I want to talk about a concept I really appreciate in tabletop rpgs. Its something I cam across talking about animation, but I think its core is something really important to how we talk about ttrpgs.
While watching a video on animation, I learned about the plasmatic nature of animation. Coming from an essay by Sergei Eisenstein on Disney animation, plasmaticity was defined as:
“The rejection of the constraint of form, fixed once and for all,
freedom from ossification, an ability to take on any form dynamically. An ability which I would call ‘plasmaticity,’ for here a being,
represented in a drawing, a being of a given form, a being that has
achieved a particular appearance, behaves itself like primordial
protoplasm, not yet having a stable form, but capable of taking on any
and all forms of animal life on the ladder of evolution.”
He's talking here about how, in animation, nothing really has traits until we witness them. Everything has a potential quality because the world doesn't follow our normal rules. Anything could happen and we won't know what is or isn't possible until it does happen.
Tabletop rpgs are plasmatic. The ttrpg rules are just a text. The game happens at the table, and so the true quality of the game isn't really there until its played. But that's not the end.
Because of this plasmatic nature, ttrpgs exist without any boundaries until those boundaries are set at the table with that particular group. Even from group to group, things will change. Anyone playing ttrpgs has witnessed this. You develop different chemistry with different groups. The tone of the games played can change from text to text and table to table.
The above episode of Dexter's Lab is fun a example of this. We see the same text of Monsters & Mazes played in two different styles between Dexter and DeeDee GMing the game. Some would argue (as Dexter) that DeeDee isn't using the rules correctly, but just as in the real world it doesn't matter. Its one individual table and the players are actually enjoying the game in this new state.
By the act of playing them, ttrpgs are shaped and formed as we go, yet still maintain the possibility to change and become something else later. The boundaries of play are only ever limited when limits are placed and acknowledged by the group.
We can also discuss how formless a ttrpg is and how easy its forms can be manipulated. In-built mechanics might be difficult to change, but the fiction is always up to interpretation and manipulation. Tone and genre are the easiest to alter, but mechanics themselves might also be an option. Changes to meet accessibility or group preferences are common.
I think the plasmatic nature of RPGs actually prevents negates the idea of rules-as-written play. Because the rules are a text not yet bound by play, the rules don't matter as much. Its only when they reach the table that anything has meaning, because application and interpretation will come then.
I think this comparison to the plasmaticity of animation helps to look at some key issues in the formless-ness of RPGs. Animation is built on recognizing shapes and movement as things. In the same way that it is more formless than other entertainment, it applies limits or expectations to these forms. When we see a dog in animation, we expect it to have dog-like qualities, yet because its animation we also expect it to defy that expectation. We won't know its limits until those limits are placed in the story itself.
So, that's plasmaticity! A great feature of ttrpgs as a medium rooted in the belief that ttrpgs rules are text that hasn't manifested as a game yet. I also think it should be a useful term when talking about how a ttrpg's prescribed function in the text can transform into infinite and unexpected variations once its in the hands of real people.
