What's funny about academic attempts to study RPGs is that they fall between the cracks.

If RPGs were just rulebooks, then you could examine them mathematically or using standard humanities tools.

But that doesn't work... because games don't live in books, they live in the act of play.

However, if books were purely about performance, then you could examine them using the tools of theatre and performance.

But that doesn't work... because games aren't just the stuff that happens at the table.

I think if you look at the history of academia's attempts to digest RPGs, you can see various disciplines nibbling at them and getting disgusted and wandering off.

Outcomes are too variable to be a conventional humanities subject.

Outcomes are too structured to be purely a question of theatrical performance.

While RPGs are procedural, they're not procedural enough to be digested by games studies, so GS nerds tend to treat them as weird prehistoric texts.

@vortiwife That would be like the end of Goodfellas when Tommy thinks he's going to become a made guy.

Except instead of an empty room, it's you sat on a dusty office chair with an evil grin.

Normally, this would be dealt with as as interdisciplinary matter BUT academia's grip on RPGs is so tenuous that there's no way to get funding or nail down referees.

There are no academic authorities but there are no non-academic authorities either because the broader hobby doesn't value analysis let another theory and everything gets forgotten every time D&D goes tits up.

@Taskerland I actually just think it suits imposter syndrome snobs. You don't have to encompass gaming in a grand unified theory to study it via intersects of different disciplines. Psychology has a big corpus about roleplaying and improvisation, and drama therapy. I just think a lot of peeps approach with a film studies head on, and do some work the night before about interface design using pointing devices... Wait... That might be me

@Printdevil The lead bloke at the Forge was a zoologist of all things.

I think a mature 'RPG Studies' set-up would benefit from psychological input definitely.

You're right, I think a lot of work is being done by people thinking they can rock up and just apply their disciplinary tools only to quickly realise that they're not making the kind of inroad that makes it worth the time and effort when you could be publishing on other things.

@Taskerland There's serious money thrown at Computer Game research but their models and analysis is very questionably applied to table top RPGs. They do try though, because publish or perish

@Printdevil Games Studies people seem to view RPGs as a kind of cultural throwback that might shine a light on some of the assumptions underpinning proper games. Like studying an isolated rainforest tribe.

Normally, this would be dealt with as as interdisciplinary matter BUT academia's grip on RPGs is so tenuous that there's no way to get funding or nail down referees.

There are no academic authorities but there are no non-academic authorities either because the broader hobby doesn't value analysis let another theory and everything gets forgotten every time D&D goes tits up.

@Taskerland True but ironic, because for some of us, the only times we feel _optimistic_ about RPGs are the times when D&D goes tits-up.

Then gaming becomes like one of those little Colorado mountain towns during the off-season ... all the noisy, ignorant tourists are finally gone and it's like "Oh, hey, we live somewhere BEAUTIFUL. I forgot!"

Normally, this would be dealt with as as interdisciplinary matter BUT academia's grip on RPGs is so tenuous that there's no way to get funding or nail down referees.

There are no academic authorities but there are no non-academic authorities either because the broader hobby doesn't value analysis let another theory and everything gets forgotten every time D&D goes tits up.