Dates: June 12-13, 2025
Times: 9-5pm both days
Location: Visby, Sweden, on the island of Gotland
The Transformative Play Initiative at Uppsala University’s Department of Game Design is co-hosting a two-day seminar on Games, Conflict, and Education directly following the Gotland Game Conference (GGC) in Visby, Sweden together with the Erasmus+ ROCKET Consortium.
The seminar invites educators, researchers, and design practitioners to present work related to conflicts within games, their associated communities, and/or game-based learning environments. Such conflicts can be central to the game, e.g., in the setting, mechanics, or themes. Alternatively, presenters can focus on conflicts arising within these leisure and educational environments, e.g., due to issues related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. While critical work is welcome, a special interest is placed on games that aim to practice prosocial skills aimed to increase peace and justice through analog role-playing games or other formats, e.g., conflict management (Cahn and Abigail 2014), resolution, or transformation (Lederach 2014).
The seminar is an Erasmus+ ROCKET project Outreach Event and is co-organized with members of Uppsala’s Political Science and Peace & Conflict Studies departments. ROCKET is a Cooperation Partnership between Göttingen, Uppsala, and Groningen University in the ENLIGHT network on the use of conflict transformation through role-playing in Critical Virtual Exchange for diversity, equity, and inclusion in EU universities.
Presenters have the option of submitting an academic article for consideration in a peer-reviewed special issue of the International Journal of Role-playing.
* * *
A common principle in game design is the notion that conflict is a necessary component for engaging play experiences (see e.g., Crawford 1997; Baker 2003-2004). Indeed, in many circles, mechanics are still referred to as “conflict resolution mechanics,” emphasizing this focus on conflict as central to the gaming experience. Popular games often feature narratives, game mechanics, and reward systems that prioritize violence as a common method of addressing conflict, in both mainstream digital (Schott 2016) and analog games (Torner 2015; Albom 2021). Such practices emphasize conflict escalation and harm as normative to one’s engagement with the game world, often enacted upon sentient beings and animals. Many games offer no other mode of interaction once another character is deemed the “enemy,” e.g., most first person-shooters. Games often feature character vs. character conflict (CvC, sometimes called PvP), character vs. environment conflict (CvE, or PvE), or both.
While such games can include cooperation and team building, e.g,. raiding parties in MMORPGs or adventuring groups in Dungeons & Dragons (D&D), the centrality of violence leads to questions about whether games can be compelling that focus on other facets of the human experience. Examples include deep experiences on existential themes (Rusch 2017; Rusch and Phelps 2020); sex (Grasmo and Stenros 2022; Guajardo and Strenros 2024), romance and intimacy (Baird, Bowman, and Hugaas 2022); birth (Essendrop 2018); death (Essendrop 2016; Hugaas 2023); friendship (Groth, Grasmo, and Edland 2021), workplace dynamics (Karlsson 2016); and family interactions (Westerling et al. 2007). While conflicts certainly can exist in such experiences, another open question is whether conflict needs to be explicit in design practice at all; many rewarding experiences in life are not centered upon strife.
Furthermore, while many games deal conscientiously with topics of violence and oppression, e.g., in the Nordic larp tradition (Stenros and Montola eds. 2010), only a few focus explicitly on practicing the peacebuilding skills needed to counter oppression in leisure or applied settings, such as nonviolent resistance (Svanelind 2017; Pöllänen and Arjoranta 2021), religious tolerance (Yamamoto 2021), and positive peace/conflict transformation (Englund 2014; Anderson, Kharroub, Levin, and Rabah, eds. 2015).
Conflicts also surround games within their associated communities, such as differing political views, incompatible play styles preferences (Torner 2024), ruptures in interpersonal and group relations, and unmanaged bleed (Bowman 2013; Leonard 2016; Leonard and Thurman 2018), a term from role-playing theory referring to aspects of the player’s consciousness noticeably spilling over to the character and vice versa (Hugaas 2024). Serious problems in gaming communities arise especially around issues related to diversity, equity, and inclusion when players with marginalized identities experience discrimination or exclusion (George 2015; Kemper 2018; Trammell 2023). Furthermore, while both culture and marginalization are relatively easy to explore through games, the risk of harmful stereotypes and appropriation is high without expert consultation and sensitivity readings (Kessock 2014; Leonard, Janjetovic, and Usman 2021; Mendez Hodes 2020). These topics are also highly important to consider in educational environments, e.g., considerations around inclusion, accessibility, and the contested space of academic freedom, which can affect both students and teachers alike (Baird and Harrer in press). Such issues can especially arise in online education, e.g., increased harassment due to greater anonymity, the Digital Divide affecting access, and conflict escalation due to reduced social cues. Academic programmes focusing on game studies, design, and development are particularly fraught spaces for these reasons.
From a Peace & Conflict Studies perspective, conflicts are always present in human interaction, whether visible, under the surface, or unconscious. Regardless of a person’s stated position on an issue, conflicts arise due to their specific interests in the situation, as well as the feelings and basic needs that underpin them. These conflicts can be internal, external, or both. At their core, conflicts arise when one’s basic needs feel threatened, e.g., safety/security, power, fun, freedom, and love/belonging (Glasser 1998). Such conflicts escalate when violence is present, whether at a direct level (verbal or physical abuse); a structural level (oppressive or inequitable social structures and laws) (Galtung 1969); on a cultural level (discriminatory beliefs) (Galtung 1990); or on a symbolic level (internalized norms around privilege and marginalization affecting behavior) (Bourdieu and Passeron 1990). In terms of addressing violence, this approach distinguishes between negative peace, the common definition of peace that emphasizes lack of direct violence, and positive peace, a justice-focused approach in which all people have their basic needs met (Addams 1907; Galtung 1969), also called justpeace (Schirch 2005).
Strategic peacebuilding approaches are recommended for cultivating justpeace, coordinating the efforts of activists and peace negotiators in order to maximize their efforts, rather than viewing such activities as incompatible (Schirch 2005). Furthermore, a conflict transformation approach considers conflicts life-giving opportunities to address the needs of each party through collaboration, adopting a both-and orientation to facilitating short-term and long-term change processes (Lederach 2014). The model emphasizes processes that address multiple dimensions of conflict, including the personal, relational, structural, and cultural levels.
Importantly, conflict transformation emphasizes creative thinking and an identity-centered approach (Lederach 2014), making it a flexible lens for studying and designing games, especially ones that integrate role-playing. Practicing peacebuilding is especially possible through games due to their ability to foster experiences of agency at the personal, interpersonal, and systemic level. Researchers have theorized the co-creative nature of analog role-playing games in particular as helpful in fostering democratic skills for civic outcomes (Garcia 2016; Haarman 2023) and ethical decision making, such as debating moral dilemmas (Wright, Cole, Weissglass, and Casey 2020; Hollander 2021). Thus, this seminar will focus not only on games through a critical lens, but also their potential for positive transformation and intentionality.
With these themes in mind, we welcome abstracts for presentations including but not limited to the following topics:
- Problematic and/or harmful representations of conflict in games;
- Violence in games and game communities, e.g., direct, structural, cultural, or symbolic;
- Responsible practices for integrating conflict in game design;
- Games in peace and conflict education;
- Representations of war and peace in games;
- Benefits and drawbacks of integrating competition in game design including for education, e.g., gamification and other mechanical incentives, faction-based conflicts, win conditions;
- Games as an intervention for practicing skills in prosocial communication skills, e.g., conflict management, resolution, and/or transformation, conflict styles, I-messages, nonviolent communication (NVC);
- Games as an intervention to foster democratic skills, e.g., deliberation (Rantanen 2016), organizing, addressing intragroup and intergroup conflict;
- Examples of conflicts embedded in game design intended for transformative impacts, e.g., awareness raising, activism, advocacy, education;
- Conflict, games, and identity;
- Conflict, games, and social dynamics;
- Conflicts related to diversity, equity, and inclusion in gaming communities;
- Conflicts related to diversity, equity, and inclusion in teaching environments, including but not limited to game studies, design, or development;
- The potential for games to foster emancipatory bleed through liberatory steering for marginalized players (Kemper 2017, 2020);
- The educational potential of games to explore conflicts related to culture, e.g., intercultural learning, heritage education;
- Issues with integrating culture and conflict in game design, e.g., stereotypical depictions, cultural appropriation, harm;
- Conflict, games, and technology;
- The role of conflict in synchronous and asynchronous online education about games and/or using games as an intervention, e.g., online universities, Critical Virtual Exchange (VE/COIL), teaching during the pandemic.
The seminar will begin with a presentation by the Erasmus+ ROCKET consortium members summarizing the current results of the project, which teaches skills in conflict transformation through role-playing games using Critical Virtual Exchange. The project addresses issues related to diversity, equity, and inclusion, delivering theoretical and practical knowledge to students, teachers, and admin staff in three EU universities in the ENLIGHT network: Göttingen, Uppsala, and Groningen University. Click here for more information.
Practical details:
This event will be hybrid, meaning attendance is possible online and in-person at Campus Gotland in Visby. Presentations will be streamed through Zoom, recorded and uploaded both to our archive and our YouTube for posterity.
However, at least one (1) presenter should be physically present at the seminar for each accepted programme item. If unable to physically attend, presenters may submit abstracts for the online poster presentations, which will be pre-recorded and uploaded to YouTube (no live Q&A).
If the abstract is accepted, presenters are invited to submit an academic article for consideration in a peer-reviewed special issue at the International Journal of Role-playing. Note that some discussion of analog RPGs or engagement with analog role-playing game studies is required for publication (see e.g., Zagal and Deterding eds. 2024), although the overall topic can be broader in this special issue. Examples of possible literature can be found in the References of this CFP.
We have multiple tracks for participation:
- Academic Presentation Track: Presenters submit an abstract for a 10-15 minute in-person presentation followed by a short Q&A based upon their research.
- Academic Article Track: Presenters submit an abstract for a 10-15 minute presentation followed by a short Q&A. If accepted, they will then compose a 2000-3000 word academic article before the seminar. Papers should include at least ten (10) peer-reviewed scholarly sources, including sources within analog role-playing game studies. Presenters will engage in open peer review with guidance from our editorial team. Presenters from this track are expected to review 1-2 other articles. If revisions are completed adequately, the final articles will be featured in a special issue of the International Journal of Role-Playing in 2026.
- Practitioner Presentation Track: Practitioners submit an abstract for a 10-15 minute in-person presentation followed by a short Q&A based upon their design or implementation work in the field.
- Poster Presentation Track: Practitioners and/or academics submit an abstract for 5-10 minute video poster presentation to be uploaded on YouTube (no live Q&A).
Note that we will accept a maximum of 30 in-person presentations. We will send the registration form at a later date. Maximum number of attendees is TBD based on venue space constraints.
Deadlines:
- Abstracts for all tracks due: January 3, 2025
- Acceptance notifications: February 1, 2025
- Academic Articles due: April 1, 2025
- Peer reviews due: May 15, 2025
- Seminar: June 12-13, 2025
- Peer reviews returned: June 20, 2025
- Revisions due: September 15, 2025
- IJRP Special Issue Publication: Spring 2026
Abstracts should be 200-300 words in length, not including References. Academic articles and presentation abstracts should include at least five (5) peer-reviewed scholarly sources.
Photography/Video policy: By submitting an abstract, by default you are agreeing to be photographed at the event, streamed over Zoom, and for your presentation to be placed on YouTube. You are also agreeing to edit the auto-generated captions for your presentations for accuracy and accessibility before release. We can make exceptions on a case-by-case basis. Please contact the organizers for details.
RSVP for the event on Facebook at this link.
Please submit abstracts and other questions to the Transformative Play Initiative at transformativeplay-speldesign@uu.se.
Seminar Organizers:
- Sarah Lynne Bowman, Game Design, (UU)
- Kristine Höglund, Peace & Conflict Studies, (UU)
- PerOla Öberg, Political Science, (UU)
- Josefin Westborg, Game Design, (UU)
- Kjell Hedgard Hugaas, Game Design, (UU)
- Josephine Baird, Game Design, (UU)
Programme Reviewers:
- Hiltraud Casper-Hehne, Intercultural German Studies, University of Göttingen (UGOE)
- Sake Jager, Applied Linguistics, University of Groningen, (RUG)
- Alexandra Schreiber, Intercultural Learning Lab, (UGOE)
- Carole Fuller, Language & Linguistics, (RUG)
- Philipp Freyer, Academic Program Development, (UGOE)
- Cora Övermann, Intercultural German Studies, (UGOE)
References
Addams, Jane. 1907. Newer Ideals of Peace. New York: Macmillan.
Albom, Sarah. 2021. “The Killing Roll: The Prevalence of Violence in Dungeons & Dragons.” International Journal of Role-Playing 11: 6-24.
Anderson, Ane Marie, Riham Kharroub, Hilda Levin, and Mohamad Rabah, eds. 2015. The Birth of Larp in the Arab World. Denmark: Rollespilsakademiet.
Baird, Josephine, and Sabine Harrer. In press. “Teaching Games While Queer: When Your Identity is the Subject.” MAI: Feminism & Visual Culture.
Baird, Josephine, Sarah Lynne Bowman, and Kjell Hedgard Hugaas. 2022. “Liminal Intimacy: Role-playing Games as Catalysts for Interpersonal Growth and Relating.” In The Magic of Games, edited by Nikolaus Koenig, Natalie Denk, Alexander Pfeiffer, and Thomas Wernbacher, 169-171. Edition Donau-Universität Krems.
Baker, Vincent. 2003-2004. “Roleplaying Theory, Hardcore.” Lumpley Games.
Bourdieu, Pierre, and Jean-Claude Passeron. 1990. Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. 2nd ed. London: Sage.
Bowman, Sarah Lynne. 2013. “Social Conflict in Role-playing Communities: An Exploratory Qualitative Study.” International Journal of Role-Playing 4: 4-25.
Cahn, Dudley, and Ruth Abigail. 2014. Managing Conflict Through Communication. 5th Edition. Pearson.
Crawford, Chris. 1997. The Art of Computer Game Design. Washington State University. Digitpress.
Englund, Tindra. 2014. “Live Action Role Play (Larp) in a Context of Conflict: An Ethnographic Study of Larp in Ramallah.” Thesis, Malmö University.
Essendrop, Nina Runa. 2016. “White Death – Larp Presentation by Nina Runa Essendrop.” Larpwriter Summer School. YouTube, July 21.
Essendrop, Nina Runa. 2018. “Retrospect: Nina Runa Essendrop.” Fantasiforbundet, January 10.
Galtung, Johan. 1969. “Violence, Peace and Peace Research.” In Journal of Peace Research 6: 167–191.
Galtung, Johan. 1990. “Cultural Violence.” Journal of Peace Research 27, no. 3: 291-305.
Garcia, Antero. 2016. “Teacher as Dungeon Master: Connected Learning, Democratic Classrooms, and Rolling for Initiative.” In The Role-Playing Society: Essays on the Cultural Influence of RPGs, edited by Andrew Byers and Francesco Crocco. McFarland.
George, A. A. 2014. “Gaming’s Race Problem: GenCon and Beyond.” Tor.com, August 13.
Glasser, William. 1998. Choice Theory: A New Psychology of Personal Freedom. Harper.
Grasmo, Hanne, and Jaakko Stenros. 2022. “Nordic Erotic Larp: Designing for Sexual Playfulness.” International Journal of Role-Playing 12: 62-105.
Groth, Anna Emilie, Hanne “Hank” Grasmo, and Tor Kjetil Edland. 2021. Just a Little Lovin’: The Larp Script. Drøbak.
Guajardo, Ashley M. L., and Jaakko Stenros. 2024. “Sexuality and the Erotic in Role-play.” In The Routledge Handbook of Role-playing Game Studies, edited by José P. Zagal and Sebastian Deterding, 441-455. London: Routledge.
Haarman, Susan. 2023. Dungeons & Dragons & Dewey: Toward a Ludic Pedagogy of Democratic Civic Life Through the Philosophy of John Dewey and Tabletop Role-Playing Games. PhD. diss., Loyola University Chicago.
Hugaas, Kjell Hedgard. 2023. “Playing Dead: How Role-Play Game Experiences Can Affect Players’ Death Attitude Profiles (DAP-R).” Master’s thesis, Uppsala University.
Karlsson, Petter. 2016. “Papers – Creating a Surreal Office Larp.”. Petter Karlsson: Designer and Producer, July 11.
Kemper, Jonaya. 2017. “The Battle of Primrose Park: Playing for Emancipatory Bleed in Fortune & Felicity.” Nordiclarp.org, June 21.
Kemper, Jonaya. 2018. “More Than a Seat at the Feasting Table.” In Shuffling the Deck: The Knutpunkt 2018 Color Printed Companion, edited by Annika Waern and Johannes Axner. ETC Press.
Kemper, Jonaya. 2020. “Wyrding the Self.” In What Do We Do When We Play?, edited by Eleanor Saitta, Johanna Koljonen, Jukka Särkijärvi, Anne Serup Grove, Pauliina Männistö, and Mia Makkonen, 211-225. Helsinki, Finland: Solmukohta.
Hollander, Aaron T. 2021. “Blessed Are the Legend-Makers: Experimentation as Edification in Dungeons & Dragons.” Political Theology (Feb 26): 1-16.
Kessock, Shoshana. 2014. “Cultural Appropriation and Larp.” In The Cutting Edge of Nordic Larp, edited by Jon Back, 125-134. Denmark: Knutpunkt.
Lederach, John Paul. 2014. Little Book of Conflict Transformation: Clear Articulation of the Guiding Principles by a Pioneer in the Field. New York: Good Books.
Leonard, Diana J. and 2016. “Conflict and Change: Testing a Life-Cycle Derived Model of Larp Group Dynamics.” International Journal of Role-Playing 7: 15-22.
Leonard, Diana J., and Tessa Thurman. 2018. “Bleed-out on the Brain: The Neuroscience of Character-to-Player.” International Journal of Role-Playing 9: 9-15.
Mendez Hodes, James. 2020. “How to Change Your Conversations About Cultural Appropriation.” Jamesmendezhodes.com, January 2.
Rantanen, Teemu. 2016. “Larp as a Form of Political Action: Some Insights from the Theories of Political Science.” In Larp Politics: Systems, Theories and Gender in Action, edited by Kaisa Kangas, Mika Loponen, and Jukka Särkijärvi, 111-118. Solmukohta.
Rusch, Doris C. 2017. Making Deep Games: Designing Games with Meaning and Purpose. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Rusch, Doris C., and Andrew M. Phelps. 2020. “Existential Transformational Game Design: Harnessing the ‘Psychomagic’ of Symbolic Enactment.” Frontiers in Psychology (November 4).
Schirch, Lisa. 2005. The Little Book of Strategic Peacebuilding: A Vision and Framework for Peace With Justice. New York: Good Books.
Schott, Gareth. 2016. Violent Games: Rules, Realism and Effect. Bloomsbury Academic.
Stenros, Jaakko, and Markus Montola, eds. 2010. Nordic Larp. Stockholm, Sweden: Fëa Livia.
Svanelind, Johanna. 2017. “Rehearsing Revolution: How Live Action Role Playing Contributes to the Palestinian Resistance Movement.” Oxford Middle East Review (September 19): 52-66.
Torner, Evan. 2015. “Bodies and Time in Tabletop Role-Playing Game Combat Systems.” In The Wyrd Companion Book 2015, edited by Sarah Lynne Bowman, 160-171. Los Angeles, CA: Wyrd Con.
Trammell, Aaron. 2023. Repairing Play: A Black Phenomenology. MIT Press.
Wright, Jennifer Cole, Daniel E. Weissglass, and Vanessa Casey. 2020. “Imaginative Role-Playing as a Medium for Moral Development: Dungeons & Dragons Provides Moral Training.” Journal of Humanistic Psychology 60, no. 1: 99-129.
Yamamoto, Mahisa. 2021. “A Case Study on Effective Scenario Writing and Session Management employing Call of Cthulhu TRPG in Peace Education for Adults.” JARPS: Japanese Journal of Analog Role-Playing Game Studies 2: RPG at a Distance: Online and Remote Forms of Analog Role-Playing.
Zagal, José P., and Sebastian Deterding, eds. 2024. The Routledge Handbook of Role-playing Game Studies. London: Routledge.
Ludography
Westerling, Anna, et al.. 2017. En stilla middag med familjen [Eng. A Nice Evening with the Family]. Larp. August 17–25, 2007.
* * *
Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or OeAD-GmbH. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.