Come together...right now...over fantasy.

-

 Buckle up. This one is a line drive down the middle. The central idea of this theory is completely intuitive to any roleplayer, actor, or anyone who’s had to pretend they’re enjoying themselves alongside other people pretending to enjoy themselves. Ernest Bormann’s theory claims that when a group shares “fantasies” (seriously) they come together (again, seriously) in the symbols (words) that they use to describe their worlds. This is symbolic convergence theory (SCT), a post that almost writes itself. 

If you’ve played D&D or any roleplaying game even once, you’ve lived this theory. When we’re part of an adventuring party we frequently talk about what’s going on outside the session, what’s happened before, and what might happen in the future. It’s the co-creation of a shared consciousness that helps to enhance the experience. Almost all messages at the table are “dramatized” messages, meaning they describe events that occur(ed) in another place and time. 

When dramatized messages are shared, heard, and enthusiastically embraced, the group participates in a fantasy chain of action and reaction (and movement). Tabletop roleplaying is one of the few groups in which the creation of a shared fantasy chain is explicit. This is not the case for every adventuring party all the time, but I sure do love it when it happens at my table.

Symbolic convergence gets even cooler than that, though. According to the theory, the fantasy we enter into will display four key pieces of information about us and our characters. For instance, if the half-orc spits at the local priests with a muttered swear and a shove, I might conclude:

  1. The half-orc dislikes the priests. This meaning is personal, not universal.

  2. The half-orc’s got some feelings about the priests. Anger? Disdain?

  3. The half-orc spat for a reason. The behavior is motivated by something.

  4. The half-orc’s actions are going to be judged by others. Behavior elicits a reaction.


These four are present in almost any action your character could take in D&D and makes up a fantasy theme. Action, emotion, meaning and motive each emerge within an adventuring party’s fantasy theme. According to the theory, this can be true for any group. Moreover, we do better as party members when we memorialize our adventures with names and a recorded history.  As a dungeonmaster, I cannot stress the importance of taking notes or drawing as a way to stay engaged in the shared fantasy of D&D. I would also propose that the more players and DMs are in sync, the more pleasurable the session feels. This part of SCT reminded me a lot about what little I know of mirror neurons. I feel what you feel.

According to the theory, we’ll feel closer to one another the more we share meanings, symbols, and converge in our communication. Divergence (as you would expect) makes the interactions feel often more frought, less collaborative, and uncoordinated. Maybe you can think of some sessions you’ve had of each: coordinated and disjointed. When the players and DM (the rhetorical community) share a collaborative drama, the cohesiveness builds and so does the table community. And it’s beautiful. 

SCT asks you to accept that:

  1. We co-create our reality.

  2. Our behaviors communicate our feelings, motivations, and understandings.

  3. Our shared fantasies will have characters, plotlines, locations, a dungeonmaster (“sanctioning agent”) and a recognizable theme (“deeper structure”).


This theory offers a lot of practical advice for new players (and reminders for old ones). When the group is on a roll, contribute! I want everyone at the table engaged and bringing the party up and together. It’s so much better when we’re all together. This goes double when you see the group falling apart. How might you help the DM regain their composure or engage another player in-character? Think about your group as something alive and vital. Give it attention, and it’ll thrive. Remind it of its history and the characters of your ties to one another. Finally, fantasies (like dice) are unpredictable and may turn in surprising directions.

Finally, SCT has a quick DM tip, as well. I’ve come to think of SCT’s fantasy visions as ways of seeing and interacting with the world around you. The visions fall into three broad categories. I think these make excellent starting points for thinking of the “bones” of an NPC, group, or government. If I know how an NPC (or faction) sees the world, then I know how she’ll react, move, and perform. Some visions are righteous (paladin, cult). Some are social (bard, hospital). Others are pragmatic (rogue, guild). So go on, build some fantasy pragmatists today.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Telephone Game

-
  Studying Information Theory is akin to thumbing through the pages of an Advanced D&D module. Sure, it’s got the same name as contemporary Dungeons & Dragons, but there are so many differences in its understanding of the elements of gameplay, that they stand out almost more than the similarities. The model Claude Channon and Warren Weaver sought to develop had far different goals and priorities than do many contemporary, post-modern theories of communication. Indeed, their mathematical theory of communication bears much more similarity to early roleplaying games based in war-reenactments than to Critical Role , Dungeons & Daddies , or The Adventure Zone . Since its development in the 1940s, Information Theory has been applied in at least two very different contexts. The first is that of the electronic sciences, wherein its focus on signal transmission and perception has been key to understanding the capacity of mass communication systems to handle ever-increasing amoun...
Read more

How you say it, and what that says.

-
  When I was a kid, we used to travel from our home in northern Ohio to family reunions in Kentucky. Once we got there, it never took very long for my Michigan-born mother to start speaking with a marked Southern drawl. “Why?”, I thought. Had I known then what I know, I would have answered, “Well, because of communication accommodation , of course!” Just like your charismatic bard can adopt the parlance of the nobles she’s performing for, or dumb it down with bawdy and ribald jokes when at the dive bar, so too can we change our communication to match others. This theory is all about how and why our speech changes, how that relates to our social groups, and what we think are the potential social consequences of sounding more (or less) like those around us.  According to this theory’s founder (a bit of a scholarly bard himself), Howard Giles, when we adjust our speech for others, we are accommodating in an effort to reduce the perceived social distance between ourselves and ot...
Read more

Drama, Dice, & Deception Checks

-
  As in my previous posts about the use of language in D&D, the theory of Dramatism conceptualizes language use and choice as symbolic action. Words are symbols which represent ideas. We use those symbols with motivation to affect the people and world around us. In tabletop gaming, the words by and large create the world within which the players act. Dramatism , for its founder Kenneth Burke , is a method of language (and thought) analysis that seeks to understand the actions conveyed, rather than the information contained. Burke is regarded as one of the twentieth-century’s leading rhetoricians . To him, language isn’t just about transmitting information, but about planning, acting, and responding to others’ language choices.  A DM’s use of language helps explain character motivation, clarifies goals players may want to achieve, and establishes rules which guide the game’s action. Without language (at least according to Burke), we couldn’t have a host of the key elemen...
Read more