Interrupting the BBEG to Start Combat

[Sejs]

Have the BBEG take the Improved Monologue feat.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

The BBEG speech is a staple of the genre, albeit unfortunately one that doesn't stand up to too much IG logic--after all, once the PCs have come upon the BBEG, their logical next step would be to attack immediately before he has time to summon guards, activate traps or otherwise decrease their chances of success. After all, they can (theoretically) always question him later. If a BBEG has the actual power to force all of the PCs to stand there passively while he gives a speech, he's probably too tough to fight.

But, it's a staple of the genre, so let's try to make it work.

You need to look at how you are incentivizing the players. Your current system gives an incentive for a player to interrupt the BBEG speech, and a pretty large one at that. If your desire is to actually include BBEG speeches in your game, this is a mistake. (Beyond that, it's an incentive found nowhere in the rules, and I'm a little perplexed as to why you would make up a house rule to encourage behavior you don't want to happen.)

You next need to look at whether or not you have been giving other incentives to interrupt. For example, in the past, have players been punished for sitting there patiently listening to the speech by having the BBEG summon guards, activate traps or set up some magic spell/device at the end of his speech? If so, then you're training your players in exactly the opposite direction of what you claim you want.

Here's the easy solution: Interrupting the BBEG causes combat to start, with normal initiative being rolled. The player who chooses to interrupt gets no special benefit (the IG explanation for why this is the case is that, like a gunslinger in a shoot-out, whoever rolled higher than the person trying to interrupt saw the putative interrupter start to move and beat him to the draw).

You then explain to the players: "Okay, guys. If you don't let the BBEG talk, we all roll initiative and fight. If you do let him finish talking, we all roll initiative and fight. There is no benefit to not listening to the boxed text, and I will not punish your characters for doing so."

(As a final issue, you should probably examine your BBEG speeches. Sometimes, the reason why players interrupt is that they're tired of sitting around listening to the GM talk to himself. As the players are indicating by their interruption that they think that sitting around listening to your speech is a waste of time, you should probably examine the speeches to see if they're right.)

At that point, if your players are still interrupting your BBEG speeches, then either you need new players or you need to join an amateur theater troupe to get the urge to soliloquize out of your system.

It wasn't so much a house rule that I made up as a rule I made up to keep the situation moving at the time. It happened in 2 consecutive sessions. I used the same rule the second time around just to be consistent as we hadn't had a chance to discuss the situation in between the 2 sessions.

You do bring up a good arguement about the BBEG (or whoever) reacting to the first person's movement and beating them to the draw so to speak. I think I'll just tell everyone to roll initiative once the first person announces that they want to do something that will effectively initiate combat.

As for why the player interrupted the BBEG's speech in the first place, I think it was due to a couple of things. Firstly his PC isn't really one to beat around the bush. The PC likes to get to the point of things very quickly (often with the aid of pointy things!). Secondly I think that the player felt as though the BBEG wasn't really going to add anything else of value and took it as a sign from me for someone to start the combat. Getting the benefits of attacking first might have had something to do with it but I don't think that was the main reason for it.

Let me also just add that the player of the PC who is interrupting is very good at playing his character. He isn't interrupting the bad guys just purely for the mechanical benefits. He is doing it as it is generally what his character does in the situation. If I really wanted to I could ask the player simply to hold off and let him finish and he would be mature enough to agree to it. However I don't really want to do that. I would rather that he kept in character. If attacking first and asking questions later causes problems for the party then that's something that they'll have to deal with.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Olaf the Stout]

In a world where just a few syllables can kill someone and worse, I don't expect PCs to let evil people be able to speak any longer than they have to. Even if the BBEG does not plan to punctuate his last sentence with a Power Word, every moment that passes while a villain is speaking is a moment his reinforcements may arrive.

Initiative should be rolled when the 2 sides meet. Then one sided turns the other into meat. The BBEG should be busy giving coded orders to his minions, not monologing.

If the game uses “Action Points” or “Hero points” for the players to commit deeds of daring-do and / or heroic survive then docking them one of those points for not playing in genre seems appropriate to me.

I generally like to avoid rolling initiative until the last possible moment before combat erupts. I find that when you ask for initiative as soon as the party encounters something they immediately assume it is something that must be attacked so the chances of a non-combat resolution are reduced.

Is it just me that has experienced this or is it a common thing?

Olaf the Stout

 

[Hedgemage]

Monologuing is a sacred event in every game I've played. Time stops, the speech is made, and then we roll up initiative.
Of course, if your villans are consistently talking for five minutes before combat, you may want to be a bit more brief.

 

[Jarrod]

I'm with the "let the BBEG finish" group.

When someone (either side) initiates combat, everyone rolls initiative and the highest one goes first. It doesn't matter who jumped first - the highest initiative saw them twitch and went first. There's also no surprise round, since everyone was aware of everyone else. Just a lot of tense staring, then someone going for their sword.

 

[Ciaran]

Just remember that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you implement this rule, you can and should have a (hidden) BBEG interrupt a talking PC to automatically act at the start of the initiative order.

 

[BSF]

Twice now in my game one of the PC's has interrupted a BBEG talking to start combat. After discussing it with the players I ruled that everyone but the interrupting PC rolls initiative and his PC then goes just before the highest initiative. It has worked ok but I'm not entirely happy with this solution.

How have you dealt with this situation?

Assuming both sides are aware of each other, making any move that could be construed as aggressive immediately drops the game into initiative. I let the players tell me when they want to begin. If they are speaking and make a move/action that seems like it could be aggressive, then the adversaries begin initiative.

Sometimes you go to draw and the other guy is faster. Just because a PC wants to interrupt a monologue does not mean the PC gains any advantage.

Now, if the PCs were intentionally trying to engage in conversation and draw the adversaries into being distracted, I could go for that. Maybe some bluff/sense motive checks. Maybe hide checks. Depends on the nature of what they are trying to do.

It doesn't come up often with BBEGs. It is more often an issue with the neutral parties that the group encounters in various places. The opportunity to turn somebody into a potential ally, or enemy, has caused much more consternation than dealing with the BBEG.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

There's always time for villain monologues and witty banter during combat.

Exactly. Just hand-wave it.

 

[Nifft]

Genre clash. I'm trying to resolve it IMC, but having some trouble.

Genre 1 ("Gentleman-at-Arms"): the PCs have come to defeat the BBEG, possibly bring him back for some justice, maybe just take his +1 MacGuffin. It's in the name of glory, justice, and other chivalric things that don't slink, scuttle or make Move Silently checks.
- Opening speech and trash talking
- Opening moves should be low-level, escalation ensues building dramatic tension
- Possible closing speech to resolve lingering mystery ("... and I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for those meddling halflings!")

Genre 2 ("Commando Strike"): the PCs have come to destroy the BBEG by any means necessary. Their foe is an implacable, irredeemable evil that must be destroyed utterly. No quarter is asked or given. It's in the name of revenge or the survival of humanity.
- Stealth, misdirection and unfair tactics on both sides
- Opening attacks are always strongest possible
- Destruction of foe precludes idle chatter -- expect silence and the like.


Thoughts on how to unambiguously separate these two, so no-one is confused about what the encounter is going to be, while allowing both to fluidly exist in game?

Thanks, -- N

 

[Nifft]

Assuming both sides are aware of each other, making any move that could be construed as aggressive immediately drops the game into initiative. [...] Sometimes you go to draw and the other guy is faster. Just because a PC wants to interrupt a monologue does not mean the PC gains any advantage.

Yeah. Rules-as-written, neither party should get a surprise round, or any particular advantage to initiating aggression. Both sides roll for initiative, and act in order.

-- N