Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Jonne Arjoranta
University of Jyvskyl
Finland
jonne.arjoranta@jyu.fi
ABSTRACT 1. INTRODUCTION
Finding a definition of role-playing games that is As Hitchens and Drachen (2009) show through an
both representative and unambiguous is not in-depth study, the approaches to defining role-
simple. The differences among tabletop role- playing are diverse and many. They list a broad
playing games, live-action role-playing and digital catalog of different definitions, arranging them
role-playing games are remarkable, yet they are all according to the target of the definition: is the
considered role-playing games. Hitchens and definition aimed at defining role-playing as activity
Drachen (2009) have proposed a definition of role- or role-playing as a game. They also make an
playing games comprising of all these types in an important note that not all role-playing is tied to
attempt to find a definition that could be role-playing games. A considerable amount of role-
commonly accepted. This paper expands upon playing, probably most of it, is done outside the
this definition, exploring its strengths and sphere of role-playing games.
weaknesses, its relation to digital games and finally It is also possible to play role-playing games as
suggests an alternative approach. This alternative regular games, as Montola (2007) notes. This is
approach is based on Wittgensteins works on the particularly true of digital role-playing games. The
nature of language, and the hermeneutic traditions act of defining role-playing games is then separate
conception of truth. This should be understood as a from defining role-playing as action. In fact, the
continuation of the discussion on defining role- first instances of defining role-playing predate role-
playing games, not as an attempt to end the playing games by several decades. The term role-
discussion in some conclusive way. Some general playing was presumably coined by a Viennese
remarks on the problems of exclusive definitions psychiatrist, Jacob L. Moreno, in the 1920s, and
are also presented. was related to his conception of theatrical
3
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
psychodrama (Gale Encyclopedia of Psychology them. For these reasons, definitions are useful as
2001; Morton 2007). There is also a strong tradition long as role-playing games are studied.
in sociology of studying social interaction through
the roles, role-taking, and role-playing involved in 2. DEFINITION BY HITCHENS AND
everyday social life (Fine 1995). The works of the DRACHEN
Erving Goffman in particular have been used in Hitchens and Drachen discuss in length how role-
role-playing study (e.g. Fine 1983; Choy 2004; playing games have been and should be defined.
Stenros 2008). They end up giving the following definition, which
Despite this wide-ranging research on playing is paraphrased here for ease of reference. The
roles, the research of role-playing games is far more definition is as follows (Hitchens and Drachen
limited. Hitchens and Drachen (2009) show that 2009, p.16):
definitions given in role-playing games research on 1. Game World: A role-playing game is a game
role-playing in general are not applicable in set in an imaginary world. Players are free to
defining role-playing games. This could probably choose how to explore the game world, in terms
also be shown on the more wide-ranging of the path through the world they take, and
may revisit areas previously explored. The
sociological and social psychological literature on amount of the game world potentially available
role-playing in social interaction. for exploration is typically large.
some sequence of events within the game systemless, live-action role-playing, single player
world, which gives the game a narrative digital, massively multi-player online, freeform
element. However, given the configurative
and pervasive role-playing. This list could be
nature of the players involvement, these
elements cannot be termed narrative according extended with such examples as Jeepform
to traditional narrative theory. (Wrigstad 2008). There are also styles of play
subordinate to the classes given, but significantly
When discussing this definition, one must note that different in style from other, similar types of role-
the authors (2009, p.16) remind us that this play. An example of this would be the Dogma 99
definition does not provide clear boundaries and style of live-action role-playing, with its strong
that the line between what are and what are not ideological separation from tabletop role-playing
role-playing games is a blurry one. However, they (Fatland and Wingrd 2003). The Dogma 99 style of
do hold that the definition provides very clear live-action role-playing strongly favors games with
support for categorising games (Hitchens and an egalitarian power structure.
Drachen 2009, p.16).
3. CRITIQUE OF HITCHENS AND
In addition to the elements found in their
DRACHEN
definition Hitchens and Drachen (2009) discuss,
and then dismiss, several elements or alternatives While the definition Hitchens and Drachen (2009)
commonly found in definitions of role-playing. end up with is a very useful one, it is not entirely
These include at least: immersion, diegetic unproblematic. They start with examining different
framework, adopting roles, structures of power, types of role-playing games, and looking at
role-playing, and episodic structure. Some of these features they consider central to role-playing
are discussed in more length later in this paper. games.
As Suits (1980, p.41) remarks, the easiest way for a While most of the definition they give is quite
definition to fail is by being either too broad or too accurate, the demand that all role-playing games
narrow. Hitchens and Drachen (2009) hold that have a game master, and a game master defined in
earlier definitions are successful in recognizing a particular way, is questionable. Inclusion of a
role-playing games, but they fail the first criterion: game master in the definition assumes that all role-
they also include games that are not role-playing playing games have game masters, all players are
games. Usually at least some forms of first-person not game masters, and the role of the game master
shooter games are easily included, often also other is in some sense uniform. This criterion of
forms of computer games that are not usually separation is also closely tied to what they say
regarded as role-playing games. The definitions about participants. While this is in no way
influenced by theater typically include anything controversial (cf. Hakkarainen and Stenros 2002), it
that contain a narrative, and are thus unable to may still be debatable.
separate role-playing games from other forms of What is most problematic about the two criteria is
narrative fiction. An example of this is the that according to them there must be two types of
definition given by Mackay (2001, pp.4-5): people participating in role-playing games
I define the role-playing game as an players and game masters and that they must be
episodic and participatory story-creation separated from each other. This blunt binary either-
system that includes a set of quantified or division
rules that assist a group of players and a 1. seems to exclude those games where the
gamemaster in determining how their narrative power is evenly divided, and
fictional characters spontaneous 2. is questionable where the division between
interactions are resolved. game master(s) and players is more complex
In addition to presuming that all games are than presumed here.
episodic, this definition places emphasis on the An example of the first one is any instance of a live
creation of a story. It also takes for granted that all action role-playing game that has been co-written.
role-playing games include a set of quantified If all players participate in writing the game
rules, a claim that is very easily falsified by taking collaboratively, then there is no separation between
a brief look at different role-playing games and players and game masters, as all participants are
ways of role-playing. both. This is something that is normally thought of
as a role-playing game, yet it seems to be excluded
Hitchens and Drachen list (2009) different forms of
by the definition given.
role-playing, naming pen-and-paper/tabletop,
5
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
There are actual examples of games written An alternative way of looking at the role of
collaboratively, like #kotikatu, a live-action role- narrative power in role-playing games is hinted at
playing game set in a near future sci-fi-setting, and by Hitchens and Drachen (2009, p.6) when they
written collaboratively among the eight quote Montola (2007, p.179):
participants (Harviainen 2006). A single person
handled the necessary tasks of an administrator,
I see roleplaying as an interactive process of
but did not control the fictional world or the
defining and re-defining an imaginary game
narrative. In other words, there was no game
world, done by a group of participants
master. There is also a guide by Martine Svanevik
according to a recognised structure of power.
(2005) for organizing live-action role-playing games
One or more or participants are players,
with a flat power structure, as she calls it. She
who portray anthropomorphic characters that
lists three commandments for organizing
delimit the players power to define.
collective live-action role-playing games (Svanevik Instead of talking about the role of game master in
2005, pp.182-183): role-playing games Montola (2007, p.179) explicitly
1. Everyone is responsible for the larp talks about a recognised structure of power. This
formulation is more flexible, although the
2. There is no organizer
definition Montola gives is more ambiguous when
3. There are no limits used in defining role-playing games than the
simple referral to a game master, and thus not as
The second problem with the binary division of useful in separating role-playing games from other
players and game masters occurs with any game, games (Hitchens and Drachen 2009, p.6). This is
where players have more narrative power than partly because Montola does not try to define role-
assumed here. It is not enough to note that the playing games, but role-playing. Nevertheless,
balance of power between players and game Montolas conception can be used in analyzing the
masters, and the assignment of these roles, can power structures present in role-playing games.
vary, even within the playing of a single game Montola (2007, p.178) expands upon this mention
session. This paints an overtly simplified picture of a structure of power by continuing:
of the structures of power within role-playing games.
If the definition is to include games that have a [A]ll role-playing is based on a power
non-traditional role for the game master, then the structure that governs the process of
initial inclusion of the requirement for a game defining. In tabletop games and larps its
master may be misleading. especially critical to establish the limitations
of each participants power: The environment
For an actual role-playing game that has a power is classically controlled by one player (the
structure not properly described by this definition, game master), while the others take over
one could look at the indie tabletop role-playing individual persons within the environment
game The Mountain Witch. In The Mountain Witch [...]. Often some power is allocated to a
there is a traditional division between the players ruleset or a digital virtual environment, but
and the game master: one of the participants is a even in the virtual worlds the players can
game master, the rest portray a single character utilize make-believe techniques to redefine
each. There is no re-assignment of these roles over the game world.
the course of the game. Even so, all of the players
have control over the game world beyond their Montolas account of the structures of power
characters, with player narrative control actually within role-playing games includes the classic role
more definitive than the game masters. The of a game master, but expands it to include other
players have the narrative power to add anything possibilities, some of which are mentioned earlier.
relevant to their characters fate to the game, even The traditional structure is a binary division into a
overriding something the game master has defined. game master and players, but this is by no means
The game master is supposed to create the the only possibility. Even this simple relation may
background for the story, but the players contain complex ways in which the narrative
themselves tell the actual story. Thus, The Mountain power is divided among the participants, as in The
Witch cannot be successfully captured within the Mountain Witch. Recognizing that there is a game
definition by a simple division between players master may not tell us much about the game. Like
and a game master. The use of actual narrative Hitchens and Drachen (2009) note, this recognition
power is more complex. is not even enough to separate role-playing games
6
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
from other games, as many war games typically digital realm, if only through the need to
have a referee comparable to a game master. prepare the graphical assets.
It is certainly true that digital role-playing games
The traditional structure is a binary have a qualitative difference from tabletop role-
playing games, but the same could be said of
division into a game master and
tabletop role-playing games and live-action role-
players, but this is by no means the playing games. All types of role-playing games
only possibility. have limitations that are hard to overcome within
the media, for example:
The separation of role-playing games from other
1. When compared to for example larp and
games is not entirely unambiguous. As can be seen
digital role-playing games, tabletop role-
from Hitchens and Drachens (2009) definition,
playing cannot as effectively convey visual
such elements as the size of the playing area, and
cues, because it depends on verbal
the typical (or possible) forms of interaction with
discourse.
the game world constitute a part of the definition.
Here another of Montolas (2009) concepts can be 2. The area of play is necessarily limited in
applied to clarify the situation. He separates the live-action role-playing, where the physical
defining characteristics of role-playing games from surroundings are part of the play. This is
those that are typical to them. This separation helps not similarly true in digital role-playing
in finding those elements that are essential to the games, where the space is virtual, or
definition, and separating them from those that are tabletop role-playing games where the
only coincidentally true. Not separating defining space is verbally created and imaginary.
characteristics from typical ones introduces 3. Online text-based role-playing is limited
ambiguity into any definition. by lacking the possibility of conveying
emotions through facial expressions.1 This
4. CAN DIGITAL GAMES BE ROLE- applies also to graphical online games
PLAYING GAMES? without video-feeds, since the player has
Digital role-playing games form a non-uniform to communicate through his or her avatar.
group. There are great many similarities between These comments should not be understood as
single player digital games and massively critiques of these forms of playing, but simply as
multiplayer online role-playing games an acknowledgement of the fact that the media
(MMORPG). They are also both recognized as role- through which play happens affects the playing
playing games in a more general sense, as being itself (McLuhan 1964). Neither are these
alike and sharing qualities for example with observations comprehensive in covering all of the
tabletop role-playing. Yet there are enough distinctions between forms of play, as such a
differences that Hitchens and Drachen (2009, p.16) question is extensive enough to merit its own
conclude them to not represent the full spectrum discussion.
of role-playing games. They continue (Hitchens
and Drachen 2009 p.16): The line between single player digital role-playing
For example, some role-playing games blur games and other digital games is blurry. Of the six
or even remove the boundary between qualities used by Hitchens and Drachen (2009) to
player and games master. Digital role- define role-playing games, three are particularly
playing games are more restrictive, with the useful in separating digital role-playing games
software having a non-negotiable role and from other digital games. These are:
rely on quantitative character representation
and event resolution, while not allowing 1. Game World,
purely qualitatively description or arbitrary 2. Interaction,
resolution. They also limit, in advance, what 3. Narrative.
portions of the game world the characters
can engage. Where a human game master Digital role-playing games typically have a large,
can, on the fly, detail and present any aspect open game world, which the player may quite
of the game world, this cannot be done in the freely explore. There are typically more types of
A reviewer pointed out that this may be (and often is) compensated for by using emotes. This is certainly true. It
simply takes more conscious effort from the player.
7
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
interaction available than in other digital games, present in the game, but the protagonist is mute.
and not just limited to a single category of fighting, The only interaction presented during the dialogue
driving, etc. Role-playing games also often create a is the possibility of either rejecting or accepting the
much more detailed and meaningful narrative than missions offered. It is perhaps more fitting then to
other digital games (Hitchens and Drachen 2009). call it monologue rather than dialogue. It does not
qualify as meaningful interaction. This is true of
The rest of the three qualities participants, most digital games; the types of interaction
characters and game master are not as effective in available is heavily limited by the genre of the
separating digital role-playing games from other game, but this should not be surprising. Games are
digital games. There tend to be at least two usually limited to certain types of game play. This
participants in all digital games, the player and the is also true of role-playing games, although the
machine operating the game. The machine controls types available are typically more varied.
the simulation where the game takes place,
effectively handling the duties of the game master. All games can be said to contain narrative elements
The characters in typical digital games, though not due to containing consecutive sequences of events
in all digital games, are defined as individuals given meaning to by the player.2 It would not then
rather than roles. The existence of individual, be informative to state that there are narrative
potentially developing characters does not separate elements in role-playing games, unless that is
digital role-playing games from other digital refined to separate role-playing games from other
games. games in some substantial way. According to the
definition, the narratives present in role-playing
While it is true that digital role-playing games tend games are not traditional, but that is probably true
to have a large area of possible exploration, using of all interactive media. The narrative structures
this as a defining quality imposes problems, as it is are probably especially similar between role-
also typical for genres apart from role-playing playing games and other games.
games. Games such as the Far Cry series include A game like Super Mario Bros does tell a story of a
both large areas for exploration, and the possibility courageous plumber rescuing a kidnapped
to retrace ones steps, which is a quality typical of princess, although it is probably true that it is not a
role-playing games. It may however be that area very complex one as stories go. But the complexity
does not really qualify as a defining characteristic; of the story cannot be a deciding factor. Even role-
strategy games typically have a larger area playing games with substandard (whatever the
represented in the game, although the scale is standard may be) narratives are still role-playing
different. However, they do not typically include a games, although not necessarily good ones, and the
single anthropomorphic character for the player to same probably applies to other forms of games.
play, so the risk of confusion with role-playing Other games may have other, redeeming qualities
games is a minimal one. It is thus probable that it is that make them good games regardless of the
not the area itself that is important, but rather the quality of the narrative. There are also games other
possibility of exploration of that area through a than role-playing games with strong narrative
single character. It can probably be concluded that elements, like the Half-Life series. It can then be
the existence of a large area possible for said that, in terms of narrative, the difference
exploration is a typical quality of role-playing between role-playing games, especially digital role-
games, but it probably should not be included as a playing games, and digital games is not that great.
defining quality.
While there are certainly other examples, Far Cry
One of the qualities typical for role-playing games and Half-Life are good examples because FPS-
is the large amount of different types of interaction games are usually not considered role-playing
possible to the players. This is especially useful in games yet they seem to fulfill most of the criteria
separating digital role-playing games from other set for role-playing games. The line is especially
digital games. One can use this as a separating blurry with Mass Effect, which is generally thought
criterion when showing why the Far Cry series is to be a role-playing game, but includes elements
not a series of role-playing games, but a series of from FPS-games as well, like real-time FPS-style
FPS-games. The only type of interaction available combat. The question is not if Mass Effect is a role-
to the player are forms of combat. There is dialogue playing game, but what makes games that have
Jesper Juul (2001) has argued that while games and narratives share some structural elements, games and narratives
share some structural elements, games and stories do not translate very successfully into each other.
8
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
walk, but also with their temperament. The same there are similarities between them, rather than
way we understand types of numbers as being assuming there are none. According to Suits (1980),
similar. There is a direct affinity with the other Wittgenstein seems to assume that there are none,
kinds of things we are used to calling numbers. when he should have looked, and found, some.
There are also non-direct similarities to the things
we have formerly called numbers, and so we
consider any new examples of number-like-objects Instead of having a common core of
numbers. What makes them number-like may attributes, role-playing games share
differ from one instance to another, just like the attributes as family resemblances that
attributes differed when comparing children to
may vary from one instance to another,
their mother and father. The children may be
forming a continuum rather than a
blond, like their father, and have brown eyes, like
their mother. These shared concepts are single potentially identifiable object.
meaningful only in a certain type of commonly
shared way of speaking about things, Wittgenstein
(1999) interestingly calls language-games. Language- It is therefore not the lesson that games are
games are thus ways of understanding concepts, undefinable that is to be learned from Wittgenstein
differing from culture to another, but also in (1999). Simply stating that games are undefinable is
smaller scales, like from a field of researcher to counterproductive to their research (cf. Suits 1980).
another. Another possibility is to understand Wittgensteins
conception of games as a hermeneutic one (Connolly
From Wittgensteins (1999) conception follows that 1986). A hermeneutic conception means that each
there are no core attributes that could be used in definition is understood as a new starting point for
separating role-playing games from other a new act of defining, or in other terms, as a pre-
phenomena. If Wittgenstein (1999) is indeed right, understanding for a more complete understanding
then there may be no single definition for role- (Gadamer 2004). This would make the process of
playing games. Instead of having a common core of definition basically endless, as it may be continued
attributes, role-playing games share attributes as eternally without reaching any form of finality.
family resemblances that may vary from one However, this endlessness is not a surrendering to
instance to another, forming a continuum rather a completely relativistic point of view (Weberman
than a single potentially identifiable 2000). Rather, it is a contextual understanding of
object (Hitchens and Drachen 2009, p.5). The the truth. There may be no final truth, but an
resemblances would probably be stronger between understanding may be more or less suitable for a
live-action role-playing games and pen-and-paper context.
role-playing games than live-action role-playing
games and single player digital role-playing What does this mean in defining role-playing
games. Different types of role-playing games could games? If defining is understood like Wittgenstein
then be understood as a continuum with pen-and- (1999) does, it follows that:
paper role-playing games near the center3. The act
1. Language-games resemble context: Larp is
of defining role-playing games would then be a
discussed with theater analogies, digital
language-game in itself, and the question not what
games with computer analogies, and
are role-playing games, but what elements are
tabletop role-playing games with war-
considered important when we identify role-
gaming analogies.
playing games in this language-game.
2. Language-games are separate: Different
Wittgenstein also claims that games cannot be language-games are used in discussing
defined, and that family resemblances are the only digital role-playing games and tabletop
possible way of identifying games. Not everyone role-playing games. There is overlapping
agrees (Suits 1980; Juul 2003). Suits (1980) has in these language-games, but they are
criticized Wittgenstein for not following his own distinct.
advice of actually looking at games and seeing if
Or perhaps any other style of role-playing at the center? Pen-and-paper role-playing games are generally thought to be
the basic form of role-playing games, but this is probably mostly because they are the first type of role-playing to be
recognized as such. This excludes Happenings (Harviainen 2008), therapeutic role-playing, pedagogic simulations
(Crookall, Oxford and Saunders 1987), social play and role-taking rituals, which all easily predate pen-and-paper role-
playing (Morton 2007).
10
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
3. Language-games may not be compatible: This language-game is part of the form of life that
Larp is difficult to discuss using is role-playing, and all the social characteristics
terminology suitable in analyzing shooter typical to it. An example of this would be the
computer games, while this is notably knowledge of fantasy and science-fiction literature
easier with digital role-playing games. typically considered relevant to role-playing
games, like cyberpunk, the works of Tolkien and
The context-sensitive, different language-games are the Cthulhu-mythos. Language-games exist in
what Wittgenstein (1999) had in mind when he nested hierarchies with porous boundaries.
called language-games forms of life. A language- Choosing which level of language-games to
game is associated with a certain way of being in employ is a strategic decision. This decision affects
the world and these ways of being in the world are questions of inclusion and exclusion.
different forms of life. Forms of life are cultural
differences, but in addition they are differences on
a smaller scale. Forms of life are the different ways
of relating to the world depending on social, There is also the language-game of
cultural and economic status and context. For role-playing games that encompasses
example, when a fisherman talks about knowing all of the forms of role-playing usually
where the best places to fish are, he probably uses considered role-playing games.
the word know in a different way than a
philosopher who specializes in epistemology (the
theory of knowledge). The fisherman and the There is also the possibility of using several
philosopher live in different forms of life, where definitions simultaneously in a field of research. An
the word know is useful in different ways and example of this is the way genes are understood in
thus they participate in different language-games. biology (Moss 2004). Instead of giving a single
definition variable over time, the alternative would
Similarly, there are related but different forms of be using several at the same time. There are
life surrounding different forms of role-playing requirements on the definitions if they are to be
games. This is true even if we exclude from the used simultaneously: they cannot be completely
discussion such things as culture differences. Live- mutually exclusive, lest they end up defining
action role-playing is discussed in different terms different phenomena. Additionally, only one
than digital role-playing. The use of different terms definition can be used in one study, to adhere to the
stems from the different cultural and social demands of coherency. The definitions can vary
contexts these activities are associated with. only between different discussions, which could
end up being completely different language-games.
The language-games around different forms of
role-playing are separate and may diverge from There is also the possibility that the search for a
one another, especially over time. An example of commonly accepted definition (Hitchens and
this could be the Knutepunkt-tradition of role- Drachen 2009, p.3) is not a meaningful one, at least
playing game theory, which deals almost yet. One is hard pressed to find a commonly
exclusively with larp (currently encompassing 10 accepted definition for such widely used terms as
books and several other works, see Larsson 2010, culture, structure (Rubinstein 2001) or game.
for an example). The Knutepunkt-tradition could These things are defined and redefined all the time
be understood as its own language-game, with a as part of new research, creating new approaches,
connected form of life. This form of life would be problems and answers along the way. This
the Nordic live-action role-playing culture and its probably should not be viewed as a lack in
related discussions. Language-games are as research, but as a consequence of the nature of the
dynamic and mutable as the forms of life they things being defined. Our understanding of
surround. Unless there is interaction between cultural phenomena is constantly changing, at least
different forms of life, the language-games partly because those phenomena are also changing,
surrounding them may also separate. and partly because our cultural perspective is
changing.
But this is only one way of looking at the situation.
There is also the language-game of role-playing Wittgensteins (1999) way of defining things is
games that encompasses all of the forms of role- essentially nominal. It means that his way of
playing usually considered role-playing games. defining things does not try to find a definition that
11
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
can be compared to reality, but to discourses4, ways Nominal definitions are defined as verbal
of speaking about things (Mills 2004). As shown agreements that cannot be truth or false. They may
before, the key benefits to using a nominal be more or less useful in a situation, but they
definition are: cannot be evaluated as true or false. This may be
considered an unfavorable quality when building a
1. Avoiding essentialism. If definitions are theory-base for a new discipline, like role-playing
limited to ways of speaking about things, game theory.
then none of the qualities of the object
being defined are taken for granted. All of Additionally, Cohen (2008, p.232) remarks that:
the qualities are subject to definition and
re-definition, highlighting the social nature We have drawn a sharp distinction between
of these qualities. verbal [nominal] and real definitions. In
practice, however, the distinction is never so
2. Flexibility. Nominal definitions are by
sharp, and even in definitions which seem
their nature sensitive to change and
altogether verbal there is generally some
context.
reference to the analysis of what the words
However, there are drawbacks to nominal stand for.
definitions, namely:
Discourse is used in this context as a non-technical term, roughly synonymous with language-game. This
corresponds loosely with Foucaults use of discourse as individualizable group of statements (Foucault 1972,
p.80 cited in Mills 2004, p.6).
12
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
experiences. The resulting conflicts over the probably not based on analytical grounds is the
meaning or essence of religion have been famous play theorist Roger Caillois (2001) view on
regarded, perhaps not without some justice, gambling. Caillois (2001) holds that gambling is not
as conflicts over words. But this is only a a type of play, but a corruption of play. He claims
half-truth. For the disputants frequently that gambling leads to debts, and other social
have their eye on a concrete phenomenon problems. This may be true, but it does not rule out
which presents all these aspects. The the possibility that gambling is play. Caillois view
quarrels over the right definition of religion might be interpreted as not something stemming
are attempts to locate the fundamental from play itself, but from a bias on his part.
features of a social phenomenon.
A more inclusive concept of play would include
There is a concrete phenomenon at the heart of gambling regardless of its social effects. Perhaps
these discussions, but the definitions given on we should for similar reasons use inclusive
religion pick out only parts of it. These parts are definitions of role-playing games. Even if an
emphasized as ways of enhancing arguments inclusive definition is not adopted, there are
about the nature of the subject. different ways definitions could be formulated.
These alternative definitions depend on the
Similarly, it is a question of power who gets to viewpoint used and the language-games
decide what games actually are role-playing surrounding the phenomenon under discussion, as
games. There is power in being able to say: That is shown by Wittgenstein (1999). An example of
no role-playing game, this is! It can also be useful theoretical plurality among role-playing theory is
to publishers of games to be able to market some the difference between academic role-playing
games as role-playing games, even if the theory and the theory created on The Forge
connection to role-playing is a tenuous one at best. Forums, often called the Forge theory (Boss 2008).
It is analytically useful to be able to exclude some The problem with talking about language-games
things from role-playing games, but what those instead of definitions is the apparent relativism
things happen to be depends at least partly on the implied. If instead of searching for a perfect
purpose of the definition. When one sets out to find definition it is conceded that there may be no
a definition that is better able to separate role- perfect definition, and that there may be many
playing games from other games, it follows that the different definitions, it seems that there are no
definition will be an exclusive one. Exactly how ways of criticizing these definitions. They are
exclusive it is depends, in addition to the findings different, and that is all. But this is a mistaken
of the analysis, on the implicit goals of the notion: some language-games are better suited for
definition. As an example, Dungeons & Dragons is talking about some phenomena than others, and
the first published fantasy role-playing game (Fine they may be evaluated based on how well they are
1983), and a model for countless others, but suited to the problem at hand. However, this is
regardless of the fact some people could criticize it different from trying to find a single, perfect
for not being a particularly good role-playing game. definition. A definition is always a tool: definitions
This criticism must stem from a conception of role- are used trying to answer certain questions, and
playing games that excludes things present in depending on those questions, different definitions
Dungeons & Dragons, and includes things not may be better suited to the problem at hand. It is a
present in it. This should not be understood as a tool also in the sense that unless definition is
critique of Dungeons & Dragons, but as an necessary, it tends not to be given.
acknowledgement that tastes differ, as do the
criteria used for counting something a role-playing This approach can be understood as a hermeneutic
game. approach (Gadamer 2004). In addition to having
intrinsic attributes, cultural phenomena also have
It is perhaps because of these problems with relative attributes, which change over time and in
exclusion that Sutton-Smith (1997) calls for different contexts (Weberman 2000). This makes
inclusive definitions on a related phenomenon: truth a context-dependent concept, when talking
play. There is not a clear enough consensus of what about historical and cultural objects. This applies in
to call play that exclusive definitions should be the larger cultural context, where history slowly
created, and start ruling things out too harshly changes the conditions in which objects are
(Sutton-Smith 1997). An example of exclusion evaluated. But it also applies on a more specific
level where individual studies are conducted.
13
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
Earlier in this paper there has been a critique of the case of digital games, the participants creating the
various aspects of the definition given by Hitchens world are the game itself (or the computer running
and Drachen (2009). Analysis shows that some of the game), with its pre-programmed rules of
its aspects are more problematic than others. But simulation, and the player interacting with these
simply removing parts of the definition do not rules. This need for (at least) two participants
make it better. A definition that aims to rectify the separates role-playing games from works of fiction,
problematic parts is presented next. This definition such as books, where typically, but not necessarily,
aims to encompass the whole phenomenon of role- a single person creates the narrative. The narrative
playing, so it is situated on the language-game power is shared between participants in various
level of role-playing in general. Suggestion for a ways, depending on the system of rules used and
definition modeled after Hitchens and Drachen the social rules surrounding the play. The structure
(2009): of power can be anything from egalitarian to
autocratic, and can change according to rules of the
1. Game World: There is a game world, game or due to changes in the surrounding social
which is defined at least partially in the act relations.
of role-playing. This game world is at least
partially separate from the players Mackay (2001, p.134) states that the role-playing
ordinary life, and exists within a magic game, like hypertext, consists of description,
circle of play. narration, and ergodics. He studies role-playing
2. Participants: There are more than one from a performative point of view, so the difference
participant, which may include computers. between description and narration is important for
his study. In the definition being formulated here
3. Shared Narrative Power: More than one those two are essentially the same thing, as they are
player can alter the narrative, or it is not both participants using their shared narrative
role-playing, but storytelling. Shared power to shape the game world. The important
narrative power implies narrative. part is what Mackay (2001, p.134) calls ergodics.
4. Interaction: There are varying modes of This is Aarseths (1997) term for interactive
interaction with the game world. literature, where the reader must participate in
Conventions of play influence these forms creating the text. In this sense, role-playing games
of interaction, limiting the scope (What can are deeply ergodic. The interaction of different
I change in the game world?) and modes participants is needed to create the text of role-
(How can I change it?) of interaction. playing narrative. The text in question is not the
Role-playing games happen in a world outside printed text of the rulebook, but the narrative that
ordinary life (Huizinga 1949, p.13), in an is created during play. Aarseth (1997, p.64) lists
imaginary world that exists within a limited realm four modes of interaction:
of its own (Salen and Zimmerman 2004). However,
this separation is not complete in the sense that 1. Interpretative
ordinary life could not influence the game; this is 2. Explorative
even truer in the case of pervasive games5 3. Configurative
(Montola 2005). Nevertheless, there is a game
4. Textonic
world created during play that is separate from the
reality of the players (Hakkarainen and Stenros All texts have the interpretative function, which is
2003). the possibility of the reader to make different
interpretations of the text. In the explorative
function the user must choose which path to take
This makes truth a context-dependent through the text. In the configurative function the
concept, when talking about historical user can make changes to the text during the
and cultural objects. reading, but can make no permanent changes to
the text. If permanent changes can be made
which carry over to subsequent readers the
The imagined world of play is constructed (more function is textonic. Like all texts, role-playing
or less) in unison with several participants (Fine games contain the interpretative function. In order
1983). This makes role-playing games social. In the for something to be a role-playing game, it must
Pervasive games are defined by Montola (2005, p.3) as follows: Pervasive game is a game that has one or
more salient features that expand the contractual magic circle of play socially, spatially or temporally.
14
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
additionally contain at least the explorative mode Regardless of this impossibility of a final
of interaction. This is to say that role-playing definition, the definition given by Hitchens and
games must be interactive. If one would like to Drachen (2009) performs well as general view on
create more exclusive definitions, one could also role-playing. It aims to be exclusive, and succeeds
require that at least the configurative mode of in this. However, exclusive definitions do have
interaction would be present. If the participants their problems (Sutton-Smith 1997). If one sets out
cannot change anything within the game, it could to find a commonly accepted
be argued that it is not properly a role-playing definition (Hitchens and Drachen 2009, p.3) it is
game, as the narrative power is not shared. highly unlikely that this is possible with an
exclusive approach. The definition given by
Elements not included in this definition, but part Hitchens and Drachen (2009) includes elements
of the definition it is modeled after (Hitchens and that could be described as typical, rather than
Drachen 2009) are: defining (Montola 2009). Examples of these kinds
of elements is the potential area of the playing
1. Game Master world and character development. Most
2. Characters problematic of these is the inclusion of game
master in the definition. Analysis shows that
3. Narrative
rather than a game master, role-playing games
Game master is replaced with shared narrative necessarily contain a structure of power (Montola
power, as a more flexible expression of the 2007). A structure of power covers the different
structures of power within role-playing games. possible ways that power may be divided among
The definition given in this paper does not define the participants in a game.
characters as required qualities of role-playing
games. However, they are as common in role- Role-playing is deeply social in its nature (Fine
playing as they are in narratives in general. It is 1983). It is defined in the social contexts where it is
just this commonality that makes them not played. There is no pure role-playing that the
qualities of role-playing, but of all things theorist can find and then rule out other forms of
narrative. Characters, therefore, cannot be role-playing as less pure. What we consider role-
effectively used in separating role-playing games playing is the product of historical and social
from others forms of narrative. If characters are happenstance. But this does not mean that
not deemed necessary, it blurs the line between anything can be called role-playing, as it is a very
shared storytelling and role-playing. This may be distinct historical and social process that has
a disadvantage in the definition given here, if formed a certain understanding of role-playing.
studying elements in role-playing games more
related to characters, like engrossment (cf. Fine REFERENCES
1983). Narrative is not defined here as a quality of
1) Aarseth, E., 1997. Cybertext: Perspectives on
role-playing games; however, it is implied by
Ergodic Literature. Baltimore: The Johns
shared narrative power.
Hopkins University Press.
15
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
11) Far Cry, 2004. France: Ubisoft. 22) Juul, J., 2001. Games telling stories?. The
International Journal of Computer Game Research,
12) Fine, G.A., 1983. Shared fantasy: Role-playing
[online] 1 (1). Available at: http://
games as social worlds. Chicago: University of www.gamestudies.org/0101/juul-gts/
Chicago Press. [accessed 14 September 2009].
13) Fine, G.A., 1995. A second Chicago school?: the
23) Huizinga, J., 1949. Homo Ludens: a study of play-
development of a postwar American sociology. element in culture. London: Routledge & K.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Paul.
14) Gadamer, H.-G., 2004. Truth and Method. 2nd
24) Juul, J., 2003. The Game, the Player, the World:
ed. London: Continuum. Looking for a Heart of Gameness. In: Copier,
15) Gale Encyclopedia of Psychology, 2001. Role M., and Raessens, J., eds. Level Up: Digital
playing/psychodrama. [online]. Available at: Games Research Confrence Proceedings, Utrecht:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/ Utrecht University, pp. 30-45. [online].
mi_g2699/is_0002/ai_2699000298/ [accessed Available at: http://www.jesperjuul.net/text/
14 September 2009] gameplayerworld/ [accessed 15 August 2009]
16) Half-Life, 1998. USA: Sierra Studios, Electronic 25) Kneale, W. and Kneale, M., 1991. The
Arts. development of logic. New York: Oxford
17) Hakkarainen, H., and Stenros, J., 2003. The University Press.
Meilahti School. Thoughts on Role-playing. In: 26) Larsson, E. ed., 2010. Playing Reality.
Gade, M., Thorup, L., and Sander, M., eds. As Stockholm: Interacting Arts.
Larp Grows Up Theory and Methods in Larp. 27) Mackay, D., 2001. The fantasy role-playing game.
Copenhagen: Knudepunkt, pp. 54-54.[online]. Jefferson: McFarland & Company, Inc.
Available at: http://www.laivforum.dk/
kp03_book [accessed 19 July 2009] 28) Mass Effect, 2007. USA: Microsoft Game
Studios, Electronic Arts.
18) Harviainen, J.T., 2006. Testing Larp Theories
and MethodsResults of Year Two. In: 29) McLuhan, M., 1964. Understanding Media: The
Fritzon, T. and Wrigstad, T., eds. Role, Play, Art Extensions of Man. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Collected Experiences of Role-Playing. 30) Mills, S., 2004. Discourse. New York:
Stockholm: Freningen Knutpunkt, pp. 57-66. Routledge.
[online]. Available at: http://jeepen.org/ 31) Montola, M., 2005. Exploring the Edge of the
16
International Journal of Role-Playing - Issue 2
Magic Circle: Defining Pervasive Games. In: 44) Sutton-Smith, B., 1997. The Ambiguity of Play.
DAC 2005 conference. Copenhagen, Denmark Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
1-3 December 2005. 45) Svavenik, M., 2005. The Collectives little red
32) Montola, M., 2007. Tangible Pleasures of book, A step-by-step guide to arranging larps the
Pervasive Role-playing. In: DiGRA (Digital collective way. In: Bckman, P. and Hutchinson,
Games Research Association), Situated Play. R., eds. Dissecting Larp. Oslo: Knutepunkt, pp.
Tokyo, Japan 24-28 September 2007. [online]. 181-188.
Available at: http://www.digra.org/dl/db/ 46) Weberman, D., 2000. A New Defense of
07312.38125.pdf [accessed 1 September 2009]. Gadamers Hermeneutics. Philosophy and
33) Montola, M., 2009. The Invisible Rules of Role- Phenomenological Research, 60 (1), pp. 45-65.
Playing. The Social Framework of Role- 47) Wittgenstein, L., 1999. Filosofisia Tutkimuksia.
playing Process. International Journal of Role- Translated from German Philosophische
Playing, [e-journal] 1 (1), pp. 22-36. Available Untersuchungen by H. Nyman. Porvoo: WSOY.
at: http://marinkacopier.nl/ijrp/wp-content/
48) Wrigstad, T., 2008. The Nuts and Bolts of
uploads/2009/01/
Jeepform. In: Montola, M. and Stenros, J., eds.
montola_the_invisible_rules_of_role_playing.
Playground Worlds Creating and Evaluating
pdf [accessed 18 August 2009]
Experiences for Role-Playing Games. Jyvskyl:
34) Morton, B., 2007. Larps and Their Cousins Ropecon ry, pp. 125-138.
Through the Ages. In: Donnis, J., Gage, M. and
Thorup, L., eds. Lifelike, pp. 245-261.
Copenhagen: Projektgruppen KP07. Jonne Arjoranta, M.Soc.Sci, is a doctoral candidate
35) Mountain Witch, The, 2005. USA: Timfire at the University of Jyvskyl, Finland, with a
masters degree in philosophy. He is working on his
publishing.
dissertation in digital culture on the structures of
36) Moss, L., 2004. What Genes Cant Do. meaning in serious games. He has been role-playing
Cambridge: MIT Press. for most of his life.
17