Hussar
Legend
Going to take these out of order:
Well, considering this was a published module, and even WotC modules have had this sort of thing, I'd say that at least some people think that this is reasonable. You wouldn't see it in published modules if no one thought it was reasonable.
Now you see why this sort of thing bothers some people.
Really, really don't care. But, [MENTION=6779196]Charlaquin[/MENTION], we have an example of at least one DM who seems to think that the module was reasonable.
The reason we think this is because we've seen examples of exactly the kind of thing you are talking about in numerous sources - both anecdotally and published adventures. It's not exactly a rare thing IME. Lots of DM's do this. So, when you advocate for a DMing style which, in my experience at least, leads to frustration, wasted time and far too many arguments at the table, you can't really be surprised that you get some push back. It's not that we're being disingenuous or arguing in bad faith, it's that we've seen what sometimes happens when DM's get that fixated on details and minutia, and it ain't pretty.
I don’t think most people would consider the “If the players don’t say they’re looking at the ceiling, they’re automatically surprised” to be at all reasonable. I certainly don’t. I want a goal and an approach to actions they take, but I don’t require that degree of specificity, and I certainly wouldn’t expect players to specify that they’re looking up when they’re just exploring the dungeon.
Well, considering this was a published module, and even WotC modules have had this sort of thing, I'd say that at least some people think that this is reasonable. You wouldn't see it in published modules if no one thought it was reasonable.
Now you see why this sort of thing bothers some people.
/snip
Where in the room are you looking? Do you move about the whole chamber freely? Is there any feature of the room as describe that you're careful to avoid? Are you using any items in your search? How long do you take to perform this task?
Really, really don't care. But, [MENTION=6779196]Charlaquin[/MENTION], we have an example of at least one DM who seems to think that the module was reasonable.
And this is why I think you're deliberately trying to misunderstand our position and pretend it's more complicated than it is. We're really not wanting players to jump through magic hoops, we just want them to clearly communicate an action through their goal and approach. You seem to assume that we have a predetermined phrase that the player must utter to pass our test (or expert domain knowledge that no one could reasonably expect). Nothing could be further from the truth. We simply want to the players to engage with the game world through their imagination rather than relying on the options listed on their character sheet.
Ah well, I tried...
The reason we think this is because we've seen examples of exactly the kind of thing you are talking about in numerous sources - both anecdotally and published adventures. It's not exactly a rare thing IME. Lots of DM's do this. So, when you advocate for a DMing style which, in my experience at least, leads to frustration, wasted time and far too many arguments at the table, you can't really be surprised that you get some push back. It's not that we're being disingenuous or arguing in bad faith, it's that we've seen what sometimes happens when DM's get that fixated on details and minutia, and it ain't pretty.