Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5342637" data-attributes="member: 996">I'm not sure what you mean by 'simple' challenges - beyond the circular argument you already put forth that any challenge that might be bypassed by the spell is too simple to be a Skill Chalenge, since it could be bypassed by the spell.Social Skill Challenges that rely on interacting with a single creature are alluded to in both the DMG and the new RC, the DMG uses one as detailed example.  Any social skill challenge that primarily deals with a single creature could potentially be bypassed by Instant Friends, not because it's 'broken' so much as because it's ill-defined.I provided you with six such examples.<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/294741-instant-friends-6.html#post5338771" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/294741-instant-friends-6.html#post5338771</a> The power isn't 'broken,' it's just badly written, it could be 'broken,' if interpreted one way, fine if interpreted another - in a different situations, the same interpretations might have the opposite results.  It's just a bad mechanic, not an invincible one.Trying to pick apart the examples I dashed off is irrellevant.  You asked for examples, I gave you some that /could/ be a problem.  Really, Intant Friends could end up problematic in virtually any Social Skill Challenge, not just because it might overpowered, but because it might be underpowered, or fail to model what it says it does.  A DM who sticks strictly to the Bluff check bonus, for intance, might render the spell useless in a challenge where it should be handy. Any Skill Challenge can be resolved with a series of primary-skill checks and nothing else.  Though, I'm not convinced that's even the case.  How many successful Diplomacy Checks does it take to get someone to consider you a trusted friend?'Are willing to do for a trusted friend' and "aren't particularly opposed to" are two very different things.  Skill Challenges provide a reasonably balanced structure that lets the DM create an obstacle for the PCs to overcome other than a simple combat.  Social Skill Challenges are a rather large subset of that, and social skill challenges henging on one creature aren't exactly unheard of - they're possibilities mentioned in the DMG & RC.  It doesn't matter if one DM uses slightly different primary skills than another in a similar challenge.  It does matter if a mechanic is dropped in his lap that could reasonably be interprested to obviate a skill challenge, especially if he interprets it unreasonably to avoid that, then has to reverse that ruling to let it be used reasonably later - because it's a vague, ill-concieved, badly-worded mechanic.Arguing that it could be OK at some tables doesn't resolve that.  Arguing that the DM can always screw things up, anyway, doesn't resolve it.  An update to a less problematic wording /does/.I thought this was a discussion of a new spell, not whether this or that hypothetical DM is worthy of his screen.</blockquote>

Verification