the Jester
Legend
I understand his reasoning, but it leads to a pitfall. If the players are stuck and not doing something you think is obvious, it is probably because they are missing a piece of information that should be obvious.
Well, as I said, if the issue is information that the pcs have but the players are overlooking, give it to them. However:
The missing information could even be "obvious actions you can take here"
It may not be considered that the NPC could have teleported out
It may not be considered that a search for tracks would yield anything
If the players do not even think of either of those points, they could sit there being stuck over an obvious detail that is action oriented, and thus barred from GM discussion.
Those are not examples of information that they are missing. Those are examples of actions that the pcs could take. It's entirely different, IMHO. And there's a big difference between stuff the pcs can see and inferences that they can make.
If the players are truly missing the obvious actions they could take, pointing out the facts of the obvious choice seems just as valid as pointing out obvious details.
Not to me. The pcs' actions are theirs to decide. If they overlook something obvious during an investigation- not something that their pcs know, but something that they fail to pick up on- it is absolutely not my role as dm to clue them in.
There is no point in a mystery adventure if you're giving them the answers, for example.
One method that might work is to phrase things in the form of questions. Thus, you are not forcing anything on the players, merely opening their minds to consider things. "Would you guys like the search the area for clues?" or "Why haven't you guys searched the area for clues?"
Again, I would never, ever, ever do this. It's the same thing as saying "You need to search the area" with only the thinnest veneer of "no it's not" spread on top of it.
There have been many times in my campaign where the pcs missed treasure, magic items, or even vital clues by not searching an area. SO BE IT. That's on them, not on me.
Note that I absolutely do not follow the philosophy that the pcs should always win every encounter, solve every mystery, find every bit of loot and discover every secret door. I am absolutely fine with the pcs missing the secret door that leads to the prince in stasis; I am absolutely fine with the pcs throwing up their hands and saying, "We can't find the emerald; screw this, let's go talk to that merchant who wants to hire us to take out the pirates instead." Heck, just Saturday night the pcs missed a magic item by failing to search an area.
One of my big issues with story-driven games is the frequent absolute unwillingness to let the pcs miss anything. The "vital clue" isn't so vital if the dm is willing to let the murderer get away with murder if the pcs don't find it. Maybe later they'll run up against him again.
If nothing else, you may get an explanation of their thinking, which may explain why they didn't consider searching. They may have stated a similar intent previously but in a way that you did not parse to mean the same thing, and thus gave them a negative result. As such, they thought they already did it and you said it didn't work.
Now, this kind of thing is an issue when it happens- but clear communication doesn't require the dm to suggest things to the party; it requires him to be a good listener, to be clear with the players as to what happens and what they've done.