By adding risk to an action that wouldn’t otherwise have risk then you are punishing searching. I would assume that has a discouraging factor.
I think we're pretty much on the same page here. But, to clarify, there is no roll if the proposed action has no chance of success. The proposed action just fails.
Sometimes it is - but I use this sparingly, most often with WIS(Insight) checks (e.g. "it's hard to read this NPC"). But I really prefer that something actually happens as a result of a failed check most of the time. "Nothing happens" or "you don't find anything" doesn't often really change the fiction.
As long as the players know ahead of time that there are wandering monsters or patrols, I'm not adding the risk that wasn't there. It was already there. If they want to take time to search in such an environment, they just need to do it efficiently (e.g. guidance, working together, inspiration, someone keeping close watch, whatever).
Sure. That’s fair enough. It just doesn’t help when there aren’t any wandering monsters and I don’t want my players to automatically know there’s a hidden drawer in the desk.
Sometimes not finding the secret drawer with the McGuffin is the penalty in and of itself; the McGuffin would have let them avoid some future obstacle or they missed out on some minor reward.
This is a non-issue if you require the player to describe a goal and reasonably specific approach. If they do so and fail without a roll, they know only that their approach had no chance of succeeding in accomplishing their goal, not necessarily that no approach could have done. And as long as there is a cost for the attempt or consequence for failure, the players will always have to weigh their options before attempting another approach.
If the party is moving quietly as they explore, I believe a passive check is appropriate (representing the average result of the players continually attempting to move quietly over time). In more moment-to-moment resolution, I prefer to include in my description of the environment something that the players can respond to - they hear the guard’s footsteps coming down the hall, or hear a “what was that?” or some such - and then ask them what they do. But I don’t really see any situations where a (non-passive) stealth check would be required if there isn’t anything to perceive them.
Thinking there might be something you missed and never really knowing is an even greater punishment
If there is no time pressure in a scene, the search can be auto-successful if the players describe with reasonable specificity that the PCs are thoroughly examining the desk. If they don't bother checking the desk carefully, they don't find the hidden drawer. That's a judgement call for the DM to make. It doesn't require phantom rolls in another scene to make it possible. At least, not at my table.
Sure. Different strokes for different folks.
