RPG Errata: Session Zero Questions

RPG Medium

I have championed the idea of Cold Opens and Session Zeros, but perhaps been a little coy about the practicalities. What sort of questions and discussions should go into a Session Zero?

There are some obvious answers, such as establishing Lines and Veils, to say nothing of setting and system; but I’ve spent a long time discussing how much more complex a game is than just setting and system. What about Tone? Best practices? Table expectations?

Well, a lot of that requires very personal answers, but I can offer a few ideas. What follows are some suggestions based on what I’ve gleaned from my looking into the genre and importance of Session Zero conversations.

“Why do you want to play an RPG?”

I need to reiterate the work of Levi Kornelsen, specifically their Manyfold glossary of types of enjoyment from games. If all of your fellow players haven’t read this, consider making it assigned reading, or be comfortable enough yourself with it to help guide a discussion about what the players actually like about RPGs. Or at least what they want from this RPG.

There are so many kinds of RPGs and ways of playing RPGs, that going into a game without having this discussion is akin to ordering pizza without taking anyone’s order. Sure, plain cheese is “safe,” but most people will have different preferences for the perfect pizza, and more people are lactose/gluten intolerant than you think.

This should probably be one of the first things you actually discuss with your table, maybe even before you decide what system you’re going to play.

“What don’t you want to see in this game, either in Story-Content or Game-Mechanics?”

The second discussion to have is fairly obvious: Most every RPG these days acknowledges the importance of Lines, Veils, Stoplights, X-cards, and the like. Rather than reiterate this here, I will instead remind you that these lines and veils should not be relegated to “subject matter” alone. Yes, avoiding content in the game-narrative is important, but the meta- and ludo- narratives must also be considered. This Toolkit is mandatory reading, and anyone should feel comfortable with bringing in their own ideas.

This discussion can easily and naturally flow into the next question:

“As GM, what do you see as my responsibilities?”

Not all games have GMs, of course, and those that do often have multiple different duties or expectations for them. Ultimately, however, it is the table’s game, and if you have a GM, how that GM runs the game is a vital discussion to have between the players.

The first and most obvious question is: is the goal of the GM to challenge or support? Do the players want a GM who is going to constantly think about how to ruin their plans, betray their expectations, and threaten their goals? Or would the players prefer a GM who is a distant referee, someone who sets up the dungeons and situations, and then dispassionately lets the dice decide what happens? Or perhaps a GM who supports the players, discusses the story they’re trying to tell, and comes up with ways of supporting it on the fly? Are dungeons pre-built puzzles that can be “solved,” or naturally evolving stories that are there to be “experienced?”

“What responsibilities are you willing to shoulder as a player at this table?”

I don’t just mean the non-GM players, but everyone at the table. Is there a tone that everyone needs to buy into? Is everyone expected to get a handle on their table-talk?

I’ve said before that The Platinum Rule is the best (dare I say, mandatory) rule for RPGs, but what those responsibilities actually are need to be discussed and expressed. This includes meta-game responsibilities, such as schedules, paying for dinner, and the like.

In addition, however, is the question of how much GM power the non-GM players have (assuming the game has a GM). Are they purely “players” in the GM’s playground? Are they allowed to dictate scenery? Can they rewind the action if they think of a better one-liner? If they forget a key plot-point or established fact, are their own notes their only recourse? How much of the world is under their control? Are the players expected to come up with descriptions of their successes and failures? In narrative games, how much weight are their suggestions supposed to receive?

This is also the time to talk about distractions, putting away phones, not allowing other open tabs if using a VTT, and similar respectful behaviors.

“What type of game system do you want to play?”

It might be a bit self-indulgent to say “read my whole treatise and discuss,” but I wrote all of what I wrote for a reason. The fact is, RPGs have as many different styles as there are groups that play RPGs, and expectations abound. I opened the whole thing with a parable about card-games, because RPGs and Card-Games are of-a-kind. Hell, just try and count the variants of poker and you’ll get a headache.

And that’s just rule-sets. Now add in the different types of improvisational storytelling, and then sort through the ratios of both…

It’s daunting, I know, but as the hobby continues to mature and the envelope continues to be pushed, the more we will have to acknowledge the variety of players and play-styles.

“When do you want to address game questions or adjustments?”

You’re not going to settle everything, even if you spent the whole evening writing your player contract. Most of these questions will probably get an “I don’t know” from your fellow players, and that’s perfectly fine. A good deal of “ideal play practices” will need to be created and agreed upon during the game. Session Zero is usually less about finding answers/solutions, but rather to encourage an atmosphere of openness, safety, and establishing a baseline from which to grow.

Does that mean that halfway through an intense dramatic combat or diplomatic scene, the action might need to come to a screeching halt? Yeah, probably; but I think it’s far better that the flow of the game is disrupted than someone doesn’t enjoy the game they’re playing.

This is less a question and more a concept worthy of discussion. The growth of Virtual Tabletop programs has taken RPGs out of the dining room and onto the digital space. I won’t dive into all the changes this caused, but one of the most practical is a subtle disconnection with the table.

It’s the tech that does it. In addition the easy distractions of social media and solitaire; unreliable microphones and the inability for modern video-calls to actually handle two people talking at once mean that saying something to the table is fundamentally harder than in person. In real life you can feel when it’s your turn to talk, or easily handle accidental talking-over and interruptions. It’s harder online. Noncommittal or casual responses go unsaid, and simple questions like “are we ready to proceed” can result in long silences as everyone waits for someone else to go first.

Instead, consider Enthusiastic Consent. Silence is a no, and for the game to continue, everyone needs to contribute a yes, no, or otherwise engaged response. Perhaps having an established response order, or having someone call out the players in turn. It’s a simple but elegant way to make sure the table’s tongues are loose and the players engaged.

This is a high-level description of some of the discussions you could have with your players before beginning the game. I’m sure you can come up with other vital discussions and questions to include in every Session Zero. Please share them with everyone you can! Only with collaboration can our hobby truly improve for everyone.

Before I finish: another possibility is playing a Zero Game — a one-shot that will serve as an exploration for everyone involved, to learn how the GM runs their game, how the players react and roleplay different situations…there is great value in experimenting as opposed to trying to hash it all out. Pick up a rules-light system like Knave or Lasers and Feelings, and tell the table that this is nothing more than a light and gentle dipping-in-of-the-toes. From there, you’ll have a lot of material to discuss any future games.