Why Villainous Rants?

[Terwox]

From a "roleplaying" perspective, I've been mocked as being a roll-player before because I'd have my character try to cut speeches off and charge.

Had a DM who just froze time while his NPCs were ranting.

I think just charging isn't really necessarily out of line... he's a villian, he hates you, you hate him, and we're supposed to listen to them mock us while he's standing right there, ready to be slain, ripe for the slaughter?

nope! I charge him. I wouldn't be roleplaying some of my characters if I -didn't- charge -- is somebody really roleplaying a barbarian if they DON'T charge a guy who is mocking them?

Now, villianous rants while the villain is somehow unreachable... this is hard to do in D&D... lots of spells to foil any barriers the villian would set up.

On the other hand, in games I've DM'd, and a few I've played in, there's been a lot of talking before, and mid-fight. Not much for the rant of evil, though... just lots of insults and yelling thrown about.

I just don't want to let it turn into dragonball z. Five minutes of fighting after three episodes of taunting. no thanks!

I dunno, I'm also, as a DM, just not a very good ranter, and I've never really played under anybody who did classic evil rants terribly well. So I dunno!

 

[drunkmoogle]

If you don't expect the battle to end quickly, it's pretty easy to just do the speech during battle. One or two lines during the BBEG's turn, maybe a few in response to some actions, and give him dying words when he hits negatives or is struck a mortal wound (read: fudge HP; tell players he's at -9 ).

They'll probably listen to him say his last words... because they want closure to end a session. Besides, that's the best time to point out the irony of their futility and...

 

[RangerWickett]

I did one time turn that cliche on its head. The party teleported into the villain's sanctum, ready to try to force him into admitting he had betrayed them. The villain say them, realized the jig was up, and charged in. Admittedly, he was a 20th level fighter, with full on whirlwind attacks, improved crit razorburst longsword, and tons of defensive items, so even after jumping into the middle of the 13th-level party he wasn't really afraid of them taking him down.

But he only had a 14 Strength.

And the party's barbarian really hated him.

And she had improved grapple.

Several poor rolls on his part later, he was down to Wound Points, and willing to try to talk. At that point, though, the party wasn't interested in listening.

But they had been willing beforehand. I probably should've taken advantage of the situation, because it ended up being the last session. At least this villain, though, the party had met with multiple times before.

The situation I was sort of miffed about from my first post involved the party finally coming upon a woman whom they had only heard stories about before.

Anyway, for future games, I'll plan better. If I'm interested in having a rant, or a mocking, or a conversation, I'll set things up so that people have a reason not to rush into a fight. And, yeah, I'll use the Rapier Wit feat, so that people have a reason to talk during combat.

 

[s/LaSH]

Let's put it this way:

If I, the DM, have come up with a splendiferous evil plot that makes me want to cackle (and you just know when you have), I want to tell someone about it. Preferably someone who isn't in the game I'm running.

Why should a villain, whose emotions are strong enough to actually send them out into the world in search of their goals instead of sitting around a table once a week, not be subject to the same impulses? They're only human, and (especially if they're a dark lord of the undead hordes, who are bad listeners) they need someone to emote with on a subconscious level. Call it villainous validation.

Because I'm so cool, I just have to share it. Otherwise I'm not cool, I'm just someone doing something that nobody cares about...

 

[Trickstergod]

"I did it 35 minutes ago."

Ahh, the wonders of villain speeches - when done right.

Honestly, they're good - when they make sense. Generally, I think a show of power followed by a speech is one of the better ways to get the players to listen. Hit them with something hard, then show that the villain is willing to talk. Let the players know that he isn't fooling around, and he's in a position of power, and I've found that, at least when the show of force is strong enough, they'll listen. Show them that he's perfectly willing to fight - but that the PC's dont' have to. You need to be quick on the attack, and quicker on the "Let's talk" line that grabs them immediately afterwards, but part of what makes the PC's jump to kill the villain right away is that they hope to get the jump on him, some surprise, be able to move in to flank, dispel - whatever.

Don't afford them that opportunity. Show that the villain's already ready to kick their sorry behinds left and right and that they're not going to get any advantage by not listening to him. I don't really consider conversation something that would prevent someone from readying their action for when things hit the fan, so the PC's moving in to attack mid-speech isn't necessarily going to catch him unawares. Swat the PC's once, say the villain is ready to talk. Swat them again if they persist, say he's willing to talk. If they're hit hard enough, they might listen - particularly as being able to rest a little (and possibly sneak in a little healing or the like) gives them an ability to recover from the intermittent hammer blows.

I try to put my villains in a position of power that is very, very clear to the PC's if I intend on them chatting much in any aspect. Otherwise, if the PC's know who to gun for, they probably will - even if it might mean them losing out on some integral knowledge. Especially if the PC's have speak with dead or similar spells. Then they figure they can just get what they need at a safer time - which isn't always an inappropriate guess.

 

[SSquirrel]

Oh, it's not that my players don't roleplay. When they're with allies, or just random folk, they love being in character, causing trouble, solving trouble, getting to know folks, cracking jokes in character, and thinking up ingenious ways to thwart villainous schemes. But, and it's the oddest thing, the moment they get within thwacking distance of the villains, all that turns off, and they just want to kill. I really don't understand it.

I really think I ought to institute some sort of Feng Shui-esque 'cool points,' or something. Like, if you do a good job taunting the villain, you get to make any roll a 20 during the course of the fight.

Our group seems to enjoy villainous speeches so long as we get to off teh bugger afterwards heh. My new group will most likely enjoy them as they've been doing a wonderful job of dragging things out with roleplaying, making short adventures last multiple sessions heh.

On the cool point aspect, an old Vampire ST did something like that...only we called it "Oh S%#^" points for doing something COMPLETELY stupid and suicidal, but surviving anyway. Like when I created a black hole (which sent us all 200 years into teh future instead of killing us) or another vamp fired her LAW rocket in a small room....you know...when vamps are AFRAID of fire and teh explosion would be quite nasty....she was near the door luckily. Made for a messy sort of competition in group to do retarded things and live....which brought some new blood into teh group as well *grin*

Hagen

 

[Jolly Giant]

the PC barbarian wanted to attack. ... It was a blast when the NPC Mind Flayer won initiative

The way we do it in our group, is that if one guy tries to actually do something while everyone else is standing round throwing dramatic speeches, then that guy gets at least one action BEFORE we roll for initiative. The way I see it, he basically took the initiative while the BBEG was shooting his mouth of.

Personally, I find the "villainous speech" to be among the most horribly overused clichès in modern fiction. IMHO it's also one of the silliest!

 

[drnuncheon]

The speech you talk about is common or used more often in a game where roleplaying dominates the game versus roll playing. Your poor friend doesn't get it.

Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a minute. You've just fought your way through ten levels of the evil wizard's tower, hacking through hordes of minions, bypassing countless fiendish traps, to finally face your enemy. He turns, sees you entering his throne room, and draws a breath...

"...that sucker's gonna cast a spell. Waste him."

That's just as valid roleplaying - perhaps even more so - than "Hey, let's hear what this guy has to say before killing him. Sure, he might magically enslave us or teleport away or call up his best balor buddy, but we'll take that chance so he gets his time to gloat."

Don't mix up 'roleplaying' with 'genre simulation' - they are not always the same, and they can be at odds - especially if the DM and players are not in agreement on the genre.

No, if you want to give the villain a chance to gloat, give the characters a reason to listen to him. Maybe he's the only one that knows where the Dingus of Power is, or where his minions took the captured princess. Maybe he's an old friend who betrayed the party and they want to know why. Maybe they need to know the nature of the spell he cast before they can break it. Then, you'll get your chance, and the players will be rankled by the fact that they can't just kill him, but they'll let him do it - and hit him all the harder when they can.

J