I want to pose a question for which I know there is no correct answer, only many individual opinions and preferences. However, I am curious if there trends I might notice, and/or to spot some creative seed of an idea. Clearly, this is unscientific and is not meant to be a exact statistic sample of preferences.
Assuming game time is not tight, what sort of situation, NPC, or other aspect in an adventure inspire you to role play your PC more (or have more fun doing so)? I recognize that some/many players would have great fun role playing the interactions between the various PCs, even in an empty room; that is fine, but is not actionable by an author or editor.
NPCs with a quirk or attitude?
Dramatic situation? Humorous situation?
Lets you showcase some skill or personality quirk of yours by ?
Bargaining with a NPC, dancing with a noble, swinging on a chandelier,...
Unusual tasks?
Keith
Recognizing someone from a previous adventure helps a lot; you get to build on previous experience and cement an existing experience.
Situations that have several solutions are good; for example, persuading someone or threatening them; tricking them or flattering them. This often plays out well in well-written social skill challenges, where it can be deduced that different approaches might work. ("He is clearly egoistical, so some form of flattery might work, but technically he is also under the command of your patron, so that might also provide leverage")
I can't think of what to call it, but "mildly pointless competitions" can also be fun -- I'm thinking of drinking games, disagreements, who-can-run-the-fastest competitions, that sort of thing. If they have too strong an obvious story result, it can go all tactical, but otherwise it brings out characterization.
Classics such as conflict between heart and mind, loyalty and justice, etc. can work well, but are high-stakes. Not only must the module make it clear that there is not one REAL way and one WRONG way, but that both are viable, but it must also be able to cope with a party having split loyalties. For example:
- BAD: "You have been hired to steal a chalice from the temple of Moradin".
- BETTER: "You have been hired to retrieve a chalice from the temple of Moradin. Your patrons suggest that it is pretty poorly guarded, or you might negotiate for it"
- BEST: "Your patrons want you to get a chalice of a certain form. One exists in the local temple of Moradin, and is not well guarded. Another is in the temple of Grumsh, and is very well guarded"
Same temple layout, similar possibilities of sneaking, but the Grumsh version will clearly be harder.
In general, roleplaying is brought out by dramatic tension, which is brought about by opposing goals. The trick is to make sure that the opposing goals are not SO opposed that tactical / meta considerations will make the module unplayable for some or make them abandon roleplaying in order "just to get it done"
First and foremost, availability of _time_ to roleplay. The more packed in with encounters an adventure is, the more in a hurry the entire group is and the less I get to roleplay. Unfortunately just the way it works in either of the groups I play LFR with.
After that, I'd say quirky and outspoken NPCs are the easiest triggers. Usually all it takes is getting the ball rolling, then things fall in line. QUES1-1 was very good for that.
Humorous situations more than serious ones. Especially when the serious ones bear no real emotional impact. The big 'emotional' scene in SPEC1-2 was bad in that way (and also due to the time complaint)
Non-standard situations that require discussion. IMPI1-3 and CORE1-13's decision before the final encounter were both good here.
Skill challenges that involve bouncing from person to person tend to be good for finding a hook for people to react to. DALE1-3's worked extremely well in that respect... I had the whole table quite involved when talking to the pit fighter especially, and when I played it the priest was a good RP time.
Set pieces that let you just think about your character, without impacting the rest of play. WATE1-4's masquerade we had a ton of fun picking out costumes for the group.
As with adventure hooks I think this is rather dependent on the PC (and obviously on the player). I think the easiest 'roleplay hooks', at least for me, are the ones that involve an aspect of the character either by providing agreement or by providing an opposite to contrast against.
By 'providing agreement' I mean that an NPC shares a certain character aspect (worldview, set of values, opinion on race/monster/country), allowing the PC to enthousiasically agree and develop the RP from there.
I guess you could call this 'situations that allow me to showcase a certain character trait or ability'.
More in general what encourages role-play is leaving room for it. Make a partially filled 'canvas' as it were and then say to the DM and the players 'that spot is left for you to fill in.' For example a dungeon filled with combat encouters (possibly seperated by some empty rooms) does not encourage role-play, as there is no space for it, everything is either a combat encounter or empty filler. A good example of leaving room for role-play is (the long introduction version of) Core 1-13. The party arrives in the city of Ankhapur, the adventure gives a short description of the city and then everything is left open to the DM and the players. The party can be steered into the adventure hook pretty quickly, but they can also spend several days exploring the city.
Another thing that works well is a properly designed and run skill challenge. To make sure a skill challenge encourages role-play a few things are important (IMO):
- Involve all the characters. When I play characters without social skills I clam up during social skill challenges as I don't want to risk a failure by making a bluff/diplomacy/intimidate check at +0. Unless I can see a way to use my non-social skills I sit back and let the party face(s) handle the situation. Skill challenge design should take into account that only some of the party has (e.g.) a social skill and provide something useful to do for the rest of the party.
- The required number of rolls should match the narrative. Take into account how many rolls will be required to complete the skill challenge (the minimum is the required number of successes, the maximum is the required number of successes plus the maxium number of failures minus 1) and make sure that there are sufficient available scenes / relevent actions. This avoids the 'well you seem to have convinced the baron, but this is a complexity xx challenge so someone make two more diplo rolls' effect. As a DM the thing I find hardest about running skill challenges is making sure the skill challenge 'ends' at the same time the required number of rolls are reached. If the required number of successes has been reached but there is still 'action' left to play out you can always have the players make dummy rolls, but the opposite (action finished but required number of successes not yet reached) is a lot harder to fix.
Final advice for now: Package a good DM with every adventure ;) In the end what really provokes roleplaying is the DM. He or she is the one who has to make the world come alive and involve the characters in it. A good DM can work with the room left for roleplaying I mentioned above to draw the players into RP. I realise you're looking for tips for writers here so this last paragraph isn't much use, but it is true nonetheless ;)
I liked how LURU1-1 had great info on each NPC for that opening scene. A lot of role-playing can be created if the DMs (especially the newer ones) have some guidance on the personality and other aspects of an NPC.
A dry quick mention of an NPC is unlikely to result in a lot of RP, either by DM or players.
NPCs that are featured for most of the mod can really benefit from good information. The mod can even mention how the NPC reacts to various situations in the mod, in ways that are evocative.
NPCs can shine when the PCs must interact with them. A barkeep is of little use if there is just generic skill challenge info to be learned. But, if the barkeep is the gateway to the PCs learning about an information broker, and the barkeep will be telling them information after a certain level of interaction... for example, the barkeep in CORE1-6 is more likely to evoke RP since they issue a challenge PCs are likely to engage in. It then becomes easier to have some swagger and prove-yourself time. They aren't just an info-bullet dispenser, or at least there is an RP speed bump along the way.
NPCs often become more interesting when there is a hook to which the PCs can relate. For example, if the NPC discloses they collect maps, or they love ale, or they wonder if was resolved. That sort of thing usually brings out a player or two.
Or, to borrow a WATE example, if the premise is likely non-violent. In WATE1-1, that whole track down aspect works well to cause players/PCs to speak a bit to each NPC and learn a thing or two, rather than to metagame bullet points. Each setting is evocative enough to foster some RP discussion and sharing of personalities.
I've in the past benefited from playtesters when I asked them for specific information on which encounters encouraged RP. I've often been surprised by the results. It is something playtesters seldom provide, unfortunately, so you really have to ask for it and then edit appropriately.
This is a terribly complex question, because for me sometimes the level of RP is tied to the character I am playing at the time.
1) Quirky NPCs - Here I present Urk (AGLA1-5 Silver Lining) I ran this module 3 or 4 times over the weekend and as long as I had the voice to keep him going Urk was a great way of stimulating RP at the table - I even had a player (hey Ben 
) give Urk his Thieves Tools at the end of the module due to the RP.
I've yet to see the game not have lots of RP moments.
2) Noble Sacrifice - AGLA1-1 Lost Temple of the Fey Gods has a wonderful moment with this in it, where there is plenty of scope for RP should the players want.
3 a) Bad Guys who talk first fight second - this gives scope for resolving modules by fight or by skill challenge. Choosing to Fight or Talk is RP. eg my Cleric of Tempus chooses fight most of the time, my Storm Sorcerer will choose Talk if given the chance most of the time, and my Swordmage will alternate depending on the circumstance.
3 b)Bad Guys who surrender and talk. Not every bad guy needs to be fanatical fight to the last breath. Having them surrender and talk gives RP scope as well. Again Players can choose to press the fight or start the talking.
4) Choosing the Villain - putting players in a situation where there are 2 factions who have conflicting goals but where neither outcome is ideal is a good way of stimulating RP as players need to debate through RP what courses of action to take. For example modules that use the Yojimbo/Fist Full of Dollars plot - not necassarily easy to write.
5) Remember that not every character is going to respond the same way. Using my three characters that I mentioned above, the Cleric did nothing to save the girl in IMPI1-1 Alone, the Swordmage used calm diplomacy and her arcane knowledge, and the Sorcerer just lied to get her free. This is also hard to allow for in writig a module, but it is one of the key things to keep in mind when examining what constitutes RP. It might well be the right RP to start a fight for a given character for example.
From my experience, the three big scenarios that encourage role-playing are:
1. Meaningful interaction with a dynamic, interesting NPC.
2. Putting the PCs in a position where they must make a difficult decision.
3. Social encounters that engage the players rather than simply asking them to make skill rolls.
1. Not being a part of a skill challenge. Nothing says "sit down, shut up and let the guy with skill X roll the dice" like "say anything that sounds like a skill your character is not good at and the most likely result is that your whole party loses a healing surge."
2. Real and meaningful choices. In this category, I vastly prefer choices that have an in-module effect such as whether to stick with the escort mission or go on a rescue in Impi 1-1 or how to approach the bandit camp in Impi 1-4 to "choose a nebulous result path that may or may not be incorporated into a final outcome in a sequel--if anyone ever writes one and if you ever play it" such as the "what to do with the radiant vessels?" choice in Core 1-14 (IIRC).
3. Realistic NPCs in quirky situations. Quirky NPCs get old extremely quickly. Seriously. If you try to make everyone quirky, you end up with a world full of over the top, scenery chewing NPCs yelling, "look at me, my author decided to try out the latest mental illness writing techniques ripped off from a bad TV show which was (loosely) based on a misunderstanding of outdated pop psychology. Look at me. LOOK AT ME. LOOK AT ME." Yuck. (The other really common outcome is "well, I'm running this module and have a full page of bad-fanfic level backstory for an NPC whose role in the story isn't to tell us how his mother, the priestess of Shar scarred him for life until he was "rescued" by slave traders and eventually escaped by betraying his girlfriend, but rather to say, "they went that way." The players will never know anything about all of what the author thought made his NPC interesting and if they did know about it, 95% of them wouldn't care.") Now, put a relatively ordinary NPC in a situation where he wants or needs something unusual or where the PCs need to convince him to take a risk in order to help him and you have a role that players can actually understand and interact with rather than simply observe.
Part of it is pacing and the number of NPCs with whom to interact.
I find that many DMs are able to really roleplay one NPC in any given adventure really well. The more different NPCs there are, though, the more abbreviated the encounters become.
As a personal example, in CORM1-1 I really get into the character of Mort the mayor, and have a hoot roleplaying him with the players. However, pretty much every other NPC is portrayed by me as super-bland in comparison, and gets a quick dice-and-out treatment.
As a player, I usually get involved in RP with the first interesting NPC I encounter, but very quickly get bored of every one after the first.
That's a good point. It is possible to make different encounters each have an interesting NPC, but it takes a bit more work. The barkeep in CORM1-1, the person in the library, these have all produced RP at different sessions, in part because they are the only person there, but also because they are spaced out around other events.
If I look back on old LG mods, something like the fey mods in Geoff, they often had really interesting NPCs in interesting settings, plus a sense of mystery. There was a strong compelling reason to speak to them, plus they are not the type of critters to be likely to be foes. When a singing dancing pixie asks you to solve a puzzle, or you meet the queen of the hive, or you are talking to ants to get into their home... that's very likely to evoke great RP.
It doesn't have to be fantastic. It just needs to be important and/or compelling. The person weeping by the road, the gnome stumbling and bumbling with arms full of eldritch scrolls, the bard that keeps asking the party for help finishing his lines... those are compelling.
To pick on a mod, the NPCs in EAST1-4 are less compelling. While it is interesting that two dwarves are in love, you don't really have a reason to speak with them. Similarly, the NPC that directs you to the baths, or the one you meet there... neither have any compelling hooks. The DM is really on their own to create the hook (or not). All of that could be corrected.
To pick on my own mod, in CORE1-14, the big name NPCs you know from before could be better fleshed out. You have all this prior history with them, but they don't interact with you beyond a sort of backdrop story sort of way, rather than really having some bits for you so your connection renewed and you had more impetus to RP with them outside of "What's up?". (That's one regret I have, but it was just sort of what wrote itself and I never found the time/inspiration to correct it without bogging down the adventure).
We're starting to hone in on something I think.
The encounters that I recall as being the most fun, RP-wise, are short-ish ones where the NPC in question has one interesting "hook". You roleplay long enough to get the point of the hook across, and then you move on. Some of these are from LFR mods, others I've remembered from other campaigns/games.
A Red Wizard who specializes in teleportation rituals.
A mayor who still lives with his mother.
An employer who is so abrasive you almost want to be defeated just so he bites it.
A coffee shop owner who never says no.
A competing adventuring party that is filled with bungling incompetents.
Etc.
But I definitely find that the more information there is to get through, and thus the longer an encounter has to go on, the lower my enthusiasm for it is (both as player and DM).
Great question! I'll second what some others have said, and add my own:
1. Not being part of a skill challenge. My best RP experiences in LFR have come outside of skill challenges. It allows players to interact more freely.
2. An open-ended plot. Meaning you set up a scene, lay out some possible options, then ask the players what they wish to do. Tight linear scenarios can be fun but don't usually allow for unscripted outcomes, and it kind of makes RP'ing meaningless when your next step is always pre-scripted.
An example of a good open-ended scenario is QUES1-1. We only did 1 fight, but we felt like we were in control the whole time, and that our choices determined what we did next. We had a great time role-playing and interacting with the NPCs.
3. Setting up interesting situations. I don't really care for quirky NPCs either -- they more often than not just tend to be annoying (or just plain odd and confusing). You want NPCs that you can interact with constructively, not feel like you're in Crazy land.
And of course:
4. Meaningful choices, moral dilemmas, and making tough choices between two equally valid options. It gets everyone involved as they grapple with the situation, talk amongst each other, and decide how their PC would react.
I agree that you shouldn't try to encourage RP as part of a skill challenge. While they may have been designed with the best of intentions, what we actually got was a rule mechanic that makes it seem like a player can lose during role-playing. That discourages involvement and immersion and encourages gamism.
Isn't it ironic that some of the best RP in LFR at my table were in social interaction skill challenges. There is a reason why people pro-skill challenge specifically mention that the challenge needs to be run properly. If done incorrectly, a skill challenge can destroy the RP real quick. If done correctly, the players do not know that a skill challenge is going on and a DM has a good tool to estimate the effects of the PCs actions and how to adjucate success and failure. One thing the DMG2 tells is that you should only tell the players they are in a skill challenge when it is necessary, and it rarely is needed for social interactions.
For example, one of the great RP scenes was in CORE1-1. The PCs were trying to get past the guards (you know the spot if you played/run the adventure), picking it because they were better at social skills then sneaking. One of the PCs was a naive paladin like fighter from Cormyr, who knew Sembian guards were corrupt, but just could not belief it in his heart. Roleplaying his character his character, he stumbled a bit around how to properly offer a bribe to the guard captain who was obviously asking for some coin. The player asked me the best approach, and whether or not it was a smart idea to begin with. He had a decent Streetwise, but he failed his check and hence promptly offered the bribe to the captain in full face of his underlings. Others tried to lessen the damage through great RP (which is basically what a skill challenge allows for), and through the skill challenge structure I knew exactly what they needed to do and against what DC. They RPed their skills, but eventually failed (this was pre-errata) and through how I portrayed the guards behavior realized it was the case.
As for players complaining about being punished for using skills they are bad at, bad luck. What did you expect (not to mention that you must be really bad at it to fail with the current DCs)? The PC is trying something he is bad at. Although, a good DM should give the players plenty of opportunity to realize he needs aid. For example, I once had a player come up with a great Bluff involving vulcanic vents and steam explosions to convince a local creature to ally with the PCs against another group, but his character neither had the Bluff nor the Thievery/Dungeoneering to make it sound believable. Two other PCs had. So one of the other PCs got the idea (the one with Bluff) and the other got to add a couple of technical sounding details (the one with Thievery).
Hmm Quirky NPC doesn't mean Crazy NPC. I mean quirky as possessing an idiosyncrasy; something unusual about their manner or style. None of these require a trip to crazy town to generate.
It is also important that the quirk matter. Urk's quirk is important as it establishes his spot in the module and the PCs expectations of him. I RP him as pretty much the "kid" from Indiana Jones 2, and in terms of story structure/writing elements that is the role he has in the module - sidekick to the PC's hero.
I'll actually take an example that I personally do not like as presented currently - from DALE1-1 Kira follower of Loviatar is a quirky character. She has something unusual about her, which could generate significant RP. However looking at DALE1-1, her quirk basically doesn't matter - yet if her brother laid it on the table as a way to try to get the PC's to side with him then there would be scope to deal with it, the problem would be that key information for the DM to really use that hook is just not in the module (ie there is really nothing on either twin's personality, and nothing at all on why Kira follows Loviatar other than "keeps it private"). Ie Kira is quirky, but who cares?
Isn't it ironic that some of the best RP in LFR at my table were in social interaction skill challenges. There is a reason why people pro-skill challenge specifically mention that the challenge needs to be run properly. If done incorrectly, a skill challenge can destroy the RP real quick. If done correctly, the players do not know that a skill challenge is going on and a DM has a good tool to estimate the effects of the PCs actions and how to adjucate success and failure. One thing the DMG2 tells is that you should only tell the players they are in a skill challenge when it is necessary, and it rarely is needed for social interactions.
I really don't wish to derail this thread with a "are skill challenges good" discussion. It soon turns into people accusing others of "not running it properly"...
Just one game mechanic observation though: the DMG does state that you must tell players if a specific skill roll can result in a penalty or failure. I think that's a fair rule myself as well.
But enough about that, a rather lengthy discussion on the topic can be read here:
games.groups.yahoo.com/group/LivingFR/me...
I suggest we stay on topic... no more posts devoted entirely to defending or bashing Skill Challenges.
If you've found you've had your best RP moments in social interactions outside of Skill Challenges, I think that's good to know and in the spirit of this thread. Likewise, if you've had your best RP moments in Skill Challenges disguised-as-Non-Skill-Challenges, then I think that's constructive as well. Ditto for whether your best RP moments have occured in the middle of combat -- it's certainly possible!
The biggest factor for me is time. I would love to spend time exploring my and other's characters but often you really have to power through a mod to finish it in the alloted 4 hour time slot.
For the record my favorite RP opportunities for me so far was probably the skill challenges in CORE1-14.
For me, the two big triggers are:
1) Interplay with the other players / characters. Is there something about one of the other PCs that triggers a reaction in mine (same race or religion, rival race or religion, flirtation, etc.)? Obviously, this one's more likely to happen when I'm playing with a character with whom I've played before, and with whom my PC has been able to establish a relationship...but if there's a hook that one of the other PCs has that I can work with, I can run with that, too.
2) An NPC that the DM makes worthy of interaction. If the shopkeeper is coming across as Random Shopkeeper #53, then it's not likely that I'm going to interact with him in anything but a bare-bones manner. But, if the shopkeeper is coming across, at least a tiny bit, like a three-dimensional character, again, there'll be some hook in there that I can riff on.
In my experience, "quirky" NPCs are not a gateway to good roleplaying for the characters. Adventures should be about the PCs, and not the NPCs. A mod with good RP will have players walking away from the table talking about something cool they learned about another PC, and not about how well the DM played the NPC.
NPCs who take an interest in the PCs are a good way to invoke this. In one of the Dragon Coast mods, the background indicates that the NPC who hires the PCs has done some research, which is why he contacted the PCs. I had the players write down a couple of facts that an NPC would know about them with a good History check, and the "hiring hook" became great RP with the NPC inquiring about the stories he had heard about the PCs.
Lame RP skill challenge (that get lots of complaints) - - PC must convince NPC that they are worthy of NPC's respect.
Fun RP skill challange (that is lots of fun) - - NPC needs to convince PCs to use their skills to help
Most of the time when I play or run a game, I see the most RP happen during tactical encounters (combat). I suppose this is because a lot of players build their PCs around the combat system, and when their characters perform well in combat, or even surpass expectations, then the RP juices seem to get flowing and the characters come to life via the player.
I'll actually take an example that I personally do not like as presented currently - from DALE1-1 Kira follower of Loviatar is a quirky character. She has something unusual about her, which could generate significant RP. However looking at DALE1-1, her quirk basically doesn't matter - yet if her brother laid it on the table as a way to try to get the PC's to side with him then there would be scope to deal with it, the problem would be that key information for the DM to really use that hook is just not in the module (ie there is really nothing on either twin's personality, and nothing at all on why Kira follows Loviatar other than "keeps it private"). Ie Kira is quirky, but who cares?
We are a bit limited in space, so character personalities do not always get the most screen time. I think that is a flaw that creeps in more adventures: that we do not provide enough background for the DM to use a character and rpesnet her in the right way (i.e, Sureen in DALE1-4).
Then again, you can also give too much information.
In the case of Kira, her faith was something to be established, rather than 'played out' (it shouldn't dominate - pardon the pun). DALE1-1 was intended to introduce some characters for future plot arcs. In an original draft, we put more info on Kira's faith, but we toned it down when we got comments from playtests that it was a bit too much 'bondage'. So now, perhaps, we did not provide enough info.
Anyway, in general, I think we need to realize that in an adventure you can only put so much background information on a NPC. At some point,m you need to let go an leave it to the DM. It is hard to establish where that point lies. Too little, and people can't form an accurate picture. Too much, and people can't determine what's important.
Note that a DM has an important part in bringing NPCs to live. An adventure should provide the information, but the DM need to utilize it.
For me, it's principally if a meaningful decision has to be made, or at times when beliefs/alignments clash.
Since the demise of the sblock I don't want to give too much away, but suffice it to say there have been a couple of mods where how you approach the adventure from the beginning is significant, and different PCs want to do it different ways.
I have not read through this whole thread, so someone else may or may not have already commented on this, but something I find of critical importance is the Plothook/Introduction.
Some adventures really don’t give enough of a justification for why you are doing something, or tend to relate everything in one reflective piece of Box text, to me this is bad, and something I often change.
The reason for an adventure is important for setting the tone of that adventure. If the plothook/introduction is an arbitrary measure that gets the PCs to go to quest X, it may devolve into a combat fest. If the plot-hook e.g: Dale 1-3 (Much better thought out imho) directly addresses the PCs with what is going on, and instigates in character interaction from the onset, it tends to help a fair bit.
This does not at all say that some random instances aren’t bad, the beginning of Core1-3 is pretty memorable and can create fun events. However these can get a bit repetitive after a while, and are best reserved as a rarity.
Several mods seem to have introductions that exist just to find an excuse for the PCs to go do something entirely different, and that tends to ruin the suspension of disbelief for many of our local tables, especially when it happens with alarming frequency.
I tend to notice most of the mods that perform well in our local ‘rate the adventure’ stuff are those that tended to have PC/NPC interaction from the first encounter.
Of course the scattered release of regions hasn’t helped, and hopefully in time that will go away, as at the moment something that really doesn’t help is the globe trotting that occurs between modules as well, which means that NPC and local issue development is staggered at best, with plotlines developing as PCs level out of contention. (This may just be a 4e levelling up to quickly issue, but that’s a whole different kettle of fish)
Just one game mechanic observation though: the DMG does state that you must tell players if a specific skill roll can result in a penalty or failure. I think that's a fair rule myself as well.
DMG2 expends on that rule in telling that sometimes reminding the players about a game mechanic can disrupt the flow of the adventure. If that happens, don't tell. If the skill challenge is logical, a player should know the risks of making that skill check without the DM telling him so.
Other then that, I agree this is not the place to discuss skill challenge. The reason I mentioned it was because otherwise the OP would think that social skill challenges always stiffle RP even though in my experience that is not true.
Likewise, if you've had your best RP moments in Skill Challenges disguised-as-Non-Skill-Challenges, then I think that's constructive as well.
But then you would be drawing the wrong conclusion. It still was very much a skill challenge for me as a DM since it did guide me in how to RP the reactions of the NPCs. Besides, my players were well aware it was a skill challenge at the time (and the fighter in question was actually the best at Streetwise of the group) ;)
Just one game mechanic observation though: the DMG does state that you must tell players if a specific skill roll can result in a penalty or failure. I think that's a fair rule myself as well.DMG2 expends on that rule in telling that sometimes reminding the players about a game mechanic can disrupt the flow of the adventure. If that happens, don't tell. If the skill challenge is logical, a player should know the risks of making that skill check without the DM telling him so.
Other then that, I agree this is not the place to discuss skill challenge. The reason I mentioned it was because otherwise the OP would think that social skill challenges always stiffle RP even though in my experience that is not true.Likewise, if you've had your best RP moments in Skill Challenges disguised-as-Non-Skill-Challenges, then I think that's constructive as well.
But then you would be drawing the wrong conclusion. It still was very much a skill challenge for me as a DM since it did guide me in how to RP the reactions of the NPCs. Besides, my players were well aware it was a skill challenge at the time (and the fighter in question was actually the best at Streetwise of the group) ;)
Are you leaving the skill challenge discussion elsewhere or not?
Because if we're going to persist in defending skill challenges here (with the caveat that anyone who doesn't like them obviously just doesn't know how to run them or has sucky DMs), there's plenty of experience on the other side too.
"let's take it to another thread/not beat the dead horse here" shouldn't be an excuse to put in an a last word combined with an insult to every player and DM who disagrees with you. So is the topic dead or do you want to go on defending skill challenges?