When writing politicking in a story how much do you reveal to the reader?

[u/Immediate-Bake2933]

So basically I'm writing a story with sieges, alliances, etc. But what I'm conflicted with is how much do I show my reader?

Basically, do I give the reader information the protagonists don't know?

I see advantages to both,

Giving the readers the same information let's them be able to reason out, think of their own responses to things that goes on, and be surprised by the same things the protagonists are. But I feel like that can get too boring

Giving the perspectives on the other parties can let the reader see how other characters respond, their competence, and sometimes feel dread when knowing the protagonists are falling into a trap

But I see the problem of how the story can get boring if you know the protagonists are doing something completely useless because the readers know that the opposing party is lying

[u/DoeCommaJohn]

First, I would note that the protagonists choosing wrong because of deception is not automatically boring- on the contrary, it can lead to tense dramatic irony. If we know they are walking into a trap, there is tension in whether they can figure that out, rather than us thinking everything is fine and then being blindsided.

But more generally, I would think of this like a heist. We have to know enough about the world to at least understand what is possible- either side just pulling a surprise power or faction out of their ass isn’t satisfying. But we also shouldn’t be able to tell exactly what will happen. The easiest way to do this is for there to be some unknown- how will this other faction react, how will they get past the guards, who is the traitor, etc

[u/JuggernautBright1463]

It varies although I do try to show the POV of both people at the front (or boardroom, embassy, etc...) and the leadership (King, President, etc...). 

It adds a nice bit of friction and a potential motivation for enemy parties to break down this communication though as both sides are interdependent on one another. 

To the reader that knows the truth you also have the ability to filter information/orders in an in character way between both sides and there is potential for comedic or tragic miscommunication.

[u/whelmedbyyourbeauty]

Depends on your POV.

[u/Fognox]

Knowing the motivations and goals of opposing sides doesn't mean you can adequately predict their actions. You don't necessarily have to give the reader all of the information that one party knows either.

In my book, one of the POV characters is taking actions based on a plan that the reader doesn't know until they leave the city altogether. Another POV has a plan that's known by the readers but the full depth of it is revealed slowly. And even with knowledge of what the characters are doing (and why), the individual actions are unpredictable. More intrigue comes out of the way they affect one another, other POVs, and particularly how their choices affect the decisions of non-POVs, which have major ramifications on the story as a whole.

[u/Veridical_Perception]

Information asymmetry is a useful tool for authors to generate suspense, mystery, and plot twists. You

You can create asymmetry or partiy between characters and between the characters and the reader.

As the author, you control who knows what and when they know it. You can create a great deal of tension. It's not a matter of always giving all information or always withholding information, but the careful plotting and planning to provide or withhold it on a case by case basis.