Post session - do you tell your players what clues or alternatives they missed?

[Helliquin]

Hey all

New DM, new-ish player.

Written a campaign based around Terry Pratchett Discworld, each character gets their own "session 0" to ensure all players start at the same location and that story line continues to be woven through the campaign. The way Im writing it, there are many alternate outcomes for each session, determined by the players actions.

Question is, post session, do you outline to players the key points or information they missed or how decisions they made influenced the outcome?

For example, session 0 for one player:
- met a woodsman (and was nice to him)
- was introduced to a witch (as a result of being nice to woodsman - if he were to have killed woodsman, the witch would have cursed him)
- got help and a sealed letter of recommendation (if he wasnt nice, he wouldnt have gotten either)
- travelled in a wagon to new city, wagon was full of sealed jars of various types (the cart driver was asleep, he could have stolen stuff, or become roaring drunk if he sampled what was in the jars)
- got pick pocketed (twice)
- met an Igor (who was given the sealed letter - if it were opened, the letter had instructions to take off his arms)
- joined the Night Watch thanks to sealed letter.

He was always going to join the Night Watch, one way or another, but could have been having his job interview drunk, or he could have been conscripted, or armless and locked in a cell. Do I tell them that stuff?

On a similar vein, the player in question at no point said stuff like "i'd like to take a closer look around X room" or "I try and engage this NPC in conversation" which would have resulted in more information for them but... they missed it. I wont be telling them this stuff. Majority of it isnt important and can be introduced at a later stage - just gives more context to the NPC's and the universe.

[Sigreid]

Nope. I don't.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

Sometimes I do just to let them know that their decisions have consequences. But I almost never do it in a way that reveals information they shouldn’t have. Most of the time if I share something it’s because it would’ve been hilarious if they’d interacted in a different way and I feel like I have to share the joke with someone.

[Helliquin]

Sometimes I do just to let them know that their decisions have consequences. But I almost never do it in a way that reveals information they shouldn’t have. Most of the time if I share something it’s because it would’ve been hilarious if they’d interacted in a different way and I feel like I have to share the joke with someone.

I guess thats hit the nail on the head. I'd like to share the possibilities with the players so they could have had a laugh - I for one was looking forward to this person doing an interview for the police force whilst roaring drunk on Scumble.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

I guess I’ll also share things sometimes to let them know that they made a really good choice that saved them from almost certain death. I think it lets them feel the tension their characters would feel in “dangerous situation X” better than they otherwise would while sitting around a comfy table.

Something like, “Wow guys. I was worried you were going to actually try to fight the king’s Royal Guard of 20 soldiers. Things would’ve gone very bad for you if you had drawn your weapons instead of walking away peacefully.”

I also might narrate it for their characters by saying something like, “As you reflect on the day it strikes you just how wise you were in choosing not to escalate the incident between the party and the Royal Guard.”

[GlenSmash!]

It depends. If I feel like maybe I didn't telegraph well enough, I would talk to my players about how they would expect me to drop information in a way that wasn't too obvious. And I would probably use specifics examples from the last campaign.

In the current campaign, I may just incorporate lost opportunities into future scenarios.

[Sigreid]

In the moment I've said "ok, wow. Game on!"

[MaxWilson]

Question is, post session, do you outline to players the key points or information they missed or how decisions they made influenced the outcome?

*snip* He was always going to join the Night Watch, one way or another, but could have been having his job interview drunk, or he could have been conscripted, or armless and locked in a cell. Do I tell them that stuff?

I don't, but only because I can't think of a good way to do so. I like the players to be as fully-informed as possible and I am always looking for good ways to give them information about the consequences of their choices. In this case I think it might be appropriate for whoever received the letter to let the player in on what would have happened if he'd opened it, e.g. by casually pointing out another Night Watchman who had made a different choice and got mutilated. (Or just by saying, "You know, now I know I can trust you, and that's good, because if I couldn't trust you--if this letter had been opened--I would have cut off both your arms, just like the letter says to do.")


I also might narrate it for their characters by saying something like, “As you reflect on the day it strikes you just how wise you were in choosing not to escalate the incident between the party and the Royal Guard.”

Hmmm. I might steal this.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

It depends. If I feel like maybe I didn't telegraph well enough, I would talk to my players about how they would expect me to drop information in a way that wasn't too obvious. And I would probably use specifics examples from the last campaign.

In the current campaign, I may just incorporate lost opportunities into future scenarios.

Great point there! If it feels like your players are missing things left and right, especially important things, maybe talk about some of the missed opportunities and how you expected them to find the information (searching the room, talking to more NPCs, etc.). Ask them if those sorts of things dawn on them during play, and if not you can work with them to find a medium ground where they do more investigating/interacting and you put things a little more in the open.

This might be slightly adjacent to your OP, but it still serves a purpose along similar lines.

[Skylivedk]

We always debrief after sessions. I frequently joke with my players about how it would only take one of their characters to ride a train for the whole thing to derail.

More often, I express surprise at some actions or ask why that character reacted in a specific manner or how they saw the situation. They last part helps me adjust my narrative to better evoke the emotions I'm aiming for. I haven't shared alternative endings etc yet

[DrowPiratRobrts]

Hmmm. I might steal this.

Please do!




...More often, I express surprise at some actions or ask why that character reacted in a specific manner or how they saw the situation. They last part helps me adjust my narrative to better evoke the emotions I'm aiming for...

Quality work, keep it up!

[Copper_Dragon]

I have done this before, but I don't make a habit of it. Reasons I've done so in the past:

Helping a new player understand better ways to interact with the game/world
Helping a group that seems flustered understand that there WERE ways out of the problem they got hung up on
If the players will get a good laugh out of knowing what could/would have happened if they'd done things differently


I generally keep things a total secret if:

revealing it in this way would ruin the potential for them to find out in a more interesting way in-game
the characters have the opportunity to go back and "fix" it during the next session

[Rukelnikov]

I generally don't, I tend to DM sandboxes (or sandboxy adventures at the very least), so something they didn't do today they could do next session.

We generally do a this kind of questions at campaigns end, i.e.:

"What was the count really up to? Was he actually trying to summon a Marilith?"

"There were no demons involved, he was trying to use a ritual he concocted to drain the life from his sacrifices into his spellbook"

If I think this information will still be important next arc, I wouldn't tell em, but give them a hint:

"What was the count really up to? Was he actually trying to summon a Marilith?"

"You never got the chance to really check his manor, maybe there were some clues there that could tell you what he was up to"

It all depends on wether that which you are telling them could become metagame next session or not, if it could become metagame, then it would be better not to tell.

[Keravath]

I generally don't unless it is a one-off adventure and someone expresses an interest.

The main reason I avoid it is that it breaks immersion and may affect future play decisions. The characters like to feel like their decisions make a difference but they don't need to know the alternate realities that were possible with different decisions. Sometimes they will be happy to have avoided a worse fate and sometimes unhappy for having missed something good. "Oh look you could have found this <insert cool item here> if only you had made <decision X>" ... just causes players to second guess their choices and to begin playing to LOOK for these opportunities in future even if it might not be in character.

If folks are not asking enough questions or exploring the environment sufficiently then I might hint about it (or outright bludgeon them into thinking about asking some questions) but going over what could have happened is generally not the best way I find to get the point across.

[JackPhoenix]

I generally do tell them what secrets/hidden treasures they've missed, in a vain hope they'll start exploring the enviroment I've spent time and effort preparing for them more.

I sometimes tell them what was going on behind the scenes once the situation is resolved and if the knowledge won't affect future. Again, I've spent effort setting up those things, so it's disappointing to see them not investigating more.

I always do full (reasonably full) debriefing and Q&A session after the campaign ends. Things they've missed, things they could've forgotten, things that weren't very relevant, like what was happening elsewhere in the world while they were doing their stuff.

[Laserlight]

Generally no, although I will occasionally point out "before you went into the castle to assassinate the Duke, you could have asked people in town about the layout of the castle. Or the Duke's abilities. Or the guard routine. Or anything more than where the front gate is."

My favorite was the witch doctor/voodoo magic man who acted as their patron for a while . He was called Old Juan and they didn't get it until I told them at the end of the campaign. And two years later, they were still saying "I can't BELIEVE we missed that."

[Sigreid]

Sounds like the movie The Man from Earth where the 14,000 year old man was living under the alias John Oldman.

[Asmotherion]

Not really. i sometimes have them roll int to come to some conclusion that's relative to the plot (giving me a way to have them realise Player Agency at some important decission).

But spoil too much and you become boring and less entertraining as a DM. You may reveal a pattern in your game turning it very much predictable as you reveal all the alternative "routes" the story may have gone. Also you can always recycle your unused ideas latter wile revealing them will have a much lesser impact.

Once the Campain is really over you can reveal any details they're still curious about.

[Monster Manuel]

Hey all

On a similar vein, the player in question at no point said stuff like "i'd like to take a closer look around X room" or "I try and engage this NPC in conversation" which would have resulted in more information for them but... they missed it.

I almost never go over alternate scenarios with the players post-session, because I like to re-use clues or background or encounters later in the campaign, if possible. But the example you gave there would maybe be an exception.

This tells your players something important about your DM-ing style. "If you don't tell me you searched the room, I'm not going to tell you there's anything interesting in there". Some players wait for some narrative clue to tell them there's some reason to search the room (usually newer players). Those players will miss out on lots of information, waiting for a clue that will never come. Unless that expectation is set, it can grow frustrating for both sides. These kinds of Session 0 games are the perfect time to set those expectations. "If you had searched the room, you would have found something relevant" lets them know that, next time, they need to explicitly search the room. Setting those kinds of expectations are what the Session 0's are for, really.

After that, no freebies, no. If they missed something plot-critical, I'll try to work it in later.

[MoiMagnus]

There is two kind of "missed things".

+ First are the missed information. I don't talk about them in post session. After the campaign ended, I may talk about them to some players. Exception if they explicitly ask questions about it, I might answer.

+ Second are missed way of obtaining information. If my PC didn't understand that they could actually talk to the NPCs, if they didn't understand that divination spells could have been used for the investigation, or any similar stuff I was expecting them to do but they didn't because they weren't in the same mindset as me, I will say it explicitly to them. Goal is that in the next session they have a better understanding of what is allowed.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

I almost never go over alternate scenarios with the players post-session, because I like to re-use clues or background or encounters later in the campaign, if possible. But the example you gave there would maybe be an exception.

This tells your players something important about your DM-ing style. "If you don't tell me you searched the room, I'm not going to tell you there's anything interesting in there". Some players wait for some narrative clue to tell them there's some reason to search the room (usually newer players). Those players will miss out on lots of information, waiting for a clue that will never come. Unless that expectation is set, it can grow frustrating for both sides. These kinds of Session 0 games are the perfect time to set those expectations. "If you had searched the room, you would have found something relevant" lets them know that, next time, they need to explicitly search the room. Setting those kinds of expectations are what the Session 0's are for, really.

After that, no freebies, no. If they missed something plot-critical, I'll try to work it in later.

I also like to reuse things which is typically why I don’t give any “good ideas” away. Just jokes or behind the scenes consequences that they’ve avoided or could’ve avoided but that their characters would have some inkling of already.

As far as setting expectations go, I typically run a prologue for the first session or two. The skeleton is adaptable to the setting but strictly laid out to expose players to my DMing style, as well as to teach new players the game.

At some point during that prologue the players will probably chase some baddies to their hideout. Somewhere in the hideout will be an empty room with beds and opened chests at the foot of each. There’s nobody in the room, there’s nothing noteworthy about it, and the players don’t have to go through it to get anywhere. But tucked under one of the mattresses is a magical item or some sort of valuable treasure. I’d tell them if they missed it after that session, just so they know to investigate the world as if they were there. But that’s where it stops for hidden items and clues.

Edit: Unless I think I haven’t given them appropriate information. Then I’ll try to correct, which is often clumsy, so they have a fair shot.

[Kurald Galain]

Question is, post session, do you outline to players the key points or information they missed or how decisions they made influenced the outcome?
Speaking for myself, I would find this a big immersion breaker; an RPG is not some kind of video game where you can reload and choose a different path.

I have met only one DM who regularly did this, and he got criticized for this by other players until he stopped. YMMV, but I get the impression that many players would not appreciate this.