Why Villainous Rants?

[dreaded_beast]

Also, if you are going for a little bit of verisimilitude in a game, NO villain would waste time mouthing off against his enemy. He'd beat the crap out of them first or kill them, and THEN, in a video tape, from a thousand miles away, he'd make his speech.

Exactly the point I was trying to make earlier, but you said it much more eloquently!

I remember there were many times, as a player, when my group would confront the BBEG and then he would begin to "rant". However, he never said anything useful, other than to verbally abuse us or make us feel like idiots. Sometimes, I wondered if it was the BBEG talking or really the DM, hehe. I'm half-serious there.

Anyways, I would always ask the DM, "This is the part where the BBEG reveals his plot and all his secrets right?" Nope. Just more verbal abuse.

I like BBEG rants, especially the ones where the BBEG reveals his "master plan" and I also enjoy verbal sparring, especially the "cinematic" variety that is so very often shown on TV and in the movies.

However, verbal abuse starts to get old when the DM is so much better than you at coming up with "witty come backs" that it no longer becomes enjoyable but players start taking it personally. I think my old DM enjoyed the whole "ranting" thing a little too much, hehe.

 

[Numion]

I use Cinematic Breaks in my game. When encountering the bad guy, there's a mandatory Cinematic Break, during which no action other than speaking happens. During the break time stops for spell durations and other game effects, and no other actions can be done than speaking.

It's usually enough for the BBEG to tell his plan, for PCs to requip how stupid the plan is and point out how it could've been done easier, and for general insults.

 

[diaglo]

No, Mister Bond. I expect you to die.













really, there are few reasons to do it:

1. he feels that none of his underlings are worthy. and the PCs have proven they are the only ones he feels are upto his caliber

2. he feels the PCs are weak and is just flaunting his power

3. he has spent so much effort in getting his plans to progress and the PCs are stopping them or costing him too much.

4. he has time to kill

5. he is the DMs previous PC

 

[RangerWickett]

I don't recall that specifically, but in Slayers d20 (just out) there is a psychological combat section. You can actually cause embarassment damage, and they have rules for conditions like "mortified" just like the core rules do for "stunned" and "dazed."

In ENMag issue 4, we had an article called Rapier Wit. Basically, it was rules to let you use Bluff, Diplomacy, and Intimidate to either make your opponent get penalties to AC, penalties to attack rolls, or for you to get bonus to damage. Basically, you say something, make opposed checks, and if you win, they get a penalty. Normally it's a move action, but with a feat you can do it once a round as a free action.

I think I'll just give the feat to all my PCs and NPCs for free in my next game. And by the way, the next game takes place in the aftermath of my last game, and will involve the new PCs trying to figure out why the world's going to pieces. Of course, this wouldn't be a problem if the last group of PCs had let the villain reveal her master plan. Oh well.

 

[Faraer]

Ryan,

You are right to want the speeches, and the players are wrong to scorn them. They're failing to play in the world of your campaign, just as they would be if their characters started spontaneously levitating.

I've only ever had one player who tried to attack a villain when he was making his speech. I just didn't let him: absolutely basic genre conventions like that are more important than one instance of player freedom.

(And a story where the hero loses is not a story.)

 

[RangerWickett]

(And a story where the hero loses is not a story.)

Well, this I'll disagree with. Tragedy is just as moving as comedy, if done properly. Though the hero may fail or die, others can learn. And often, a story can end better with sacrifice. Some heroes have a goal that, once reached, will leave any life thereafter empty. True, a true hero could go on, but for some stories, a hero's death for the sake of victory is more gratifying.

Like on a recent television finale.

 

[Faraer]

There has to be a spiritual victory, which can certainly be achieved with physical defeat, as in the Christ story.

 

[LoneWolf23]

Here's an idea - Look up the Masters of Villainous Rants: Bond Villains and Comic Book Supervillains. They both do Villainous Rants, but both of them do them only when they have the upper hand.

Bond Villains, for exemple, only go into their Rants when Bond is brought before them, captive and surrounded by a hundred or so armed guards, so they can gloat at him before killing him. Goldfinger only exposed his plan when Bond was tied to a table with a laser coming up to slice him in two, after all.

Supervillains also do this, but somethings simply manage to overpower their heroic opponents, trounce them soundly, then leave them groaning on the ground or trap them and gloat about their Brilliant Master Plan.

So take a page from their playbook: Have your villains surrounded by an army of minions to keep the heroes in check while he rants, or have them be so powerful they can overpower the heroes. Then, while he rants, they can work out a plan to outsmart him...

Another option is the Supervillain who blabs as he fights, where he fights the heroes on an equal or superior footing while gloating and ranting.. Here, the important part is to know what your PCs can do and give the Villain abilities which match, but don't necessarily over-power the PCs' abilities, making the fight challenging, but not unfair to the players.

 

[Planesdragon]

But I do wonder, why do we want villainous speeches, and why won't many players let us have them? I mean, we all see them in movies. The players ought to know that I, as a GM, am not going to use the speech as a way to hurt them.

It seems like you're trying to force something to happen without reason for it.

The best dramatic speaches are when the "villian" is actually someone known to the party. And the best way to get them, IMO, is for the PCs to roleplay with the villian.

IMO, if you want more dramatic ways to defeat villians, give full XP if they manage to talk the guy into not doing what he was going to do. Take a cue from Storyteller, and USE those noncombat skills et al for roleplaying's sake.

 

[rogueattorney]

No, Mister Bond. I expect you to die.

Damn you Diaglo! _I_ wanted to make the first Bond reference!

I don't like villain speeches. They're a bad cliche from bad films and comic books, made by authors who either didn't think the audience was smart enough to pick up on the plot, or had a plot so convoluted the only way it made any sense was if the instigator took 5 minutes to explain it.

If my players haven't figured it out by the time they've reached the big bad guy, they just not going to figure it out. And, personally, I'm more of a fan of the old Lovecraft and Howard stories where many of the mysterious aspects of the stories were never fully explained. Showing the players the man behind the curtain takes away a lot of the mystery and magic.

R.A.