Interrupting the BBEG to Start Combat

[geosapient]

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.

I'm in this boat. Not because I really enjoy hearing a monologue, but because if I can get whoever to monologue (whether BBEG or leader of a small orc band) it gives the rest of the group a chance to 'catch up' to me. Sometimes they get there in time. Sometimes not. When you're the scout and run into trouble every second counts.

I'm good at coercing conversation, though. Not because I want to hear people talk but I give the impression that I'm genuinely interested.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Gotta disagree here:

Yes, but that's not a cool visual.

It's not the same visual. It could be plenty cool, just as the skeletons rising could be plenty dull. For instance, imagine a protagonist racing across the room, as sarcophagi burst open and skeletons rise up around him, but he is swift and skilled and, because of his initiative, manages to reach the BBG before the skeletons are able to interpose. "Your minions were too slow--now it's just you and me." That could be cool.

In these situations, the writer is choosing the cool visual of the rising skeletons over the exactly game equivalent scenario of having the skeletons already risen by the time the PCs enter the room.

This is not true. A PC who scouted ahead would see skeletons that are already there. If the skeletons are rising up, out of the ground, they won't be seen by the scout. Similarly, if the skeletons are rising up around a reach weapon wielder with combat reflexes, there may (depending upon cover) be a lot of AoOs that the PC is entitled to. On the other hand, if the skeletons are already present in the room, they won't provoke AoOs by appearing. On a simpler level, if the room is already full of skeletons, smart PCs will position themselves tactically so as to control the space available to them. If the skeletons rise up at the end of the monologue, PCs are more likely to have positioned themselves so as to deal with a single threat.

Perhaps more to the point, it's a complete waste of the skeletons rising up scene if it is mechanically identical to the skeletons being there in the first place. A quick PC wizard with hold portal should be able to lock one in its sarcophagus. A PC with a reach weapon and combat reflexes should make a hailstorm of broken bones around him. A PC with good movment, good initiative, and tumble should be able to dodge past them or simply run past before they have a chance to get up. If it's a cool scene, the PCs should be a part of it and their abilities (combat reflexes, reach, etc) should function normally in the context of the scene.

Of course, skeletons who start off prone and in a coffin are not the same challenge as skeletons who start the combat standing in appropriate formations, fully armed and ready to act. So, the DM or writer should take that into consideration in writing the scene. With the judgement that it's a net positive for the PCs if the skeletons have to spend their first round extricating themselves from their circumstances and may provoke AoOs while doing so, for instance, you could judge that it is an EL modifier of -1 and use 1 1/2 times as many "rising up" skeletons as you would "ready" skeletons to achieve the same anticipated challenge. Or, you might say that it makes it MUCH easier and use twice as many skeletons to achieve the challenge that you want.

[/quote]Honestly, if action movie characters acted like PCs continually want to in D&D, action movies would be incredibly short and boring.[/QUOTE]

IME, PCs don't all want to act the same way in D&D. However, the more or less efficient model that we're discussing here has resulted in more than a few good action movies. Under Siege comes to mind, and I suspect that Air Force One mostly meshes with the approach too. IIRC, Apocalypto worked on a similar style too. (And, to the degree that it was an action movie, Unforgiven took the direct approach). Now, there are some good action movies that didn't take this approach (to the degree that it's an action movie, for instance, Willow did not take this approach and Star Wars didn't consistently take it (though Han Solo did)), so I don't think you have to take the efficient approach in order to make things exciting, but it's certainly possible to make exciting movies where the main characters are as direct and don't forgoe advantages for style's sake.

 

[Li Shenron]

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?

Please note that I'm not trying to punish my player or anything like that. If he doesn't want to listen to what the BBEG has to say then that is ok. The party may miss out on some useful information as a result of it but they can deal with that. It just seems a little unfair (to both the bad guys and the other PC's) that by my current rules he gets to automatically go first.

I had thought about the bad guys having readied actions as one possible solution. This would allow them to react to the PC's doing certain things. I am interested to see what other people can come up with though.

Olaf the Stout

I simply let everyone roll initiative, period.

If a player wants his PC to get a surprise round, being the first to say "I attack" is not enough in my opinion. That's what initiative is for, when both sides are aware of each other (no surprise round). The player chooses to attack, but his PC might not be quick and skillful enough to get to shoot before anybody else notices and reacts.

Picture a wild-western movie with a cowboys gun duel: the quickest to shoot is not necessarily the quickest to draw

Eventually, in a scenario where the foe has no reasons to think he's going to be attacked, then a surprise round can be granted (but for example a Sense Motive check to the foe to avoid being surprised would be fair), but not otherwise.

 

[Darklone]

Just have the BBEG ready an action to lightning bolt (or equiv) first person to interrupt monologue
...

Does not matter, he can't ready outside of combat. As most others have already said: Everyone is aware of each other, as soon as someone starts to fight it's time to roll initiative.

The only exception would be if someone is hiding somewhere and he's not been noticed yet.

Somehow this reminds me of the movie "The gamers"...

 

[Umbran]

"Interupting Player" does not equal "Player using Bluff skill".

No, but shouldn't the player be told the option is available? A good old, "Sure, you can just attack - but everybody gets to roll initiative, and he might win. If you want to catch him by surprise, I'm going to need you to roll a Bluff, opposed by his Sense Motive..."

BTW, how would a Slight of Hand check change initiative rolls or surprise rounds?

Slight of Hand might draw a weapon, which might save an action after combat begins. Or it might distract the BBEG, causing him to have a penalized Spot check, but other than that?

The whole reason everyone in this situation normally just gets to roll initiative is that they are aware of and can see what each other is doing. So, clearly making sure the BBEG is not aware ought to be part of that - and Slight of Hand is all about keeping other people unaware of what you're actually doing...

There are multiple possibilities, depending on the details of the situation. F'rex: if the character didn't have their weapons ready, I'd call for a Slight of Hand to do it surreptitously, and then a Bluff/Feint to let them get a shot in before the initiative rolls. This, of course, assumes they are within striking distance before the rolls...

 

[Chiaroscuro23]

Hmmn, this seems to be a campaign style issue masquerading as a rules question.

In every case where "genre" bumps up against "realism" you need a way to decide which one will rule the day. Deciding that is a "social contract" issue, since all the people at the table need to be on the same page about it. You can't win an argument by saying either one should triumph due to its general superiority unless others agree on that point; there's no inherent value to realism, only players that value it.


In addition to deciding who gets initiative, there's the issue in D&D that pre-buffing is clearly the superior strategy, so you can't allow the talking-to-BBEG period to eat into your buff spells (or his!) if you want to be effective (and you had a chance to cast before the encounter). The "time ceases during the monologue" rule gets around that problem nicely, if preserving the monologue is something you want to accomplish in your game. But it's clearly violative of "realism" and you have to accept that up front.

 

[SteveC]

In every case where "genre" bumps up against "realism" you need a way to decide which one will rule the day. Deciding that is a "social contract" issue, since all the people at the table need to be on the same page about it. You can't win an argument by saying either one should triumph due to its general superiority unless others agree on that point; there's no inherent value to realism, only players that value it.


In addition to deciding who gets initiative, there's the issue in D&D that pre-buffing is clearly the superior strategy, so you can't allow the talking-to-BBEG period to eat into your buff spells (or his!) if you want to be effective (and you had a chance to cast before the encounter). The "time ceases during the monologue" rule gets around that problem nicely, if preserving the monologue is something you want to accomplish in your game. But it's clearly violative of "realism" and you have to accept that up front.

These are some very good points. Whenever I'm running a game, I sit down with the players and talk about rules issues with them, but I'll also talk about themes and table rules as well. That way, I can hopefully eliminate as many of these problems as possible.

Now having the villain monologue is something that's in genre for a lot of campaign styles, but certainly not all of them. I think if a GM tried to say "well how long did that monologue take? Mark that many rounds off of your buff spells," he would see an end to the practice almost immediately, which would be a waste, since the monologue is that perfect place for the villain to tell you what his evil plans are, after all. As far as I'm concerned the genre conventions and table rules you have should trump realism all day long, but I also know that you need to get player buy-in for this to work. If the players want a different kind of game, you're just swimming against the current to argue with them.

 

[werk]

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.

I would simply roll initiative. It's not like the BBEG doesn't know they are there, or isn't watching them during his speech. THere isn't any chance of a surprise round or anything like that.

Definitely don't reward this behavior by allowing him what he wants...like you are currently.

 

[werk]

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.

Wrong + Wrong = ? (the answer is not Right)

 

[dogoftheunderworld]

I'm mostly with the "everyone roles for initiative" crowd; however, I would allow a character to try and gain an advantage during a monologue by bluffing/move silently/etc.

Similar to Mr. Incredible getting off a suprise attack while the villian is monologueing [sp ]. Once the PC has bluffed the villian and made a hide/move silent roll, they have effectively made the villian "un-aware" of their position (or at least intentions).

I would make the DCs high enough to ensure that it would be a difficult proposition, at best.