After the Session

The dragon's been slain, the princess returned to the kingdom, and the reward divided amongst the players. So now everyone goes home.

Not so fast.

Something that I do as a GM, that I think a lot of other GMs leave out, is asking for feedback. I'm not sure what it is about RPGs and their players that make communication so difficult. Perhaps it's that the stereotypical RPer is social inept and has difficulty expressing themselves in a proactive fashion. Perhaps the players don't want to upset the GM who put a lot of work into the session. Perhaps the players feel like their concerns will fall on deaf ears. Whatever the case may be, everyone is losing out when this step isn't taken.

I feel that there are 4 essential parts to this oft forgotten stage of a session. The first two are questions from the GM, and the second two are comments. Both sections are important.

First the GM should ask the players what they didn't like about the session and why. This can be anything; whether the players felt railroaded, a really boring fight, too much politics, etc. These are things that the GM should really try to remember to make the game more fun for everyone. Not to mention that a GM's job can often be thankless and hearing what went well can be a real ego boost (just don't let it go to your head).

Secondly, the GM should find out what the players DID like about the game. Were they impressed by the size of a battle, the magnificent bastard who tricked them, or the fact that they felt they really affected the story. Again, this is to make the game more fun for everyone.

However, a common pitfall with this part is just copying a situation in its entirety. For example, if the players really enjoyed a combat where they fought goblins while a hole in the floor slowly filled with water as part of a ritual to sacrifice the poor elven children in the hole who are screaming for help during the battle, the GM shouldn't just say "well, I'll just swap the kids for some farmers, and the goblins for some lizardmen next time."

No, the thing to do is to break it down. Was it the danger of falling into the hole, the timed nature of the battle, the swarm tactics of the goblins, the need to save the children, the moral dilemma of saving the children first or killing the goblins first, or a combination of any of the above. Chances are that the players liked specific aspects of the scene, as opposed to the scene as a whole. These ingredients that make up the scene are what the GM should try to simulate by taking the effect that the ingredient had and using it in another scene. If they liked the swarm tactics was it actually facing lots of easy to kill foes, or was it that the battle was more challenging because there were reduced movement options?

The third stage is when the GM gets to return the favour. The GM should start by telling each player something that s/he liked that the player did. Doesn't matter what it was, but preferably the comment should be something that relates to the player getting involved. For example "It was awesome when your berserker saved the little girl even though he could've attacked the goblin shaman." is better than "Nice job grabbing the objective and avoiding the decoy." Make the players feel a kinship with their characters. They should be proud for their characters achievements in addition to their own.

Lastly, the GM gets a little cathartic release by telling the players what they could improve. Don't just say what you didn't like, give them specific examples from the session, and what you think they could do to improve. For example "I think that it would have made more sense if your elf hating ranger had fought the goblin shaman instead of trying to save the children, even though you as a player knew that was the 'goal' of the scene." is better than "Stop metagaming, and roleplay already!"

This is done because everyone can use critiquing sometimes and most groups have a "problem" player who disrupts the fun of the game, whatever that fun may be. For one reason or another you may not want to get rid of the player or can't so you need to talk to them. What if they don't take criticism well? That's why you a) start with something you liked about what they did, b) give some criticism to everyone else as well, and c) accept criticism yourself.

With these four together, the game should improve for everyone involved, even "that guy."