Judging a Chili Cook Off

[Rechan]

This is going to sound a little odd. I am trying to write an adventure for a publication, but I'm not sure how to carry through with this.

Here is the situation: The PCs are the judges of 3 contestants. I am not going to specify the circumstances of the competition, but it's the PCs deciding the "best" or "most appropriate" NPC.

Rather than making the challenge "How do the contestants perform, and thus the PCs choose the one who rolls the highest/has the highest stat", I'd like to set up some sort of mechanic situation where the PCs do the rolling, or are in charge of the contest, rather than have the NPCs compete mechanically against one another.

This is for a contest such as a cook-off, or a beauty contest, or deciding "Which of the three has done better deeds, deserving a heroic title"?

Before you ask, "Why are the NPCs the focus, not the PCs", because it's a situation that will have repercussions for the PCs depending on which person they pick. As well, it's a spring-board for future adventure and encounters.

Sidenote One possibility that should be considered is if a PC wants to jump in and say, "I am the best [x]", so I think the mechanical situation should be able to account for the other PCs weighing in on their comrad.

 

[Tale]

"Which of the three has done better deeds, deserving a heroic title"?

This one doesn't require any rolling. Get your creative storytelling on.

 

[Rechan]

This one doesn't require any rolling. Get your creative storytelling on.

In this case though, it would be me giving the creative storytelling, and the PCs just responding. That's not really engaging, mechanically.

Also, this isn't the situation. I'm just giving another example of 'here is some objective thing, which is not mechanically based; decide which one you like better'.

 

[Tale]

The only way I can see for something feasible like this is if it's a riddle contest.
Or if your chili contest involves them having to make rolls to avoid burning their mouths.
Which could be quite fun, come to think of it.
The PC who passes the roll is like "Good chili! Nicely spiced!"
The PC who fails is like "I WANT THIS MAN ARRESTED FOR TRYING TO POISON ME! HELP, I NEED A CLERIC!"

 

[WalterKovacs]

The big things would be perception and insight perhaps allowing for a few special things [with perhaps a skill relating to the activity as well]. The basic idea being that the PCs might be able to use their skills to figure out things other people might notice ... also interaction skills [diplomacy mostly, but also bluff] could let them get to know the contestants later. Having the PCs possibly motivated to have a "favorite" going into the competition, or maybe catching one of the contestants cheating, etc ... basically letting them come to a decision as to who to vote for but one where they have to make it so that it's hard to make a decision where they isn't some conflict of interest or other moral struggle [i.e. if someone cheated, but wasn't caught, do you give them the prize because as far as the audience knows, they "should" win]

 

[Rechan]

There won't really be any cheating involved, and the only audience is the PCs, really. But the insight/perception, I suppose, could suffice.

 

[Tale]

Screw "cheating!" Let their be an attempt to kill the judges. Poisoned chili! And they take checks to endure and detect the poison. Otherwise, heck, they could make the guy trying to kill them the winner!

 

[ppaladin123]

How do you define success in this scenario?

1.Maybe the PCs have a favorite they would like to see win but they have to convince other NPC judges?

2. Maybe there is a correct choice, an NPC who should win based on some standard. The PCs are actually being evaluated as well. How wise are they? Can they choose the correct candidate?

3.Maybe the contest is like American Idol...the judges give their reviews but the public makes the decision. In this case, the challenge is convincing the spectators. There could even be judges that argue in the opposite direction. It would be a court case of sorts.

 

[Rechan]

How do you define success in this scenario?

I don't. The situation is a take on the three greek goddesses who asked Paris which of them is the most beautiful. Because when Paris chose Aphrodite, and Aphrodite rewarded him with Helen, this sparked the Trojan war.

It is literally "PCs walk down a road. They are stopped by 3 people, who ask the PCs to settle a disagreement: who among them is the best x".

I just want to present a more interesting/engaging mechanism for the PCs to decide than saying "Eenie Meanie Minee Mo".

After they make their decision, the meat of the situation comes to bare. They receive a benefit depending on who they choose, and which person they chose determines the challenges they have to deal with during the later encounters.

 

[WalterKovacs]

In that case, some sort of interactions with the characters should give the players a bit of a hint at what the consequences are to some extent, based on not just perception and insight, but perhaps in interacting with the competitors.

Allowing the players a chance to get a tease of what's behind each door so to speak gives them a chance to pick the direction they want to go in the campaign.

But in general to avoid an arbitrary decision you need to give the characters a reason to want to pick someone over the rest, but likely for different PCs to have different "favorite" NPCs, so the interest becomes the PCs/players trying to convince each other to come to a consensus for the judging. Or have all the NPCs provide a compelling, but different, reason the PCs should vote for them.