Hey all,

So the huge Nordic roleplaying convention, called "Nodal Point" in various Scandinavian languages, decided to publish a book on RPG theory for this year's convention in Helsinki, Finland. I don't know about any of you, but I'm dying to get a copy of this book, which was printed in English. The description from their website is included below:

Solmukohta's webpage wrote: Ropecon will publish a book for Solmukohta 2004 in order to to create and preserve intellectual discussion on role-playing. The book, Beyond Role and Play, is edited by Markus Montola and Jaakko Stenros, and it features authors from Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, USA, Singapore and Japan. The foreword of the book has been written by professor Frans Mäyrä from the University of Tampere.

The book contains 28 articles and essays on role-playing, studying the interactive arts from various angles. The 320 pages have been divided into four sections. Theory holds academic papers, Practice contains methodological guides, Games reviews three recent influential Nordic larps and Openings provides visions, opinions and new avenues of role-playing studies. In addition there are three contextualising texts in the book delving into the social and historical roots of role-playing. The emphasis of the book is on larping, but the articles and ideas are applicable to tabletop role-playing as well.

Jonathan Walton wrote: So the huge Nordic roleplaying convention, called "Nodal Point" in various Scandinavian languages, decided to publish a book on RPG theory for this year's convention in Helsinki, Finland. I don't know about any of you, but I'm dying to get a copy of this book, which was printed in English.

I'll jump in on that for two copies. Let me know how to arrange payment and whatnot, Jonathan.

Sounds like a worthy investment. Count me in for one, and let me know what you need.

Ditto.

Best,
Ron

I'm in. $12 + shipping sounds reasonable to me.

Random thought: Would selling these from the Forge booth at GenCon make any sense at all, and if so, would the Nodal Point people be interested in opening a dialogue about it?

Lxndr wrote: Random thought: Would selling these from the Forge booth at GenCon make any sense at all, and if so, would the Nodal Point people be interested in opening a dialogue about it?

If I'm not too late, count me in and let me know how to pay.

Chris

Since I'm trying to come up with some sort of a review for the book before the deadline next wednesday, and having actually read it, I might as well comment on this. Might help me get my thoughts together. Putting it all together in a very short time (it was published last tuesday, were I got my press copy) is not that easy. Btw, yes, Knutpunkt, Knudepunkt, Knutepunkt and Solmukohta are the same thing (they all mean Nodal Point in english). The event tours the nordic countries and is always named in the language of the hosting country.

What's the book about?

The book is about 300 pages in a smallish font and it has 28 articles by 26 different people from eight different countries, so it's safe to say it has "all kinds of stuff". There's theory, history, articles on some interesting larps (which unfortunately pretty much prove that you'd have to had been there to understand), some attempts to create tools and some quite interesting propaganda. Basicly I found the subjects to fall into two categories.



What is roleplaying: where is it coming from, how's it done, what is it, what can be done with it, where is it going, how does it relate to the older art forms. Many parts of this relates to "is it or should it be about narration".

Writing LARPS: how it should be done, what can be done, some ways to do it, some examples on what has been done. A lot of the more manifesto-style and practice-oriented text relates to this subject.



What's the book like?

As Ron Edwards might put it, a lot of it is "theory heartbreakers", IMO. Almost every article has some worthwhile notions or ideas, but many of them cover it well. The need to create science has in many cases only blurred the actual issue, and sadly most of the "facts" would not hold up to a critical review. Also in many cases the writers need to bring out his or her own opinion is just damaging, and most of the writers fail to recognize their own biases, which are mostly pretty obvious. (Propably in some cases this is a conscious decision.) In other words, credibility is often lost. It's also obvious that many of the writers have a very limited understanding of table-top gaming, which limits their ability to understand roleplaying in general.

There's also the "manifesto heartbreakers"; articles about something which the writer declares to be good or bad, mostly presented in overly complicated ways. The book is a very good showcase about how you should either try to prove something, or try to state your opinion. Trying to do both things at the same time rarely ends well.

Now, on the other hand, the above could propably be said about every "serious" article ever written about roleplaying. This book is by no means worse, and the many attempts to apply science to roleplaying discussion are in my opinion highly welcome and should be much appreciated. These people have not had much to work with except their own personal experiences, and with that in mind, they have managed to come up with some very good stuff. In the publication event one of the editors stated that the book tries to create something to build on for future studies. The first steps are always the most difficult. This book is very possibly the best book about roleplaying yet.

There's a lot of good stuff. There are many interesting points in the book, some of which do have good presentation to back them up. Some of the techniques and terminology seem potentially useful, even if most of it is larp-oriented. It's obvious the book has a lot of thought and a lot of roleplaying experience behind it, and some of the views presented are in any case very interesting and thought-provoking. Reading this book has certainly added to and cleared up a lot of what I personally think about roleplaying. It's not perfect, and not even as good as such a book could be, but it's still good. At least now we have something to build on.

Should I by this book?

Well, that depends. Do you have a serious interest in roleplaying? If you do, you should definitely own it, for future reference if nothing else. Even if you are just a hobbyist, this book will propably give you something interesting to think about. If you aim to take part in theoretical roleplaying discussion in the next few years, this book will certainly do you good. If you are interested in the Nordic LARP-scene, this book is a must.

For those who don't know, the Nordic roleplaying scene is WAY different from that in the US and UK. Very LARP-centered and pretty far removed from the Microsoft-like reach of d20. Also, pretty strongly grounded in theory, from what I can tell, and what we might consider experimental and avante garde roleplaying.

Thanks for the clarifications, Risto. I think any kind of book that freely accepts submissions (even if they get selected and edited afterwards) is bound to be a mixed bag. Still, I'm approaching this from several angels:

1. I don't know enough about LARPing and LARP theory. There's not a lot of it discussed on the Forge, unfortunately, and I don't have enough experience to seek out good places to discuss LARP.

2. I don't know enough about the "Nordic scene," as you say, but it interests me greatly. Working with Eero Tuovinen on brainstorming for "Humble Mythologies," working with Antti Karjalainen on illustrating "Argonauts," reading Juhana Pettersson and Mike Pohjola's columns at RPGnet... it's clear that you guys have some great stuff going on.

3. Sometimes, it's interesting to know not just what the considered opinion of the "expert" is, but what the average player or GM or game designer on the street feels about roleplaying. For instance, I think the Turku Manifesto represents a style of play that I would never encourage or support, but it's really cool that someone had that opinion and wrote it up, all the same.

4. In the American and UK scenes, there aren't yet publications that deal completely with roleplaying theory, though they may not be too far off. There are online communities like the Forge, there are the articles that occasionally get published in books like Grey Ghost's "Gamemastering Secrets" and Robin's Laws "Laws of Gamemastering," there are things like "Daedalus" which do games and theory together, but mostly those type of articles don't get widespread attention (or really, any attention).

In any case, that's why I'm excited about the book.

Jonathan Walton wrote: In the American and UK scenes, there aren't yet publications that deal completely with roleplaying theory, though they may not be too far off. There are online communities like the Forge, there are the articles that occasionally get published in books like Grey Ghost's "Gamemastering Secrets" and Robin's Laws "Laws of Gamemastering," there are things like "Daedalus" which do games and theory together, but mostly those type of articles don't get widespread attention (or really, any attention).

Slightly off topic, but since it's being discussed here...:

There's no such thing as a "Nordic scene". There's a great difference between Finnish immersionist-theory LARPers, the Danish scenario-writing culture (R'Lyeh Project and Fastaval), the new developments in the tiny Norwegian game designer subculture (three new games cover the themes of Norwegian folklore, romance, and 1920's dreamy surrealism), and highly commercial Swedish RPG design based on the GW business model.

There's also a certain split between the vocal minority and the gaming majority (at least in Norway). While Vampire, D20 and GURPS are the biggest sellers, game designers and theorists are going towards rules-light systems, focusing on "method" rather than "mechanism". Many gamers, meanwhile, strongly defend their right to play the "traditional" way, and see new developments as threatening their style of play.

While I understand it's impossible to know everything about the most obscure gaming subcultures, I think it's wise not to assume that a few million people (who can't even understand each others languages) all follow the ideas of four or five vocal and profiled gaming theorists.

Itse wrote:

For those who don't know, the Nordic roleplaying scene is WAY different from that in the US and UK. Very LARP-centered and pretty far removed from the Microsoft-like reach of d20. Also, pretty strongly grounded in theory, from what I can tell, and what we might consider experimental and avante garde roleplaying.

That's very much a half-truth, even an illusion. First of all, d20 rules here too (at least in Finland). The most popular games afaik are the sorts of D&D, Rolemaster and GURPS, and of course the White Wolf lines. On the other hand, larping has had a lot effect on table-top here, especially by making deep character immersion to be pretty much a definition for "good roleplaying". The most notable thing about the "Nordic style" is that here, immersion is the king... actually, it's the emperor. It's The Thing about roleplaying.

Ole wrote:

I cant speak for the rest of the nordic countries, but for Norway atleast speaking about a single RP scene, encompassing both tabletop RPG and live action RPg, is misleading. There is crossover, and many will have tried both types of play, but most identifies with one of the two. Traditionally there have been some animosity between the two scenes, but thats not really relevant.

In the (tabletop) RPG community incoherent sim/gam D&D and WoD is the King. Many classify their style as storytelling simply because they play Vampire, and describe blood-drinking in detail. Of course there are more avant-garde bent individuals, and surprisingly they tend to be more vocal. This sounds pretty much like the Anglo-American scene to me.

Itse wrote: But yes, talking about "one scene" can be said to be overly simplified. Even in Finland there are obvious differences in style.

As far as differences between the Nordic countries go, I feel that they are commonly overstated. There is more difference between the immersionist/dramatist players and entertainment hobbyists than there is between Danish and Finnish roleplayers overall. Certainly, there is differences, but compared to the differences towards f.ex. American roleplaying culture they are slight indeed.

The fact is, larpers hold an annual Nordic convention, Solmukohta. Fact is that my Swedish peers understand it when I start to talk about the relationship of immersion to social agitation. The fact is that Tomas and Risto speak essentially the same language, radically different from Forge-speak in several respects. The fact is that there is more connections between the roleplayers of Norway and Finland than there is between those of Delaware and of California.

Surely the passive hobbyist play is similar in all these countries, as it is everywhere. The differences (which Tomas summed up nicely) are largely in emphasis of application - much freeform here, dramatist methodism there, some more larping than tabletop over there. These are not differences in culture, they are differences in social dynamics. That's natural, as the common hobbyist takes his cue from his play group and American roleplaying books, so it's natural that regional differences reign. Much more important, as far as scene goes, is that the serious theorists and artistic players (which are more common among larpers in each of these countries) do care what is happening on the other side of the gulf.

This is the point - when talking about similarity of the scene in these countries, it's not play we are talking about, it's theory. After the execution of Mellan himmel och hav every Nordic theorist knows about it, takes stock and considers it for himself. That's as much of a common scene as there can be. Any stronger claim transcends the line of stereotype.

Anyway, about the book: I'd say that it's a must for a realistic picture of what is happening in the Nordic area, as far as larp theory goes. Being that larping is the only area of gaming where there is state-of-the-art innovation going on hereabouts, the book is an important period piece. It is true that the theories themselves are largely narrowminded and childish (IMO, no use to argue that), but they have despite that produced some great play - when reading these it's imporant to remember that these very same writers are really good larpsmiths. If the theories fall short of the mark as a description of the activity, they seem to work very well as prescription - read the individual texts as manifests, claims about what works, and they make much more sense.

Anyway, I hope Risto gets the review done for wednesday. I for one expect it fervently (well, me being the editor it's not so surprising ;).

Eero Tuovinen wrote: The fact is, larpers hold an annual Nordic convention, Solmukohta. Fact is that my Swedish peers understand it when I start to talk about the relationship of immersion to social agitation. The fact is that Tomas and Risto speak essentially the same language, radically different from Forge-speak in several respects. The fact is that there is more connections between the roleplayers of Norway and Finland than there is between those of Delaware and of California.

Surely the passive hobbyist play is similar in all these countries, as it is everywhere. The differences (which Tomas summed up nicely) are largely in emphasis of application - much freeform here, dramatist methodism there, some more larping than tabletop over there. These are not differences in culture, they are differences in social dynamics. That's natural, as the common hobbyist takes his cue from his play group and American roleplaying books, so it's natural that regional differences reign. Much more important, as far as scene goes, is that the serious theorists and artistic players (which are more common among larpers in each of these countries) do care what is happening on the other side of the gulf.

This is the point - when talking about similarity of the scene in these countries, it's not play we are talking about, it's theory.

After the execution of Mellan himmel och hav every Nordic theorist knows about it, takes stock and considers it for himself. That's as much of a common scene as there can be. Any stronger claim transcends the line of stereotype.

Anyway, about the book: I'd say that it's a must for a realistic picture of what is happening in the Nordic area, as far as larp theory goes. (...) It is true that the theories themselves are largely narrowminded and childish (...) If the theories fall short of the mark as a description of the activity, they seem to work very well as prescription - read the individual texts as manifests, claims about what works, and they make much more sense.

We'll, dissecting Nordic roleplaying community isn't exactly on-topic, but at least it might give some insight towards the context of the book...

matthijs wrote:
I'd really appreciate it if you could use consistently different terms for LARPers and tabletop gamers. From my viewpoint, it seems like the LARP scene has lots of connections between the countries, and theories are being exchanged all the time. However, the situation in tabletop gaming isn't the same. It seems to me that we play differently, and have different outlooks on why and how we play.

You'll be hard pressed to find many Danish, Swedish or Finnish or Icelandic gamers at Norway's largest (tabletop RPG and board) game festival, ARCON. Presumably the same goes for Danish, Finnish, Swedish and Icelandic cons. Knutepunkt, however, has brought together LARPers from all these countries for years now.

Certainly, a handful of individuals keep in touch with tabletop gamers not from their own country of origin. But they're way too few to be talking about a "scene". There's more Norwegians posting on the Forge than on any non-Norwegian nordic forum; haven't seen any non-Norwegians on www.rollespill.net either.

Not sure what you mean here. It seems like you're saying that we all play the same way, except that we play differently?

Well - how much do you know of Norwegian tabletop gaming theory? I mean, do you know whether it exists or not, what kind of things we're focussing on, who the major participants are etc? (Again, tabletop; not LARP).

After the execution of Mellan himmel och hav every Nordic theorist knows about it, takes stock and considers it for himself. That's as much of a common scene as there can be. Any stronger claim transcends the line of stereotype.

Never heard of it - but then, I'm not very well informed about LARP; I focus mostly on tabletop RPG's. I still consider myself a "Nordic theorist".

Anyway, about the book: I'd say that it's a must for a realistic picture of what is happening in the Nordic area, as far as larp theory goes. (...) It is true that the theories themselves are largely narrowminded and childish (...) If the theories fall short of the mark as a description of the activity, they seem to work very well as prescription - read the individual texts as manifests, claims about what works, and they make much more sense.

I'm not sure whether I would call them "theories", then. Perhaps "techniques", "suggestions", "recipes" would be better? (I don't mean to be a nitpicker here; I think such prescriptions are very often much more useful than theoretical descriptions).

Eero Tuovinen wrote: Funny, larpers bash me all the time when I do differentiate between the forms ;)

Most hobbyists in any hobby do their own thing, and the scene is what the active ones create.

What I was talking in that paragraph was how the apparent differences in playing style are largely self-styled illusions and not really relevant. I, for one, don't believe one second that f.ex. commonly known Danish freeform tabletop is actually significantly more common than it is in Finland. It's one part urban legend and one part historical coincidence.

There is no norwegian tabletop theory, as far as I know (talking about published, acknowledged work here). As far as I've familiarized myself with the norwegian situation, it seems exactly like the finnish one. Tabletop theory, where it exists, is a direct offshoot of either international contacts or larp theory. Actual play ranges from the fantasy (Ars Magica, D&D) mainstream to isolated examples of everything else you'd think of - the mainstream hobbyists play as they play anywhere, and active people find their preference either in the innovative larp scene or international options, like Forge.

Then the question becomes, why you haven't heard of it? Go read about the game, it's chock full of nice ideas. Might be we have the point here - you clearly aren't orientated towards the other Nordic countries, but towards the larger American community?

matthijs wrote:

Most hobbyists in any hobby do their own thing, and the scene is what the active ones create.

So "scene" is, by your definition, created by those who 1) want to theorize, and 2) are vocal about it...? To me, the term "scene" is broader - when I talk of the Norwegian tabletop "scene", I think of all Norwegian tabletop gamers, not just the very small percentage of us who insist on shouting our opinions from the rooftops while the rest just play on, wondering what the fuss is all about.

At this point, I strongly wish that we had some facts to base an opinion on. This is, as I see it, a major problem with this whole discussion: We're talking about our views of the activities of tens of thousands of people, of several nationalities, based only on our own experiences. And our experiences clearly differ.

Not too far off. However, there are some attempts at theory. "Publication" is mostly in Imagonem (the Norwegian gaming fanzine), on usenet, or on discussion groups... acknowledged, I guess, by those few who care.

So, well, I could go read about "Mellan himmel och hav", but right now - tabletop, and getting RPGs accepted by Norwegian schools & media.

Eero Tuovinen wrote: Would you mind writing a little essay to Forge about Norwegian roleplaying theory? Other people would probably be interested too, and there might be some new insights.

There's something wrong with the world when I have to tell people to consider larping ;) The forms are in many things quite near each other, so it's only sensible to keep more or less current about that scene (if there is a scene there, that is). I myself don't larp at all, but find the achievements (not in theory, but in practice) interesting indeed.

Eero writes on differences in the Nordic RPG-culture, and claim they are differences in social dynamics. Yes, they are, and under these "social dynamics" you will find more fundamental differences.

As for what is, and what is not a "scene"; I consider the term "the Nordic RPG-scene" to be a term coined to include the whole of RPG-culture in this region. In my view this region is, like any other region, a mishmash of RPG-creators, theorists, subcultures and players of different persuasions. So a scene in general is not appliable.

As stated; a scene in respect to larp-theory may be postulated, but I think you should confine it to that, Eero.

Eero Tuovinen wrote: Being that larping is the only area of gaming where there is state-of-the-art innovation going on hereabouts,

Tomas HVM wrote:

I am skeptical to the use of this Knutepunkt-book for tabletop people, not only because it is focussed on larping, but also because the arrogance of the Nordic larp-theorists need to be curbed a bit, before they may communicate anything really useful. As it is now; they are bathing in their own excellence, and producing this book partly as a manifestation of cultural supremacy.

Well.

As a contributor to the book, I feel qualified to speak. The book is, despite what it says on the cover, related to LARP and LARP only. The theories applies to LARPing, the rewievs are from LARPs etc. Im not saying that roleplayers cant use it, but a basic understanding of LARP might be required.

BTW; this could change. Im sorta on the comittee for next years "Knutepunkt" in Olso, and we would love to see both americans and texts by americans.

Aksel

ps: sorry for the lack of certain sign. My girlfriends computer is evil.

Itse wrote: Well, I'd say they are culturally supreme. Really. I'm in the "table-top camp" myself, and I'll admit readily that the larp-theorists are at the moment much more active, innovative, communicative and generally just more interesting (as a whole). This book is a good example of the fact that they do more than just "bathe in their own excellence"; they at least communicate with the outside world, even those who are not larpers. The more table-top oriented developers seem to have a hard time talking to anyone except their gamegroup.

So here's the info I just got, now that they've set up a PayPal account:

Markus Montola wrote: 8 books = 96 Euros
Estimated (economy) postage for 4 kg = 27,2 Euros
Extra costs for Paypal = 1 Euro

Total: 124,2 Euros = $150

As a second option, I suppose you could mail me a check or money order, if you like. PM or email me for my mailing address.