TabletopRes/campaign-0/why.tex

\chapter{Why Session 0?}

Some of what I have to say falls into the `controversial' category, and 
the why of a Session 0 at least in part falls into that category.

By controversial, it is more that there are some people who are opposed
to at least some of the functions that come up here (and possibly all of
the functions for probably an even smaller minority).  Most players are
either supportive, or unaware of some of this.

\begin{itemize}
    \item{Familiarity with game}
    \item{Setting up game}
    \item{Familiarity with players}
    \item{Safety Tools}
    \item{When have it}
    \item{Time it takes}
    \item{Where to have it}
\end{itemize}

That's probably a decent list of the main reasons, and let's get into 
each of them.

\section{Familiarity with game}

This may be the least contested part of what a Session 0 can accomplish.

This is ensuring that to some extent all the players involved are 
familiar enough with the game, that there will not be major issues
with failing to understand some of the basics.  

Basics such as:

\begin{itemize}
    \item{Core gameplay}
    \item{Core setting}
    \item{Core characters}
    \item{Core themes}
\end{itemize}

These really are not in any sort of order, because they kind of move 
about as to how one would want to talk about them.

\subsection{Core Gameplay}

This is the basics of the game mechanics.  This can apply to stuff like
board games or whatever.  

This is something that can take a very brief time, or it can be something
that will require some explanation.  

I would think that some of the ways all of this happens ends up being 
able to happen in a more woven between different parts of the Session 
0 time (and also included in further sessions), or a very laid out 
format.

Some of what comes up probably depends at least somewhat on what 
the game is.  Some games are intended to be played with minimal 
pre-knowledge, and simply getting into it, while others really work
well with more of that.  

Also the people involved (players, game master, et cetera) will change
how this will work out.

It is hoped that the game master will know at least a little of who they
are dealing with prior to setting up any meeting, or at least have the
ability to adapt enough that it ends up working out for most of the other
players.

Getting bogged down in the how to play the game, can very much end up
very quickly ruining the experience of a game.  This is not to say that
the learning of the game has to happen before starting to play, but more
that to know basics (and for me some of these basics are about how 
questions about how to play will likely be handled), so little things
don't get in the way of playing a game.

Some people really want to be sure that the rules are followed properly,
other people are very much on the other end of the spectrum, and don't
much care about the rules.  Then there are people who are all for the
chaos, switching between caring about the rules, and ignoring the rules,
as they see fit.

Finding that sort of thing out before trying to play can be a huge
measure of how the game is likely to end up working.

\subsection{Core Setting}

This can be very simple, and for some games it is defined very simply.  
In a lot of cases, you probably don't want to go more into it than a
basic understanding of what the characters are likely to all know
about the world, and for some that may be at the `village level'.

That being that at the start of the game, they basically know nothing
beyond much of their immediate surroundings, and in some cases may 
wake up not really knowing anything.

That said, it may be worthwhile to have the players know more than
the characters.

\subsection{Core Characters}

This is more about the types of characters the players will be playing
and encountering than any details about any of that (though some of the
details will come up in the setting up of the game).

This is sort of similar to the above about the setting, it would be 
about making sure the players are aware enough about what the characters
are likely aware of.

\subsection{Core Themes}

This can be the start of where things start to be more of a discussion 
than simply describing the way the game is setup.  The game master will
likely have some degree of where they want to take things, but most are
usually willing to move that around in response to what the players are
interested in.

Most games have some sense of defined themes that they are wanting to
deal with.  Some despite maybe being more open at the core, will have 
some rules like, `No Fascists Allowed,' which largely speaks for itself,
but there has been significant discussion, as it seems it doesn't seem
clear enough to some people.

Then there are the players.  They have similar ideas as to what type
of game they may want to play, and what type of game they don't want
to play.

This part isn't about really going into the details of that, as some
of that ends up going into the safety tools section, but all of this
ends up interacting with everything, so this is probably going somewhat
into that.

With that all said, I think that is the basics of dealing with the
familiarity of the game.  

Let's move on to setting up the game.

\section{Setting up the Game}

This is sometimes the most important part, with the creation of
characters, and the start of looking at where the game will start.

Now for some games such as {\it Querent}\cite{querent}, are meant to have
``No Session 0.''  Which I personally would put more in a, ``Session 0 
and Session 1 are the same time,'' as it more means that the goals of
Session 0, can be accomplished quickly enough to not be separated from
the main session.

Important things about this, is setting things like the starting location
and the different characters that the players will be playing.  Some of 
which may not need to be discussed in terms of in person (or more 
``realtime'' with how online games can be), but through email or
whatever.

This can be important to start to get a feel for the dynamics of the
group, to be able to see where potential pain points may come up.  

The details about this will change for each game or game system you
are working with, and as I have worked with some games where it can
more or less run with little more than a brief (like a couple minutes
at most), introduction before playing, to games that I have spent hours
myself trying to prepare enough to present to players in advance, I feel
that talking further would be very individual to the different games.

\section{Familiarity with Players}

This applies to all the sort of interactions between all of the different
players, and to some extent the characters.  This may be where one 
starts to talk about personal and group boundaries.

This is getting into the territory where some people start to say, ``We
don't need that sort of thing.''  Some people are saying that from a 
perspective of ``We are all friends, so we don't really need to do that 
sort of thing.''  Other people are less charitable in their criticism, 
and consider that it is an outright bad idea.

I would like to suggest a couple of reasons for those who feel that 
they are all friends, so it's not needed, and also for those who
feel it's just a bad idea, but might not be stuck in that idea.

\begin{itemize}
    \item{We Don't Need It}
    \begin{itemize}
        \item{Hidden Boundaries}
        \item{Hidden Interests}
    \end{itemize}
    \item{This is a Bad Idea}
    \begin{itemize}
        \item{Then don't do it}
        \item{Let your players know}
        \item{Direct players to other places}
    \end{itemize}
\end{itemize}

\subsection{We Don't Need It}

So, if you are friends who have run around these types of things you
can think there's not really any reason to consider these things
but I kind of think there are a couple of pretty important things
to think about in terms of that.