As a GM, I strive to make the best experience for my group and adapt and improve my style and skill. I usually do this by live observation and asking for inputs after the session.
My problem lies in after session Q&A. Usually I ask them "Do you have fun? Which part is fun? Which part is not fun? How can it be better?" and they answer generally "Yep, it was fun. I like every part of it. I think it's fine."
I don't want to look for problems that aren't there, but I feel like I'm not improving the group's experience this way. There are some parts where they are distracted enough to play with their phone – they are not engaged enough, so it's obvious I can change some things, like pacing, so they can enjoy the session more.
I want my players to give feedback on every session. How to make them do so?
I've tried to make the questions as guiding as possible and as brief as possible, but they stick with the general "it's fine".
Best Answer
Obviously, this question cannot have an objective apply-everywhere answer, however, I can tell you what works and doesn't work for me.
Session Feedback Is Not Very Useful
I also ask my players if they had fun during the session, and their answer is also "Yeap, it was great, I had fun!". The thing is that if your players/friends are even slightly polite they won't tell you anything else unless the session has gone really bad.
However, this is expected not only because your players may be polite, but also because every sane person knows that not every session can be equally exciting. A story has ups and downs. Also, it is impossible for every player to shine in every session, as it is impossible for every session to have the desired level of battles, role-playing, exploration, political intrigue, etc.
So, how can you get useful feedback? This is what I do:
Campaign Feedback Is Usually Very Useful
Every few sessions -- the number may vary based on how often you play, for how many hours each time -- before a session starts, I ask each of my players to:
This makes wonders. First, they get the opportunity to gloat about something ridiculous or really cool their PC did and then, after they felt that they praised the campaign, they feel better about opening up about the thing(s) they don't enjoy as much.
An example answer is this: "The sessions where we planned and executed the heist were the highlight of the campaign for me so far. However, I don't enjoy the turn of events in the last 2 sessions so much because of the heavy political intrigue that's going on. I want to experience a proper battle!"
I then proceed to note down the things my players liked and disliked and I try to adjust the following sessions to better suit their taste.
Another note:
It May Be Better to Get Feedback Before a Session Starts
I know that the usual thing is to ask your players for feedback after a session, however, I've noticed that this is not ideal. The reasons is that most players, including the GM, are somewhat tired after a session. And when you're tired you're not best suited to critique or to receive critique. Also, sometimes, we need time to process some events properly. For example, we may get frustrated about an event but we may later realize that this happened because it served a very important purpose in the story progression. Or, we may realize that it was foretold long ago by a series of events/clues we ignored.
However, before a session starts, everyone is excited and positive. Furthermore, the events of the previous events have "sunk in". This combination is perfect to offer criticism because you can see clearly and you have a good grasp of the events that took place.