + Furthermore, this word only acquires meaning by its relations to other + words: if I say "iron," you do not know until I go on with "a pair of + pants" what sort of meaning I intend, even whether it is a verb or a noun. + + The other approach I want to bring up, "practice" theory, arises from a + number of rather technical difficulties with structuralism, and amounts to + an attempt to understand manipulation of signs and symbols in strategic + yet controlled ways. With respect to ritual, practice theory argues for a + continuity among behaviors, as against the disjuncture of ritual from + other modes of action. The signs used in ritual, that is, acquire meaning + from their extra-ritual contexts, and furthermore the special meanings + accorded to them in ritual carry over into other modes of life. + + From a practice perspective, every ritual contains within itself a number + of structures, just as in structuralism; these structures are in essence + the Rube Goldberg machines constructed by the bricoleur. As we know from + Levi-Strauss, the iron can be replaced by any other source of local heat, + since its only function in the machine in question was to create smoke by + burning a pair of pants. Thus the machine has a structure, requiring a + number of elements, but the specifics of which objects or signs are used + to fill those element-slots are open. What interests practice theorists is + strategic choice: how do people decide whether to use an iron or a space + heater? + + Broadly, the question in practice theory is how people choose, from a + limited range of culturally-available options, which techniques to apply + at a given moment. This depends on strategy: we want to maximize rewards + in a specific situation. But in order for strategy to work, we have to + play the game; that is, one cannot go outside the structure of the system + to manipulate signs as one likes, because to do so annuls the power of the + strategy in the first place. Thus every strategic use of signs is at once + a free, liberated exercise of power by a situated person, and at the same + time a contribution to keeping the system stable and intact without + significant change. The possibility of real change is thus undermined by + the very strategies which seek to change the system, because they depend + for their efficacy upon the structures in question. + + If the dichotomy between virtual experience and collaborative storytelling + parallels that between performativity and what we might call the practice + of bricolage, as yet this parallel serves no analytical or synthetic + function; it is once more an over-theorized and over-determined metaphor. + In addition, it is as yet under-explained, in that the theories may be + formulated but their application to the specific situation of RPG's is not + yet clear. In short, while we can see a parallel division within both the + two discourses and the two modes of behavior, this does not answer the + question: why are RPG's ritual? + +Semiotic Modeling of Ritual and RPG + + I have noted that Kim's use of the formalist + perception-discourse-conception model parallels the semiotic or structural + percept-sign-concept model. The difficulty with the formalist model for + this purpose, however, is that it is focused primarily on an interpretive + perspective, in which the analyst stands in a perceptive relationship to a + givendiscourse; like the circular model in hermeneutics,[19][11] the + central issue is how an interpreter can make sense of a discourse already + present, how we approach meaning through interpretation of texts and signs + already distant from their producers (authors). Thus a central + preoccupation of both formalist analysis and of hermeneutics has been the + analysis of ways in which the reading situation is not conversational, in + which reading a text is not having a conversation with the author. But in + RPG's, the situation is normally conversational in an obvious sense, and + thus this mode of analysis focuses on problems seemingly distant from + those in RPG's. + + The structural model of signification, from which the practice theory also + arose, is by contrast primarily concerned with the use of signs by a + current producer, a situation more obviously commensurable with RPG play. + The question, in short, is not how players read a text produced for them + by a game-master, but rather how the whole group in combination produces + signs and texts that they themselves read. The structural model of + signification fits well here, as the primary issue is to understand ritual + or mythic activity as a mode of discourse production. + + In ritual, participants manipulate a range of signs within a constrained + structure. That structure can change through such manipulations, but only + within narrow limits. Every Catholic Eucharist differs significantly, in + that the place, people, and physical environment of the ritual vary, but + this variation is officially read by participants as within a fixed + structure. The post-Vatican II use of the vernacular in the Mass, for + example, was at once a major transformation of the structure of the + ritual, and at the same time theorized as not radically transformative: + even in the vernacular, according to the Vatican II council, the Eucharist + retains its sacramental efficacy. From a semiotic perspective, the + linguistic alteration represents a new negotiation of liturgical language + as a discrete sign, where Vatican II agreed that the differences between + Latin and the vernacular should not be understood as an essential + structure of the ritual, but rather a relatively arbitrary sign amenable + to conversion without undermining ritual structure itself. + + At this same level of semiotic manipulation, we can see in RPG + reconstruction and revision a parallel analytical discourse. Taking to its + extreme the Edwards et al. formulation that "system matters,"[20][12] the + claim is a clearly structuralist one: transformation of system elements in + RPG's effects concomitant transformation of gameplay and orientation. For + example, a combat system dominated by so-called "realism", usually meaning + a high prioritization of real-world simulation in modes of action and + effects of violence, is not a discrete sign that may be removed from a + given game and replaced with an entirely stylized, anti-"realist" combat + system. Because such a system element is structural, it links to all other + parts of the total game structure and its transformation thus strongly + affects the whole. Mike Holmes has made this point well, arguing that a + "realist" combat system colors the whole game, such that all activity + occurs with reference to such a preoccupation with violence;[21][13] as + Kim puts it, + + [E]ven if a gun is never fired during the game session, the mechanics for + that [weapon] may influence the story -- because they shape how the player + conceives of guns within the fictional world. If the mechanics make all + guns exceptionally deadly, it increases the tension in a scene where a gun + appears even if the gun is never fired. + + Thus the "system does matter" principle argues that system elements are + motivated signs, and thus contain structure; their transformation affects + the totality of the structure. + + Between the Vatican II approach to language and the Forge approach to + system, however, we must recognize that the difference is not absolute; + furthermore, the distinction drawn is ideological, not "factual." There + can be no question, for example, that the use of the vernacular in + Catholic Mass has significantly changed the ways in which Catholics + experience the ritual; indeed, were this not so, there would have been no + reason to make the change in the first place. Vatican II asserted a matter + of aesthetic and theological priority: however far-reaching the effects of + this transformation, they argued, the essential core of the ritual + (transubstantiation in a broad sense) would not be affected, and whatever + aesthetic loss of force might be entailed by the loss of the affective + qualities of Latin (as traditional, foreign, ancient, powerful) would be + more than made up for by gains in broader spiritual involvement (through + understanding the liturgy intellectually, thus affectively through content + rather than through an aura of ritualism). Indeed, Martin Luther's move to + the vernacular was intended partly to combat the affective dimension of + Latin as itself powerful, arguing that this amounted to a kind of + fetishism or idolatry: the focus should be, he thought, on the content of + the words spoken, rather than on their linguistic medium. + + In Forge RPG theory, conversely, there is an implicit distinction between + system elements and other elements. It is certainly plausible that the + radical transformation of the combat system of Dungeons and Dragons from + the AD&D system to the recent d20 system considerably changes all elements + of gameplay, even those not overtly connected with combat; to replace the + combat system with a more freeform model akin to The Pool would presumably + effect further changes. But first of all, it seems clear that transforming + other elements of the game (setting, background, character generation) + would also entail drastic concomitant changes in gameplay; for example, + d20 games not based on Dungeons and Dragons genre and story conventions + exist in considerable numbers, and certainly do not play exactly the same + way as does Dungeons and Dragons. In short, it is unclear how one is to + classify elements into arbitrary and motivated, into those which can be + shifted without large-scale structural effects and those which + cannot.[22][14] + + More interestingly, RPG theorists (taken in the broadest sense) generally + make a series of divisions among elements in their games, and implicitly + argue for relative arbitrariness. That is, the notion that a "combat + system" is in any sense a discrete element, a discrete structure, should + not be accepted uncritically. If the Forge "system matters" principle + argues that even apparently discrete structures like this are motivated + and not arbitrary, we must recognize that this presumes a tendency to see + such systems as arbitrary, that they are apparently discrete. By + emphasizing that "system" is motivated and structural, the Forge theorists + further suggest a prioritization of elements, where motivation is taken as + superior to arbitrariness, so that theoretical analysis and synthesis + should focus on structure rather than sign. To put this differently, it is + implicit that RPG's consist of a vast group of interrelated elements, + falling into a natural hierarchical order; those nearest the trunk of the + tree, as it were, are relatively motivated and theoretically important, + while those nearest the branch-tips are more arbitrary and of lesser + theoretical weight. + + At the same time, few would argue that the arbitrary, non-structural signs + are trivial or unimportant. Such arbitrary elements as Color (essentially + affective set-dressing in imagined space) or snack choices by players are + not irrelevant, and may in particular instances be elevated to structural + elements: the game-concept Long Pig The Role-Playing Game made snack + choice and usage into a system element, while Ars Magica troupes + interested in medieval history may make set-dressing a primary focus for + play.[23][15] But the claim is that it is by shifting such elements from + arbitrary to motivated, from incidental to system, that they become + analytically important; in general, the analyst does not focus + classification on such elements, but rather begins with system. + + The important point here is that whether the issue is the relative weight + of meaningful dimensions of liturgical language or the classification of + structural elements in RPG's, the understanding is in both cases + ideological, intended not only to classify and analyze the ritual in + question but also to emphasize and push for improvement in the activity, + thus making normative claims about what the ritual should be about. + Precisely at this point, predictably, the ideological weapon of + "practicality" often comes into play in RPG discourse: because a more + purely analytic classificatory model (e.g. the polythetic comparative + model proposed for the humanities by Jonathan Z. Smith[24][16]) eschews + normative claims in the form of practical suggestions for game design or + ritual construction, the RPG theorist codes such classification as + impractical, thus valueless. This is equivalent to a Catholic liturgist + saying of an academic theorist's analysis that it is irrelevant because it + does not help formulate new dimensions in Mass. For the academic, however, + this is precisely the point: she may be interested to see the results of + her analyses serving a constructive use to the liturgist, she does not + wish to impose her perspective upon those she studies. Ronald Grimes, for + example, believes deeply that ritual theory can be of constructive value + for people seeking to formulate or reformulate their rituals, but as a + rule he does not tell them how to go about it.[25][17] A ritualist who + denounces Grimes for not proposing a "how-to" makes an entirely + ideological -- and ultimately incoherent -- claim: if Grimes does not + propose a "how-to," his work is useless; if on the other hand he does tell + ritualists how to "fix" their rituals, he will (and should!) be denounced + for telling others what they ought to believe. + + I have come a long way around, but the notion of RPG's as ritual can now + be asserted directly. Between RPG theory and RPG practice there exists a + dynamic relationship structurally identical to that between the theory and + practice of ritual within lived ritual communities. RPG theory, by this + logic, is only commensurable to academic theory and analytical method + through a deeper and more complex formulation; a relatively direct + correlation links RPG's to rituals in their actuality.[26][18] In order to + recognize this link, we must accept the duality of theory and practice as + integral to ritual performance itself; in other words, rituals are not + actions or activities performed in isolation from their cultural worlds, + but rather performances related to theoretical concerns in the same way as + game-play relates to the theory and system-construction that surrounds it. + + To put this differently, and more specifically, RPG play enacts theory, in + the sense that standing behind and prior to play is a series of + theoretical constructs: system design, GM notes, pre-play agreements and + social contract, genre expectations, and other theoretical tools. From + this perspective, RPG play acts out this prior structure; this is + equivalent to the old reading of ritual as acting out a liturgical text. + At the same time, the prior structure is to a degree open to challenge + within game play, and furthermore does not fully constrain particular game + actions, determining a range and a set of priorities rather than laying + out a script. As has been recognized for some decades now, the same can be + said of the most formal ritual: within apparent constraint there is scope + for contestation, not only of the various issues and questions related to + a particular ritual's situation within the social context, but also of the + ritual itself with all its symbols. + + Nevertheless, these two views are always in dynamic, creative tension: the + available range of manipulations of ritual signs stands within a + structural context only slightly accessible to interior challenge. For + example, radical transformation of Catholic liturgy cannot proceed from + within ritual performance itself, while small-scale local transformation + and contestation are fully expected. Radical transformation of liturgy, as + we have seen with Vatican II, must come from a theoretical discourse + exterior to performance. Conversely, such discourse acquires its ability + to challenge ritual structurally by sacrificing its analytical and + normative force at the local level; that is, while Vatican II could change + liturgical language, a structural change not available to a given + congregation at the moment of performance, the congregation can manipulate + particular performances to effect social meanings inaccessible to the + Vatican. For example, a particular wedding ritual may be used, at a given + moment and in a particular contingent historical situation, to enable deep + consideration within the congregation about the traditions of marriage, + divorce, and childbirth; these same issues can be discussed by the College + of Cardinals, as indeed they are, but not at the level of particular + people in particular time, since they can only formulate principles and + cannot apply them individually. + + Precisely the same dynamic obtains in RPG discourse. While a given + structural situation of notes, game system, theoretical models, and so + forth formulates a contextual model within which play occurs, such + structures do not extend to the level of individual particularity that is + central to play experience; that is, no game structure can be so logically + intensive as to dictate every action and speech by every participant at + all times, because to do so (even were it possible) would annul the entire + nature of the game as game. In fact, this limitation of theoretical + efficacy is granted the status of a virtue in Forge theory, through the + double formulation of "practicality" as a rational anchor and the + hierarchization of the relative motivation of system structures as + relative theoretical importance. Not surprisingly, we find that the usual + model of RPG discourse has it that performance (play) is the "real" anchor + of RPG's, and that theory is understood by its proponents as a potentially + liberating source of creativity and energy for "real" play. + +Liminality in Ritual and RPG: Preliminary Classification + + If we recognize in RPG's a dynamic interaction of theoretical and + practical reason, between structure and event, it is not clear how within + the practical sphere the active, strategic manipulation of signs actually + works. That is, we have seen that in religious ritual, situated people + deploy signs and structures within the context of larger, only partly + flexible structures, and that RPG play stands within a similar context; we + need now to understand how RPG players manipulate signs and structures for + strategic reasons, and how such strategies are both free and subject to + constraint. + + For this purpose, I would like to propose a specific analogy, that of RPG + play to a particular mode of ritual behavior. At the outset, however, I + should note that this is analogy and not identity; that is, while RPG is + (and is not merely like) ritual, it is nevertheless a distinct and + specific kind of ritual, one with no exact equivalent in other ritual + spheres. Thus this analysis must be effected within a deliberately + constrained comparative model, in order to evade the methodological + problems attendant upon the loose metaphoricities described in the + introduction. + + Every modern scholar of ritual is familiar with the liminal model of rites + de passage (passage-rites), originally proposed by Arnold van Gennep in + the eponymous book, and elevated to a critical analytical model in + especially the earlier work of Victor Turner.[27][19] In its classic + formulation by van Gennep, such passage-rites as initiations consist of + three stages. First, the neophyte is separated from the symbolic and + social structures which normally surround him; second, the neophyte passes + through a liminal phase, in which a series of new and powerful symbols + known as sacra are presented to the neophyte for consideration and + reflection; and finally, the neophyte is aggregated back into the social + structure, now in a new status. + + For example, in boys' puberty initiations, the boy is removed from boyhood + and society in general, perhaps secluded in a special initiation hut or + otherwise physically removed; in addition, he is visibly marked as + unclassified, e.g. having his head shaved, being painted black or white, + stripped of clothing, and so forth. Once separation from boyhood has been + effected, the neophyte is in a condition of liminality, "betwixt and + between," neither this nor that; neither boy nor man, he is + unclassifiable, a condition generally expressed through symbols marking + status as not participating in even a larger range of classes: he may be + dressed as an androgyne, marking him as neither male nor female (and + both); he may be forced to lie on the ground in a posture normal for + corpses, marking him as neither dead nor alive (and both); and so forth. + + In this liminal phase, various sacred symbols (sacra) are presented to the + boy and his co-initiates (such initiations usually involve several boys at + once), in the form of monstrous and bizarre masks, objects, or behaviors, + presented to the neophytes by already-initiated men. All these signs serve + as objects of thought, and are commonly distorted to emphasize reflection + on particular issues; for example, a figurine or dancing costume might be + shrunken and blurred in all its parts, but bear a wildly exaggerated + phallus, encouraging reflection on sexuality and male sexual identity. + + In an example discussed by Turner,[28][20] Bemba girls are presented with + an earthenware figurine of an exaggeratedly pregnant woman who carries + four infants, two at her equally exaggerated breasts and two on her back; + other features of this figure (arms and legs, for example) are shrunken to + stubs. The figurine in this case is accompanied by a riddling song about a + mythical midwife, and initiated women say the riddle's point is + straightforward: Bemba tradition demands that after giving birth women + abstain from sexual intercourse for a year. But a woman's husband may + object to this, and one's mother or mother-in-law may also demand that the + young woman get pregnant again, as the older woman wants grandchildren and + the husband wants sexual satisfaction. The point of the sacrum, then, is + that a wife who does not respect the tradition of abstention will become + like the figurine, dominated to destruction by babies and their care. + However much a woman may wish to give in to her husband or mother -- or + her own desires -- she must abstain. Thus the use of exaggerated symbols + in the liminal phase focuses attention on traditional culture, its reasons + and purposes, and ultimately promotes conformity. + + Once this instructional phase has concluded, aggregation usually begins + with more or less permanent markers of the new status, followed by social + presentation of the neophyte to the relevant communities (initiates, then + society at large). For example, a boy may be circumcised, marking him + permanently as an initiate (thus fully male), then dressed in men's + clothing (not unlike the old British practice of a boy's changing + permanently from short to long pants); the initiates are then presented to + the men, who welcome them into the men's longhouse or equivalent male + structure from which they were previously forbidden, and they depart this + house to be greeted by the women of the community as men rather than boys. + + The emphasis in the current analysis is, as for Turner, the liminal. There + is no difficulty spotting separation and aggregation in RPG's. Depending + on a particular group's habitual practices and preferences, separation may + begin at the front door of the host's house or apartment; this is + particularly apparent in more LARP-oriented play, where entry into the + broadly-defined play space is marked by a transformation of manner and + affect, even of clothing. But the most limited table-top play generally + marks a separation between game-play and out-of-game behavior. This is + perhaps most obvious negatively, in objections to players who do not focus + on the game and continually introduce "irrelevant" topics (television + shows, video games, current events, etc.) into play. + + I have marked the term "irrelevant" with quotes for a reason: these topics + are only irrelevant if and to the degree that a given group marks them so, + a point generally negotiated through piecemeal social contract means. The + LARP example, as an extreme of the Virtual Experience model, may tend to + object to any introduction of topics or behaviors not previously + formulated as "in-game." A smaller-scale variant of this general dynamic + is the issue of "in-character" as distinct from "out-of-character": in + some groups, speech should be performed in-character, in that anything + said by a given player should be taken as the speech of that player's + current character; sometimes this takes the form of linguistic constraint, + notably the demand that players speak of their characters in the first + person rather than the third. + + At a more strategic level, groups may make a sharp distinction between + in-character and out-of-character knowledge, raising as a problem whether + a player may act in-character upon knowledge presumably not available to + his character. That is, if Alan (playing Thror the Barbarian) knows that + Marler the Wizard (played by Barbara) has been captured by an evil + sorcerer and is held in a deep dungeon below the castle in which Thror now + stands, and Alan knows this because as a player he was present when + Marler/Barbara was captured, but Thror was not on the scene and thus has + no particular way to know what has occurred, a group must consider whether + Alan may have Thror head for the deep dungeon to rescue Marler. + + The question is complex, and may be handled strategically at any number of + levels. For example, some groups feel that, so long as Thror's rescue of + Marler would make an exciting story, the fact that Thror "knows" nothing + about the capture is irrelevant. Even within this perspective, however, we + might note a distinction between Alan having Thror "happen accidentally" + to head downwards, postulating an in-game coincidence to cover the + out-of-game implausibility, as against Alan having Thror declaim in + ringing tones that somehow he knows what has occurred, postulating a + backwards revision of plot and thus annulling disjuncture. Another + strategic choice, of course, would have Alan simply ignore what has + happened to Marler, since Thror is "actually" ignorant of it; Alan and + Barbara may hope that events will transpire such that Thror can rescue + Marler, but the interior logic of the game-world in this case does not + permit Alan's use of out-of-character knowledge to alter events in this + fashion. + + At a theoretical level, the same issues obtain, particularly in the + aesthetics of game design. Some groups prefer to keep rules and systems as + far in the background as possible, because they see such structures as + irrelevant to the game-world; that is, since Thror himself cannot be + imagined thinking that he has a +7 to hit but a -2 to damage if he swings + his fist, while he has a +3 to hit and a +6 to damage if he swings his + sword, the strategic choices made by Alan in selecting the appropriate + attack for the situation can be read as interfering with the interior + game-logic. Other groups see such activity on Alan's part as an essential + aspect of gaming as an activity. For example, one can treat a Dungeons and + Dragons "dungeon-crawl" as a competition by the players, as strategic + manipulators of an intricate mechanical system, against the Dungeon Master + who has similarly manipulated the system to construct a difficult + challenge; in this case, Barbara's choice to cast Magic Missile rather + than Fireball because she makes a trade-off between damage inflicted upon + a chosen target and the collateral damage which comes from the fireball + spell, not to mention the specifics of range, casting-time, and material + components, is anything but irrelevant: indeed, at one extreme, this may + constitute much of the fun of play. + + In any event, the problem of negotiating the bridge between in-character + and out-of-character is founded upon the structural separation effected at + the outset of ritual. The social aggregation at the close of play thus + amounts to an undoing of this separation: players step back from the + in-character world (to whatever extent they postulated themselves as in + it) in order to receive rewards or accolades, rehash enjoyable events, and + generally begin shifting from a relatively discontinuous and separated + game-time to an ordinary social event, itself marked eventually by the + dispersal of the participants to their everyday lives. + + We have already seen that within the liminal phase, the "game itself," + classification, and identity are sites of considerable contestation and + difficulty. But it is when we take into account the question of sacra and + response that the parallel to initiation becomes particularly valuable. In + particular, when we consider the interrelation of freedom and conformity, + i.e. the political nature of liminality, we can begin to dig under the + surface of gaming to discern the social relations and contracts which make + play possible. + +Liminality in RPG's: The Social Rituals of Play + + One of Turner's great achievements in the study of ritual was his + explication of the socio-political implications of ritual activity; while + he was hardly alone in formulating this general perspective, Turner has + the advantage for present purposes of having a relatively clear model that + does not depend on extensive prior reading in the literature of + anthropology or sociology. + + As liminality theory shaded into the origins of "practice" theory, it gave + rise to a stock type of analysis. The symbols of a given ritual, + particularly its liminal phase, would be explicated for purposes of + situation, giving sufficient data for the reader to make sense of the + further argument. The analyst would then attempt to demonstrate the + following dynamic at work: within the liminal phase, neophytes -- and by + extension, the society as a whole -- employ symbols and structures to + challenge, test, and even undermine the structures and norms of authority; + through the ritual process, however, particularly as the liminal phase + moves towards conclusion in aggregation, all this "testing" ends up + serving the purposes of established authority. Thus the ritual gives the + illusion of freedom and choice, but actually enforces conformity; ritual + is thus read as a technique of mystification by which cultural authority + can be produced and reproduced by deceiving participants in all walks of + society into accepting these authority structures as natural, given, and + ideal. + + There is certainly truth in this reading. For example, numerous + carnivalesque rituals (Mardi Gras in New Orleans, Carn`aval, Saturnalia, + etc.) do indeed construct a special space and time in which to express + discontent, disorder, radicalism, and challenge, all of which is then + often deployed in a larger cultural context to emphasize the "rightness" + of hegemonic discourses of authority. But more recently scholars have + begun to grant that this reading is simplistic: Mardi Gras has on numerous + occasions been used precisely to foment revolt, for example. Thus recent + practice theory, when it has focused on ritual and liminality, has tended + to admit that ritual does produce conformity through the illusion of free + choice, but at the same time to grant that particular agents in particular + historical situations have the ability to manipulate symbols to their own + advantage, despite the apparent constraints (and apparent freedoms) of + ritual structures. + + At present, I will not push the socio-political reading of RPG's beyond + the narrow, local community. It would be interesting to consider how RPG's + as ritual necessarily participate in and reconstitute the structures of + society at large, but the data-set required to do such analysis + meaningfully is prohibitively large. In addition, ethnography of + game-sessions has barely begun, if indeed it can be said to have begun at + all, and thus we have only the most dubious sort of anecdotal data. My + concern, then, is with the socio-political workings within a gaming group, + which amounts to an analytic perspective on the social contract of such a + group as it intersects with other structures of gaming. + + It is worth noting here that the dominant Forge theory generally takes + social contract to be a maximally distanced structure, standing at the + upper extreme of the hierarchy of RPG structure. While there has been + discussion of social contract and means by which it can be negotiated in + order to avoid paradigmatic or personal conflict, the emphasis fits + squarely within Edwards's overall approach. That is, because social + contract is seen as at a considerable remove from in-game play issues, the + most efficient way to deal with contractual problems is to discuss them + outside of play, e.g. by confronting a problem player outside of game + time, by formulating explicit social expectations before play, and so + forth. But the fact remains that these problems generally arise within + game play, and prior constraint cannot fully predict or forestall such + difficulties. I suggest, in fact, that precisely because RPG's are ritual + behaviors, social conflict is inherent in the form. At the same time, from + a practical perspective, it is worth recognizing that because structural + and sign-manipulation achieve their maximal expressions within liminality, + with extra-ritual commentary discourse primarily functioning to protect + ritual tradition against challenge, acting disjunctively to separate + possible challenges from the fragile yet powerful matrix of ritual + performance, play itself will necessary be the central locus of social + contestation, and importantly it is only within its structures that + conjunctive solutions are possible. In other words, while extra-gameplay + discourse may try to protect a game against social contract problems + arising within gameplay, such strategies cannot of themselves achieve + consensus; the means by which a group can resolve such questions must be + sought within play. + + Extending from this point, we may note a common tensive relationship + between extra-ritual assertions of hegemony over performance on the one + hand, and on the other a concomitant counter-balancing of the manipulation + of ritual as a site for resistance. Simply put, it is often the case that + as authoritative discourse tries to increase control over what happens + within ritual performance externally, resistant elements become increasing + empowered within performance and have greater efficacy without. In an RPG + context specifically, it seems not unlikely that increasingly emphatic + assertions of hegemonic control of appropriate play and in-game discourse + will tend to evoke increasing resistance within play, which is to say that + players within the game will tend to challenge strong norms asserted by + the game-master (or the game text, the received tradition of appropriate + play, etc.) the more forcefully they are expressed. One classic example + returns us to Advanced Dungeons and Dragons: the more Gary Gygax asserted + his authority and authenticity in laying down constraints about "the right + way to play," the more particular groups and players were drawn either to + revise the game, to play other games, or to challenge Gygax's principles + from within play. With respect to more ordinary assertions of authority, + e.g. "railroading,"[29][21] the more overt the railroading the greater the + tendency to resist; that is, if GM railroading involves providing genuine + incentives to follow the predetermined plot structure, resistance may be + minimal, while if a GM simply blocks all choices but the "correct" one + through ad hoc and increasingly ridiculous means (deus ex machina + maneuvers, etc.), players may find themselves led to beat their heads + against the imposed limitations rather than find creative and enjoyable + means by which to "play along."[30][22] + + My point is not simply that strong formulations of norms in play style and + social interaction may produce the reverse of the desired effect, though + this is worth consideration. Rather, I wish to emphasize that semiotic + manipulation within play reacts to functions in the given structural + context, such that assertions of social or technical norms naturally + constitute important objects of gameplay contestation. As in initiation + ritual, the imposition of social structures through such means as sacra or + rules systems demands challenge and consideration within ritual; attempts + to eliminate such semiotic manipulation within ritual liminality, + including gameplay, can only provoke two kinds of response: resistance to + the norms or elimination of ritual effectiveness. Thus the nature of + gameplay as ritual activity necessarily determines its focus on + manipulation and challenge of given structures. + + If RPG play can be read as reactive, it is neither mechanical nor passive, + and a great strength of both structural and practice theories is the + emphasis on dynamism in the relationship. If on the one hand ritual + imposes upon its participants a series of interlinked structures and + motivated signs, to which participants are then forced to react by the + normative view of ritual activity and thought, at the same time those + participants actually have considerable flexibility in doing so. This is + where some of the earlier Marxist approaches overestimated the hegemony of + authority-structures: they assumed that the imposition not only of signs + but of structures through which to think them fully constrained initiates + (for example) to conform to a rigid status quo; ritual could thus be read + as a means of combating in advance nonconformity, resistance, and the + potential for revolution, because it mystified the arbitrary, cultural + nature of authority structures by transposing them into tradition, and + then constructing a notion of tradition as natural and "given" in nature + or meta-nature (the gods, the spirits, etc.). But as numerous critics of + such ritual theories noted, this implies a special division in society: + there are those who create authority-structures, who to some degree know + that these structures are merely inventions, and then there are those who + are simply slates inscribed upon by such authority structures through + ritual; the only flexible part of this formulation would be the first + part, in that it is possible that authorities too are entirely subject to + what they take to be given structures and traditions, such that everyone + is enslaved by ignorance of the functions and methods of their own + society. Good Marxism this may be, but it does presume that people are + entirely controlled and dominated by what they are told, and never think + flexibly.[31][23] In fact, the approach deconstructs itself: if this is + all true, how can the academic analyst spot the problem at all? + Presumably, academia would constitute a constrained discourse that + recognizes itself as an object of critical analysis, in which case how did + it become so? The logical conclusion essentially would assert that the + members of critical academic discursive circles are a different sort of + people than those constrained by discourse, such that radical elitism + becomes a naturalized and normative structure -- precisely that which the + analysis desired to challenge in the first place. + + In RPG's, flexibility is relatively obvious: few if any players or + observers would assert that gameplay is so constrained as to prevent + flexibility in semiotic manipulation of any kind. At the same time, this + creativity is still generally taken as a marker of the distinctive or even + unique character of RPG's. Quite apart from the fact that this entails RPG + theorists' participation in the reproduction of authoritarian notions of + ritual behavior, a complex logical circle inserts itself in this + understanding, common it seems from the inception of RPG's as a discrete + ritual form. With the explication of this circularity, it will become + clear why I emphasize an analogical parallel to liminality in religious + ritual. + +Creativity as Circularity + + Overt acceptance of creativity and flexibility within RPG play is indeed + unusual in ritual. Importantly, however, it is not the existence of such + dynamism that marks a distinctive ritual mode, but the fact that + participants of all levels recognize and accept this. By contrast, the + modern Catholic Eucharist permits considerable scope for flexibility and + creativity in each and every performance, by every participant at every + level, but this is not commonly accepted as either present or desirable; + we might note that the common disdain for Neopagan ritual invention among + relatively knowledgeable mainstream religious Americans includes (but is + not limited to) a distinction between "real" or "traditional" ritual as + opposed to those which Neopagans "make up."[32][24] In this context, we + can read the ideological split as a claim against creativity within the + special context of ritual, importantly different from how RPG discourse + consciously constructs itself as creative and dynamic.[33][25] + + To put this in terms of initiation, we find that the liminal phase + involves flexibility and invention on the parts of not only the neophytes + but also the entire society; at the same time, such flexibility is + commonly denied by the hegemonic discourse, as already indicated by the + tendency to conceive of neophyte interaction with sacra as "instruction" + rather than creative engagement. Similarly, we find numerous discourses + about carnivalesque ritual formulated in terms of what has been called a + "hydraulic" theory: carnivals act as valves, allowing participants to + "blow off steam" rather than harness it to antisocial ends. By permitting + marginal elements of society to "act out" their frustrations, authorities + retain control of real power and maintain the stability of those they + dominate. Real challenge or engagement with social rules is annulled, + because it "doesn't count" in ritual space. + + Thus the demarcation of ritual space and time -- that formal construction + of division between ritual and everything else central to what Catherine + Bell calls "ritualization" -- lends itself to protection of social norms. + In RPG's, with their discourse of invention and creativity, such + protection seems non-present or at least marginal. But this accords with + expectations: by asserting that RPG gameplay constitutes a protected space + in which to deal with the limited range of issues at stake in a given + game, RPG's naturally tend to assert not only that gameplay permits + flexible engagement with social norms but also that the effects of + exterior norms on players do not play a significant role in the game. For + example, the protection of RPG's allows a male player to play a female + character, a heterosexual player to play a homosexual character, without + its being read as relevant to the player's out-of-game identity; we do + not, that is, assume that a male player who chooses a female character is + actually conflicted about his sexual identity. At the same time, this + entails that the female character in question, if she appears as a + chauvinist stereotype, cannot "officially" be read to imply chauvinism on + the part of the player. + + While for majority players -- white, male, middle-class -- this freedom + may not appear problematic, it entails real difficulties when (especially) + female players enter the game situation, most especially if such players + have a romantic and/or sexual affiliation with another player. Indeed, + female players often find themselves read as "not serious," "just the GM's + girlfriend," and so forth. When such players experience events in + game-time, whether plot events effected by other players or overtly + structural elements constructed within the game rules, their responses may + be read as problematic for in-game discourse. To take an extreme example, + if a female player reacts (in-character or out, in-game or out) negatively + to a rape scene perpetrated upon her (or any) character, some groups will + interpret this as a failure by the player to recognize the lines + separating gameplay from ordinary discourse; more insidiously, perhaps, + the player may feel that she should not overtly respond negatively, + precisely because she accepts that other players grant this absolute + division of discursive spaces, de-legitimizing her own emotional response + as confirmation that she is not a "serious" player. + + The common RPG theoretical response to such a situation, at least in + recent times, is to grant the legitimacy of the player's response. But + this is formulated as a special case: certain types of in-game discourse + "cross the lines" or "go overboard." By implication, normative in-game + activity does not require such responses, and thus this theoretically + symptomatic treatment of the situation continues to emphasize that + gameplay constitutes a protected space by constructing new social-contract + rules to prevent specific problems. That is, theoretical criticism of the + rape situation proposed above amounts to this: RPG groups and games ought + to have rules that say that players' characters cannot be raped. But this + misses the point. On the one hand, it constrains RPG discourse to a + limited range of social issues, making commentary and criticism of rape + (for example) simply a prohibited discourse, undermining the very dynamic + freedom which is supposed to permit a player to deal with situations that + he or she would or could not encounter in real life; on the other, it + retains and protects the hegemony of RPG discourse as something within + which players may not respond personally or emotionally by making those + situations in which such responses are legitimate into abnormal cases. + + Continuing the comparison to initiatory ritual in particular, we have here + an extra-ritual response to contingent historical circumstance through + limitation. In the case of the Bemba girls' initiation mentioned above, + let us suppose that a girl responds to the figurine by saying, "If I + become like the figurine, the white organizations that provide support and + health services will give extra assistance even outside of infant care; + therefore for my family in the current situation the appropriate answer to + the riddle is that I should throw over tradition and use pregnancy to + create a cargo-cult reciprocity with whites."[34][26] Here we see a + creative, dynamic response to the symbolic structures proposed, but with + an ultimate response at odds with the hegemonic intent. An obvious + counter-response would add additional symbols and instructions to prevent + this response by future neophytes, and perhaps provide extra-ritual + instruction of this particular neophyte so as to annul the validity of her + solution. + + In RPG ritual discourse, the same structure of constraint through + piecemeal placation consistently obtains. To the extent that RPG players + understand themselves as creative and dynamic, not controlled by + encultured norms, they are enabled to reproduce challenged norms within + gameplay as protected space. That is, the liberation and protection + afforded players with respect to uneasy social issues tends only to enable + players who (often unconsciously) represent majority discourses to reenact + the violence of those social categories in a hegemonically protected + fashion, defended by the structure of the RPG as separated and distinct. + If the white, male player's black, female character enacts stereotypes, + the notional freedom explored merely reproduces dubious social norms, an + effect seen overtly in fantasy and science fiction book cover images (e.g. + the work of Boris Vallejo), with their manly men with weapons and + voluptuous women in revealing clothing. + + To shift the modalities of play from reproductive to transformational may + be desirable, but it is unclear how this might be effected. While RPG + ritual liminality permits exploration, its structured and constrained + nature acts to defend stereotype reproduction as "freedom" while blocking + challenges thereto as failures of player technique or understanding. + Logically, practical game-construction cannot merely strive to forestall + deployment of stereotypes, but must work actively to undermine their + function within gameplay; it is here that critical formation of + counter-hegemonic moves (e.g. feminist game design) must focus effort, at + the same time recognizing that simply formulating a game that + pre-determines the boundaries of appropriate and inappropriate structure + challenges cannot achieve anything. + +Disjuncture and Continuity + + As we have seen, the liminal phase of passage ritual, or more broadly the + "sacred space" effected by social disjunctures outlining any ritual + practice, affords a privileged site for examination and contestation of + extra-ritual concerns; this sacred space in RPG's is found in gameplay, + often understood as a "safe" place for exploration, and distinguished from + other active spaces by a number of explicit and more subtle formations. So + far, I have focused on how such privilege and safety becomes a + double-edged sword, permitting some forms of experimentation while denying + others legitimacy, and also undercutting the radicalism of experiment to + render it harmless. But as with any ritual, the protective structures that + reproduce hegemonic discourse formations are themselves genuinely + threatened by in-ritual challenges. It is worth considering how such + challenge may be formulated through semiotic manipulation in gameplay. + + In The Savage Mind, Claude Levi-Strauss suggested that ritual tends to be + conjunctive, as opposed to the disjunctive, classifying emphasis of myth. + His meaning is best expressed, perhaps, in a discussion of the difference + between game and rite: + + All games are defined by a set of rules which in practice allow the + playing of any number of matches. Ritual, which is also 'played', is on + the other hand, like a favoured instance of a game, remembered from among + the possible ones because it is the only one which results in a particular + type of equilibrium between the two sides. The transposition is readily + seen in the case of the Gahuku-Gama of New Guinea who have learnt football + but who will play, several days running, as many matches as are necessary + for both sides to reach the same score. This is treating a game as a + ritual.... Games thus appear to have a disjunctive effect: they end in the + establishment of a difference between individual players or teams where + originally there was no indication of inequality. And at the end of the + game they are distinguished into winners and losers. Ritual, on the other + hand, is the exact inverse: it conjoins, for it brings about a union ... + or in any case an organic relation between two initially separate + groups....[35][27] + + The point is that a game like soccer or Monopoly takes a group of people + not initially distinct in game terms and divides them into at least two + classes (winners and losers). By contrast, the ritual performance of + soccer described here does not conclude until all players have been made + equivalent; latent in Levi-Strauss's formulation is that the natives + project their preexisting social divisions upon the game by picking teams + upon non-arbitrary given grounds. For example, they might decide that each + team will be made up exclusively of initiated men of a given moiety, so + that the teams represent moieties; through the ritual process, they then + construct a situation in which this difference is asserted as + non-absolute. This is arguably the point of the modern Olympic Games: + national participation through representative athletes is supposed to + assert that all men are brothers, that superiority is individual and not + national, and so forth. + + Setting aside the numerous quite serious problems with L vi-Strauss's + theory with respect to ritual as a broad range of behaviors -- indeed, I + doubt he intended that it be taken as a general principle in the first + place -- we can see this dynamic at work in a major RPG discourse, + particularly that which emphasizes the collaborative nature of play. As we + have already seen, in Kim's Collaborative Storytelling model "play is + understood as multiple authors producing a single discourse and a single + story." The same model discourages secrets among participants, and judges + success partly by whether "all of the participants significantly + contributed to that discourse." Following up Levi-Strauss's notion, we can + see here a striving toward conjunction and unity, as against disjuncture + in the form of "winning" or limited player dominance of the discourse. In + other words, one of the distinctive characteristics of RPG's as opposed to + more traditional games is precisely that they fit a ritual rather than a + game model. + + At the same time, a more serious deployment of structural and practice + perspectives on the semiotic elements of both religious and RPG ritual + must recognize the oversimplification inherent in this + conjunction/division split. First, that there are no winners or losers + cannot be accepted uncritically. Precisely because a dominant RPG + discourse denies such divisions, we must consider the possibility that + play imposes upon players a notional unity by denying the option to seek + or even accept division. After all, if we extend this rhetoric of unity, + it can be taken as a claim that in-game, all players are equal and in fact + equivalent, which may be deployed strategically by situationally- or + socially-dominant players to assert that complaints are anti-group and + thus mark bad players. In this context, the discourse of collaboration and + unity can support the problematic use of hegemonic authoritarian or + oppressive discourse, as discussed previously in the context of + chauvinism. + + But not all such challenge necessarily supports authority or serves as an + instrument of oppression. To take a simple example, the rhetoric of unity + and conjunction may be deployed to block favoritism or to identify problem + players as those who either try to dominate play or refuse to participate + at all. Especially in the latter case, the unifying effect of ritual + process may enable a group to draw out a timid player, emphasizing further + the liminal "safety" of game space. + + More interestingly, however, the conjunctive nature of ritual process may + act together with the aggregation of ritual closure to effect genuine + social alteration. A play group is often formed on an ad hoc basis, where + some players do not know each other well outside of the game context, and + indeed may not have met. Through successful ritual collaboration in a + shared space understood as distinct from other social spaces, a new social + group forms, enabling friendship and other forms of collaboration that + refer to the constructed game-space rather than to other social + structures. That is, precisely because gameplay is at once divided from + other social spaces and nominally focused upon a limited set of + predetermined issues, and because such rituals do act conjunctively by + taking given divisions and annulling "winner and loser" categorizations, + gameplay tends naturally to formulate an alternative social framework. + Particularly for those who find mainstream, dominant social frameworks + problematic or dangerous, gameplay can constitute a controlled social + space in which to succeed and seek liberation. + + However psychologically supportive and validating such an alternative + framework may be -- and it is worth noting that some psychologists have + pointed to RPG's as valuable for self-exploration and validation among + (especially) teenagers -- from a broader social perspective we should + recognize that this essentially entails a continuation of the initiation + discourse. Turner notes that it is common that the neophytes, whatever + their extra-ritual socio-economic status, are as part of the liminal + leveling considered equivalent. While friendships among those + simultaneously initiated often extend beyond the ritual situation, social + status, factored out within liminality, is not particularly affected by + such friendships. That is, it could be argued that the shared space of + ritual, although it permits and even demands reflection upon social + inequalities, ultimately acts not only to affirm these inequalities as + natural and given, but also deludes those in inferior positions into + thinking that they achieve a measure of equality that is in fact + nonexistent. From this perspective, we can see that RPG's may act + simultaneously to affirm and assist players psychologically, and at the + same time discourage them from acting upon or challenging the inequities + of modern social dynamics. Anecdotally, at least, we seem to see this in + stereotypes of RPG players as "geeks" or "nerds" who, by participating in + gaming, in conventions, and generally in a subculture, are thereby + diverted or distracted from real social action or mobilization. To + formulate a rather overstated Marxist reading, the recognition of RPG's as + ritual is confirmed by its ability to serve as an opiate for the + oppressed. + +Conclusions: Toward an RPG of Practical Reason + + At present, RPG theory primarily acts as an exterior, supporting discourse + referred toward the "real thing" -- gameplay. Ironically, criticism of + some RPG theory as irrelevant or trivial, on the ground that it is not + practical for play goals, actually serves to grant power and hegemony to + theoretical discourse: the very fact that gameplay so strongly formulates + the barriers between in-game and out-of-game, play and system, + in-character and out-of-character, reproduces the mystification of + theory's active role in discourse construction. As a way of concluding + this somewhat dispersed series of analyses, then, I should like to propose + some new directions in theory, directions which I think contain the + possibility for real practical change. + + First, theory must recognize a distinction between analysis and synthesis. + While it is important that such a distinction not become the object of + fetishism, as it in a sense already has, the mystification of the aspect + of RPG's traditionally associated with hierarchy and power can only lead + to abuse on the one hand, analytic sterility on the other. As Kim points + out for Collaborative Storytelling, "It considers the rules system to be + outside of the meaningful product. Rules are judged on their results for + shared play, not on how the participants view the process." This + perspective sets aside the impact of system and theory upon gameplay, + asserting player freedom and collaboration instead. While such a view may + seem liberating, and indeed may be so as against old-fashioned GM + authoritarianism, it implicitly claims that RPG performance occurs outside + of structure, not in reaction to it. But since social structures and + presumptive traditions of play at the least are necessarily at work in RPG + performance, there can be no doubt that gameplay has a structured context; + were this somehow not the case, and gameplay fully liberated from exterior + structures, there could be no possibility of conflict or its resolution, + as no player would have a context within which to react conflictually. + Thus while a particular group or style may wish to formulate a liberated + play modality as ideal, this has an ideological function and serves to + replace one authoritarian structure (GM authority, game-system authority, + etc.) with yet another. In order for theory to advance the improvement of + gameplay, then, it must work to distinguish between analytical activities + and constructive or synthetic ones, and furthermore strive to bring this + to consciousness within actual play. + + Second, RPG theory needs to take seriously the contributions and insights + of other disciplines. Eventually this should be a reciprocal engagement, + but this will require acceptance by academic and other mainstream + intellectual theorists; insofar as RPG theory can support such a move, it + must do so by engaging actively and constructively with such theorists, in + language acceptable to their traditions. In the meantime, RPG theory must + set aside its tendency to see its analytical object as unique and thus + special. William James reminds us forcefully, + + The first thing the intellect does with an object is to class it along + with something else. But any object that is infinitely important to us and + awakens our devotion feels to us also as if it must be sui generis and + unique. Probably a crab would be filled with a sense of personal outrage + if it could hear us class it without ado or apology as a crustacean, and + thus dispose of it. "I am no such thing," it would say; "I am MYSELF, + MYSELF alone." [36][28] + + James's point is clear: while we are willing to make all sorts of + classifications within RPG's, we tend to think of RPG's as unique and thus + special. But "unique" is simply a logical category that can be applied to + any object of analysis supporting formulation as a categorical object. If + RPG's are unique, that does not mean they are not ritual, or social + behavior; it only means that they can, from a particular perspective, be + formulated as having some distinctive characteristics. So long as RPG + theory continues to formulate itself otherwise, as unique in an illogical, + strong sense with respect to other behaviors, such theory will continue to + be marked by two unfortunate properties: first, it will be perpetually in + the position of many religious discourses of having continually to defend + its boundaries against the incursions of other discourses and analytical + methods; and second, it will be incapable of real analytical force because + it has built into its very self-definition essentialist biases that again + require constant and vigilant defense. Arguably, the tendency of much RPG + theory toward rigid hierarchization and toward discourse-circle hegemony + would thus constitute a parallel to more obviously religious dogmatisms. + + Third, RPG theory requires models founded upon a productive and + reproductive, as opposed to interpretive and receptive, situation of + narrativity. Two obvious examples, Kim's already-cited article and Liz + Henry's "Power, Information, and Play in Role Playing Games,"[37][29] are + admirable moves toward intelligent application of exterior models, but + find themselves at odds with the purposes of those models. Kim's awareness + of this problem is clear: + + There are many differences between RPGs and books [upon which the + formalist model is built], but some are more subtle than others. It is + clear that RPGs have no division between author and reader. Each + participant both expresses and interprets. Further, this calls into + question what the story is. The answer depends in part on what we define + as the discourse or "text" of RPG play. + + These questions are essential, and require answers; indeed, even cursory + examination of recent RPG theory reveals a constant concern to formulate + authorship, textuality, and so forth with respect to RPG's. But these + debates mostly run around in circles, die out, and get revived with new + energy but no really new formulations, with endless repetitions of the + cycle. The problem, in short, is that formalist and hermeutical models are + founded on confronting the genuinely difficult problem that interpreting a + text is not comparable to a conversational situation; intricate and + elegant strategies are deployed to make sense of how we make sense of + text, if you will, given that it is not conversation. But RPG's are + conversational; the problem does not arise directly. By attempting to read + RPG's through such lenses, we are caught in circularity: conversations are + like books (except that they are not face-to-face), and books are like + RPG's (except that the latter are face-to-face). Why not drop out the + sidetrack and recognize RPG's as active, dynamic, conversational forms of + symbolic manipulation? I have attempted a beginning here, but a great deal + more needs to be done. [38][30] + + Fourth, stemming from the last point, RPG theory must take into account + the social issues at stake and at work within the smallest, most + apparently arbitrary activities of play. That so much discussion of + "problem games" focuses on social difficulties -- problem players or GM's, + paradigmatic clashes, etc. -- reveals that the central issues in play are + social. To the extent that RPG theory tends to work hierarchically, from + top-down (broad categorical strokes before specific game issues), it + mistakes the actual dynamics by incorporating its analytic framework into + problems needing resolution; this is another means by which theoretical + discourse mystifies itself and its contributions, and it can most + effectively be challenged from within theory itself. + + Fifth, RPG theory must, through engagement with broader social theory -- + particularly the mode of anthropological theory labeled "practice" -- + become aware of symbolic and structural manipulation as a strategic part + of everyday life, a set of techniques also employed (and refined) within + the specifically RPG context. This occurs at every level of play; there + can be no absolute divisions between in-game and out-of-game, for the same + reasons that the only absolute division between a Catholic Eucharist and a + Catholic's everyday life is an ideological one. + + Finally, RPG theory must move beyond hierarchical classification as a + technique. There is no question that classification is a valid, even + necessary goal for serious analytical work. But as in so many disciplines, + most notably the study of religion, the tendency is to use the scientific + character of classification to construct an aura of objectivity; we see + this in discourses that stress "correctness". The natural upshot of such + an endeavor is to reify the categories as ontologically legitimate, + mystify their constructed character, and thus naturalize the + authority-claims latent within such structures. Classification must + recognize that the object does not exist outside of the construction of + taxa; "religion" or "ritual" do not exist, but are means by which + historically situated and motivated people classify certain behaviors. + Similarly, "RPG" is not a thing, a singular object, unique and discrete + from others, and Narrativist orientations do not differ from Simulationist + or Gamist ones except insofar as we construct them so. Classification is + the basis of comparison, not of truth or certainty. Until RPG theory takes + on board serious recognition of its comparative nature, it will remain an + ideology and not a science.[39][31] + + -------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +Notes + + 1. E.g. Ron Edwards' game Sorcerer (Chicago: Adept Press, 2001; see + [40]www.sorcerer-rpg.com). + 2. Edward's views have been formulated in several articles, all of which + may be found at The Forge ( [41]http://www.indie-rpgs.com). Apart from + the library articles, a useful recent discussion started by Edwards is + "The whole model - this is it" + ([42]http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=8655). + 3. Stable URL: + [43]http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/theory/narrative/paradigms.html + 4. Stable URL: [44]rec.games.frp.advocacy. + 5. The Forge has hosted lengthy discussions of how RPG play is like + playing in a band (with the gamemaster playing bass), how RPG play is + like playing a pinball machine, and so on. Examination of the range of + such discussions will show the two discursive thrusts: the drive for + clarification and precision in the metaphor, and the extension of the + analogical range. As a rule, such discussions end when those who find + the analogy helpful have formulated a version that is clear to them + personally, when those who do not find it so grow tired of trying, and + when most become frustrated with those who try to extend the analogy + to ludicrous, literalist extremes. These discussions are not worthless + -->analytical models, such metaphors must be formulated rigorously, + with their boundaries precisely set. For more casual discussion, on + the other hand, one of the best qualities of a forum like the Forge is + that it permits this sort of open speculation and play; indeed, a + close analysis of the ludic dimension in such RPG discourse would be + valuable for understanding the interrelations of RPG play and theory. + 6. On the issue of the "unique" as special, and its problematic + applications to serious analysis within classificatory discourse, see + Jonathan Z. Smith, "Fences and Neighbors." Imagining Religion + (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982), 1-18. + 7. See Ronald L. Grimes, Beginnings in Ritual Studies (Washington, D.C.: + University Press of America, 1982); Victor W. Turner, Dramas, Fields + and Metaphors (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell UP, 1974); Turner, From Ritual to + Theater: The Human Seriousness of Play (New York: Performing Arts + Journal Publications, 1982). Essentially all of Grimes' work work + since the late 1970's fits the model am describing here, as part of + what he has dubbed "ritual studies". Turner's work, however, took a + strictly performative and dramatic turn; his earliest works, while + excellent, do not directly fit this model, and can only be made to + accord with the performative perspective with considerable hindsight + and, I think, distortion. + 8. See Claude Levi-Strauss, The Savage Mind (Chicago: University of + Chicago Press, 1966); Levi-Strauss, The Naked Man, trans. John and + Doreen Weightman (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990); Pierre + Bourdieu, The Logic of Practice, trans. Richard Nice (Stanford: + Stanford UP, 1990); Sherry Ortner, "Theory in Antropology Since the + Sixties", Comparative Studies in Soiety and History 26.1 (Jan. 1984), + 126-66; Catherine Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice (Oxford: Oxford + UP, 1992). + 9. The French idea of bricolage is not directly translatable into + English; we simply have no category quite like it. The bricoleur is a + hobbyist of a sort, but elevated to a high artistic level. For the + Levi-Strauss formulation, see The Savage Mind, chapter 1, "The Science + of the Concrete"; the translation is execrable, and those with a good + command of French would be well advised to read La pensee sauvage, + chapter 1, "La science du concret." + 10. Stable URL: [45]http://194.29.64.17/thecog/movie.html + 11. I shall not go into detail on hermeneutics, as it is founded primarily + on philosophical negotiation of the problems of interpretive + reception, problems relevant but not central to the analysis of RPG's. + On this model, see Paul Ricoeur, Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences + (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1981). See also Umberto Eco, Interpretation + and Overinterpretation (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1992); and Hans Georg + Gadamer, Philosophical Hermeneutics (Berkeley and Los Angeles: + University of California Press, 1977). Also useful, though less + approachable, are Eco's The Limits of Interpretation (Bloomington, IN: + Indiana UP, 1994) and A Theory of Semiotics (Bloomington, IN: Indiana + UP, 1979). + 12. A central tenet of hegemonic Forge theory. + 13. See Mike Holmes, "Mike's Standard Rant #3: Combat System" + ([46]http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=2024). Holmes' + essential point is this: "If you don't want combat to be the focus of + a game, do not include special rules for it. Especially if you don't + include special rules about anything else." This "standard rant" has + been discussed periodically on the Forge. + 14. It should be pointed out that the Forge "system matters" principle + does not claim that other elements do not matter; the question is one + of emphasis, and is here an analytical distinction rather than a + polemical one. + 15. See iago [Fred Hicks], "Long Pig the RPG: Would You Play It?" + ([47]http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=6091). + 16. Jonathan Z. Smith, "Fences and Neighbors," Imagining Religion: From + Babylon to Jonestown (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), + 1-18. The polythetic system is hardly perfectly objective, but as + Smith argues persuasively, it is less inherently inclined toward + normative claims and slippages than the monothetic, taxonomic sorts of + systems founded on hierarchy. + 17. Although see his Deeply Into the Bone: Reinventing Rites of Passage + (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2002), the + purpose of which is explicitly to formulate ritual theory as a + constructive discourse for people wishing to invent or reinvent their + own rites of passage. + 18. The commensuration of ritual discourses and discourses about ritual, + between ritual in fact as analytical discourse and academic analysis + as in fact ritual, is outside the scope of the present paper. The + argument, founded upon a grammatological engagement with practice, + performance, and structural analysis, juxtaposed to early modern + magical practice and the theoretical dramaturgy of Zeami's Noe, will + be part of the core of my book Magic in Theory and Practice, where I + do not connect it with RPG's per se. + 19. Arnold van Gennep, The Rites of Passage, trans. Monika B. Vizedon and + Gabrielle L. Caffee (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961); + Victor Turner, "Betwixt and Between: The Liminal Phase in Rites de + Passage," Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society, Symposium + on New Approaches to the Study of Religion, 1964:4-20; Turner, The + Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure (Aldine de Gruyter, + 1969); Turner, The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual + (Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 1970). + 20. "Betwixt and Between," 13, citing Audrey I. Richards, Chisungu + (London: Faber and Faber, 1956), 209-10; the new edition is Richards, + Chisungu: A Girl's Initiation Ceremony Among the Bemba of Zambia + (London: Routledge, 1982). + 21. "Railroading," for which there are numerous more or less equivalent + terms, is the practice of a GM essentially scripting the majority of + plot events and structures within a given play session or series of + such. For example, the GM may decide, prior to play, that he wants the + PC characters, all cowboys, to engage in an OK Corral-style gunfight + as the climax of play; when the PC's choose (via their players, of + course) to ride out of town to investigate a lost silver mine, the GM + uses various strategies to prevent them from doing this, because he + needs them in town in order for the gunfight to take place. Such + strategies range from subtle hints to overt assertions of authority; a + possible example would be to inform the players that several of their + horses are lame and cannot be ridden, then to have no horses available + at the town stable, then to ensure that nobody in town will sell his + or her own horse. By the time the players have negotiated this many + options, it is generally clear to everyone (though very often not + stated) that no matter what they do, the PC's will be prevented from + riding out of town. + 22. This point has been emphasized in various RPG discussions. One common + suggestion is that if, for some reason, the GM actually needs her + players to follow a set of railroad tracks, the GM should react to + repeated attempts to jump the rails out-of-game, by saying something + like, "Okay, guys. I'm really not that prepared, actually, and I kind + of need you to go and do X. Is that okay?" While this may act + practically to achieve the desired effect, it depends upon the + rigidity of in-game/out-of-game divisions to acquire efficacy, and + cannot in itself be deemed a resolution of a more fundamental + difficulty. + 23. I would agree with these thinkers that people never think truly + independently, that is unconstrained in any manner by encultured + structures; the point here is that even constrained thought and action + has tremendous flexibility and ranges of possibility, and is not + simply scripted or railroaded in the RPG sense. + 24. This division is reproduced in strictly academic contexts not only + with reference to ritual but also to myth: myths are not "really" + myths if they are invented for that purpose (whatever such a purpose + might be), just as rituals as not "really" rituals if they are + consciously invented so. The intrusion of dubious ideas of + consciousness, ontology, and category only deflect from the central + point: academics by formulating critique in this fashion reproduce the + ideology of authenticity that authorizes and legitimates certain + religious behaviors as stable and non-inventive, as against the + "wannabe" inventions of recent "flakes" and "crazies". In a sense, we + might see the division here as between those who are creative within + an authorized framework and those who create their own framework. The + critique thus becomes reflexive, as indeed we should have suspected it + always was: the academic is really saying that she herself, by being + creative (doing new analytical work) within an authorized or + traditional framework (academic and disciplinary traditional + discourse) is legitimate and critical, while "crazies" (those + proposing unexpected critiques) fall outside the authorized framework + (do not have Ph.D.s, for example) and thus need not be taken + seriously. + 25. It would be interesting to consider whether the apparent (though + entirely anecdotal) overlap between RPG communities and Neopagan ones + might be at least partly rooted here. In the absence of serious + sociological data, I suspect that an effective technique here would be + close analysis of White Wolf's various Neopagan-oriented games + (especially Werewolf: The Apocalypse and several of the Ars Magica + supplements) with respect to ritual/magical creativity, criticism of + religion, and criticism of what the authors refer to as "traditional" + games in their explanations of how their games are special and + different. + 26. This is a purely hypothetical construct; I know of no such actual + response among Bemba, and the example is deliberately over-simplified + for heuristic reasons. + 27. Levi-Strauss, The Savage Mind, 30-32; the reference on the Gahuku-Gama + is to K. E. Read, "Leadership and Consensus in a New Guinea Society." + American Anthropologist 61.3 (1959): 429. + 28. William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience (New York: + Longmans, Green, and Co., 1902), 9. See also Jonathan Z. Smith, + "Fences and Neighbors" for a penetrating discussion of the "unique" in + theoretical discourses. + 29. [48]http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/theory/liz-paper-2003/ + 30. The same point might be made about Edwards's dependence upon Lajos + Egri's constructive models for creative writing, models poorly suited + to analytical purposes. In essence, Edwards asserts that Egri's models + fit RPG's, except that the product is entirely different, authorship + is shared, and really the Threefold Model is analytic rather than + constructive. More recently, Edwards has noted that Egri's model + (especially with regard to "premise") only applies properly to + Narrativist play. + 31. Here I take science to be a reflexive and self-critical attempt to + differentiate and understand its analytical objects. There can be no + question that modern science, in the usual sense, does not always + fulfill these criteria, in particular because it tends to claim + objectivity instead of constructed reflexivity. But given the need for + such reflexive awareness, the goals and ideals of science remain + worthy of theoretical discourse; see the introduction and first + chapters of Bourdieu's The Logic of Practice for a brilliant (if + dense) formulation of scientific analysis that recognizes and takes + seriously its own constructed nature. For comparison as a discourse + and a method, Jonathan Z. Smith's Imagining Religion should be the + starting-point of any attempt at theoretical construction. + + -------------------------------------------------------------------------- + + Christopher I. Lehrich + + Converted to HTML by John H. Kim + + Last modified: 19:13 AM 10/01/2005 + + The Forge created and administrated by [49]Clinton R. Nixon and [50]Ron + Edwards. + All articles, reviews, and posts on this site are copyright their + designated author. + +References + + Visible links + 1. http://www.indie-rpgs.com/ + 2. http://www.indie-rpgs.com/about/ + 3. http://www.indie-rpgs.com/donate.php + 4. http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/ + 5. http://www.indie-rpgs.com/reviews/ + 6. http://www.indie-rpgs.com/resources/ + 7. http://www.indie-rpgs.com/ + 8. mailto:clehrich@bu.edu + 9. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note1 + 10. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note2 + 11. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note3 + 12. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note4 + 13. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note5 + 14. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note6 + 15. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note7 + 16. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note8 + 17. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note9 + 18. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note10 + 19. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note11 + 20. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note12 + 21. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note13 + 22. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note14 + 23. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note15 + 24. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note16 + 25. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note17 + 26. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note18 + 27. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note19 + 28. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note20 + 29. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note21 + 30. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note22 + 31. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note23 + 32. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note24 + 33. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note25 + 34. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note26 + 35. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note27 + 36. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note28 + 37. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note29 + 38. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note30 + 39. file:///home/fabien/data/projets/jdr/harmonies/work/ecjdr/draft/ritual_discourse_in_RPGs.html#note31 + 40. http://www.sorcerer-rpg.com/ + 41. http://www.indie-rpgs.com/ + 42. http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=8655 + 43. http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/theory/narrative/paradigms.html + 44. news:rec.games.frp.advocacy + 45. http://194.29.64.17/thecog/movie.html + 46. http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=2024 + 47. http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=6091 + 48. http://www.darkshire.net/%7Ejhkim/rpg/theory/liz-paper-2003/ + 49. mailto:webmaster@indie-rpgs.com + 50. mailto:sorcerer@sorcerer-rpg.com