@
iserith: Well, at least I think I understand where you are coming from now. I had totally misunderstood the thrust of your argument, hence your confusion over why I was talking about rail roading. I had thought you were standing on the principle of player agency. In fact it seems more the case now that you explain yourself is that you are standing on the principle of the rules are the rules, and ought to be followed strictly as written. So all my discussion about process loops, player agency, and railroading was only tangential to the point you were trying to make.
--snip--
I haven't yet decided if this is actually the intention of the designers or just your interpretation of it. Certainly, one reading of the example of play, is even though it is stated as a question, the player has given an goal and an approach. However, if that is the case, then the player must first guess what might possibly be hidden or wrong in the scene before even being allowed to test if his character notices what is hidden or wrong, which does in fact imply "pixel bitching" to a very high degree. For example, if that is the strict intent, then if the player said, "Are the gargoyles large enough to hide behind?" or "What sort of stone are the gargoyles made of?" or "Are the gargoyles carved in the Moldavian style?" or "Are the gargoyles male or female figures?" or whatever, then the Gm would be perfectly in his rights to not even give the player a chance to notice the gargoyles are living beings even while intently studying them. There is a certain Gygaxian "skillful play" logic to the idea that the player will eventually as a player learn that gargoyles are potentially alive, but it seems to go beyond even Gygaxian naturalism and I doubt very many readers have interpreted it that way.
