The Three Session Rule

Puella Magi Madoka Magica definitely needs a three episode rule: if you know, you know.

I’m not sure how it started, but in anime viewing there’s the general “three episode rule”. There are different ways of interpreting it but it basically boils down to give an anime three episodes to impress you. The general understanding is that it takes time to see the potential in an anime, and a single episode doesn’t usually do that.

I’ve been thinking about this lately because I’m surprised with how quick folks are to make pretty solid and or even final opinions about TTRPGs. I’ve seen people do so after just reading the text, or after a single session of play.

But here’s why I personally believe in following a three session rule for TTRPGs:

• One session isn’t enough

• Game Feel takes time to feel

• We all have baggage

One Session Isn’t Enough

Unless the game is built to be a one-shot experience, most TTRPGs require several sessions to see its full potential. Most games shine at around 6-8 sessions (if not longer), I think three sessions (excluding session 0) gives the game just enough breathing room to feel things out. In most TTRPGs where player characters Get Things Done In A Narrative Fashion, the first session sets the premise and the stakes. The second session raises the stakes, perhaps offers a cliffhanger. The third session is the big climax or final confrontation, with just enough time for an epilogue.

On top of that general story arc, that’s barely enough time to get the hang of the mechanics. The first session introduces you to the main task resolution system and essential aspects related to it. The second session has you getting the hang of things and exploring mechanical connections and synergies. The third session should have you starting to feel comfortable with pushing the mechanics further. Even if you’re familiar with the framework!

Let’s say it’s a Powered by the Apocalypse game — newer PbtA games push and pull the mechanics into different directions that takes time to get used to. I think we often make the mistake of thinking “I know what a PbtA game is like”, when games like Pasión de las Pasiones and Hearts of Wulin both work very differently within the system.

Game Feel Takes Time To Feel

How a game feels, is probably a whole blog post series unto itself. For now, I’ll describe it as how different games may have the same goals or draw upon the same themes but feel completely different in players engage with the mechanics. The Veil and The Sprawl may seem similar at first glance: they’re both PbtA Cyberpunk games. But The Veil focuses on emotions and genre crafting, offering a completely different experience depending on Playbook choice and setting generation. The Sprawl is an ode to Nueromancer and Shadowrun, a more focused experience that creates a satisfying cycle phases of a mission.

Both games have a completely different game feel. The Veil feels cerebral, thematic, and asks you to check in on your character’s emotional state and create the world together. The mechanics ask you to both connect to the world and your character in an intimate way, while using that connection and intimacy to serve the mechanics and PC goals. The Sprawl feels tactical, risky, and the world is something that happens to you. You can prepare as much as you want and stack the odds in your favor, but the mechanics can still land you in a bad position and that’s the fun of it!

Even if both games use the same systemic framework and design philosophy of Powered by the Apocalypse (we play to find out, we trigger moves, etc etc) the game feels completely different in how the mechanics, narrative, and player experience all collide into each other.

I’ll have to think some more about how to put into words what game feel means, but it’s definitely not something that comes across when just reading about the game or playing one session of it!

We All Have Baggage

What I mean by baggage is: your game experience, expectations, and goals. These can often come at odds with the game you’re playing, and approaching a game on its own terms and allowing it to unfold as it was intended to takes time.

The more we play TTRPGs, the more our ideas of what gameplay is and should be starts to calcify. Relationships in games should be mechanized like this, the GM should do this in a game, the players should do that, PCs need HP to feel fragile and the world is dangerous, if a PC is in a scene with just a GM it’s not roleplaying as a group, etc etc etc. All of these ideas are based on our experiences, what we expect, what we want our games to be like. But they get in the way of seeing what the game in front of us actually is and what it’s inviting us to do.

When I first played Dream Askew, a Belonging Outside Belonging game, I suffered. Greatly. Playing a GM-less game was difficult. It was difficult to build stakes and challenges, and figure out how to address them. The whole group decided to venture from the enclave, which was a huge mistake. Most of our moves were about being in the Enclave, engaging with the community. We didn’t know when to pick up a Setting Element, who would voice the NPCs. It was a mess! It was a bad time! It was just one session.

I played Dream Askew another time, and then another. Each time with a different group actually. By the third session, it was enough for me to leave behind my baggage and meet the game where it was. In my mind I thought, oh this is a GM-full game, we’re all the GM. Oh, we build the stakes and challenges that interest us, and craft them together. We stay within the enclave, and engage in the slice of life queer tenderness and difficulties the game encourages. We make an NPC that we all love and jokingly fight to play each scene they come up in. It’s fun!

Dream Askew, and the Belonging Outside Belonging framework, is one of my favorites now. And it would have never been this way if I didn’t give the game three sessions, just enough time for me to leave behind my own baggage.

I’m Asking You To Give Games Time

Really, the three session rule is more of a guideline than an actual rule. What I’m really asking from you here is: please give games a chance to impress you, to win you over, to show you what they’re capable of.

I make it very clear to folks when I have an initial impression or when I have questions that can only be answered when I play the game. I’m open to having opinions in flux, vague open ended things that need more input. It’s also taught me that even after I form an opinion, I can always change my mind later. Wild concept, I know!

What were games that needed more time for you to enjoy them? Do you think one shot games need a similar rule or are they held to a different standard for you? Do you have your own guidelines when coming across a game for the first time? What do you think about game feel, and how would you describe it?