[Basic] Skill of the week: Cooking

[Turhan's Bey Company]

This is one of those rare occasions on which I can mention competitive cooking rules and have it be relevant to the conversation.

[Xplo]

Originally Posted by Anders

Could you use it as an adjunct to Poisons, disguising the taste?

Ordinarily, I would expect a skilled poisoner who doesn't generally cook to know what type of meal or spice can best hide the taste of a poison, if only so that he can choose an appropriate poison for the king's meal, or suggest an appropriate dish to the kitchen staff. I would not expect a chef to have any idea what kind of meal or spice would best hide a particular poison, except by coincidence (i.e. Poisons at default). So I would say that this is properly an application of Poisons, not Cooking.

In some situations - perhaps a farce, where the poisoner is inept, but in cahoots with the chef, who has to imagine how to best hide the flavor of something he dare not taste? - the GM might want to allow Cooking as a prerequisite or complimentary skill to using Poisons.

[fredtheobviouspseudonym]

Rosa Lewis, the original for the BBC "Duchess of Duke Street," (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Lewis) allegedly had a large number of contacts with various VIPs of the era for her cooking abilities.

I'd say Cooking is less rare than ____ said; I would include making tasty, morale-restoring (at least in part) meals which don't poison the players or other troops is a useful talent.

IIRC it was "Warriors of the Rising Sun" that mentioned the importance of the Russian field kitchens in holding together the repeatedly-defeated troops in the Russo-Japanese war; also the value of similar kitchens in maintaining morale & cohesion on the Eastern Front in WW Two. See also the role of the kitchens & cooks in the Ottoman army from, say, the early 15th to the early 20th centuries.

I'd give field cookery a possible specialization. It's quite a different challenge to cook something palatable using indifferent ("Here's a rodent. Now cook it") ingredients over an open fire vs. in a well-equipped kitchen with stuff more or less healthy (depending on era & FDA activities).

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Xplo

Ordinarily, I would expect a skilled poisoner who doesn't generally cook to know what type of meal or spice can best hide the taste of a poison, if only so that he can choose an appropriate poison for the king's meal, or suggest an appropriate dish to the kitchen staff. I would not expect a chef to have any idea what kind of meal or spice would best hide a particular poison, except by coincidence (i.e. Poisons at default). So I would say that this is properly an application of Poisons, not Cooking.

In some situations - perhaps a farce, where the poisoner is inept, but in cahoots with the chef, who has to imagine how to best hide the flavor of something he dare not taste? - the GM might want to allow Cooking as a prerequisite or complimentary skill to using Poisons.

A cook would know how to hid a poison if they knew its flavor profile. Like hiding overly sweet, bitter, sour, etc. with ingredients likely to overwhelm.
Ethylene glycol in candy, cyanide in almond brittle, nightshade in bitter coffee...

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

A very important specialization would be Candy Making. It requires very careful temperature control, so before thermometers and precise burners took significant practice and training.

My grandmother had a candy shop for a few years. Hand crafted candy is beyond amazing. She made flavored marshmallows. (Homer Simpson drooling - ahhhhhhhrrgh.)

There is a case in Renaissance Italy about a guy who was head of a candy making family sueing the guild because he blamed them for the death of his wife and business partner I forget why. There was a carefully itemized list for damages ending incongruously with "and the loss of her beloved companionship such-and-such money". What the guy really meant of course was,"I'm darn mad and I'm gonna get you any way I can." But unfortunately that doesn't translate into legalese.

[Xplo]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

A cook would know how to hid a poison if they knew its flavor profile. Like hiding overly sweet, bitter, sour, etc. with ingredients likely to overwhelm.
Ethylene glycol in candy, cyanide in almond brittle, nightshade in bitter coffee...

Knowing the flavor profile of a poison without any training in poisons is one of those things that one would attempt to do with a default roll. If the GM feels that the poison is sufficiently popular that anyone might be familiar with it, he could offer a bonus to the roll or (in the interest of moving the plot or eliminating nuisance rolling) simply declare that the chef knows the answer.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

There is a case in Renaissance Italy about a guy who was head of a candy making family sueing the guild because he blamed them for the death of his wife and business partner I forget why. There was a carefully itemized list for damages ending incongruously with "and the loss of her beloved companionship such-and-such money". What the guy really meant of course was,"I'm darn mad and I'm gonna get you any way I can." But unfortunately that doesn't translate into legalese.

I believe the technical legal term for that last item used to be "loss of consortium." It was considered a perfectly legitimate standing to sue.

Bill Stoddard

[Rasputin]

I once had players use Cooking in place of a reaction roll when trying to get past a guard. The guard, thinking they were help, asked the PCs to make him a sandwich, and one of the PCs had Cooking-13. Made the roll by 6 or 7. For the rest of the campaign, we'd periodically imitate Jules Winnfield: "Mmmm, that is a tasty sandwich!"

[RGTraynor]

Originally Posted by whswhs

I believe the technical legal term for that last item used to be "loss of consortium." It was considered a perfectly legitimate standing to sue.

No "used to be" about it; still is. These days, in America, it's often code for "And now we can't have sex five times a week any more since your negligence caused my husband to become a quadriplegic," but the broader meaning still applies.

As to the OP, one of the characters in my initial restart group in 2003 decided that she'd be an innkeeper running the family business after the untimely death of her mother, and her Cooking-15 just backed up the boast that the inn had the best stew in the Old City. So ... instant crash space for the party. That character is now a princess, and the most powerful wizard in the campaign's history, but she still keeps a small tavern on her estate, by the highroad, and tries to put in an evening of tending bar once a week ... if she's not out saving the world or governing the empire's capital city.

[simply Nathan]

I wanted to build my pre-gen DF Innkeeper (who knew how to cook) with several instances of the Perk found on the Servant henchman lens so that he could make meals out of monsters. I could only afford one.

Successful roll = free rations equal to the monster's ST.