Hell, they don't even have the upper hand! He takes out both Rorschach and Nite Owl in a few moves, pinning Rorschach with a fork and breaking Nite Owl's portable laser beam, *then* he monologues, having effectively established how he completely outclasses them both. If it happened differently in the movie, my bad. I only read the graphic novel. But it still shows a monologue done right; the good guys want the information, and they can't just jump him before he can finish talking.

Don't forget that _Watchmen_ was a deconstruction of superhero stories, though. A deconstruction is not inherently better than the genre it is commenting on, it is simply, well, a commentary. Many of the tropes a deconstruction takes apart, including this one, have their narrative and meta-narrative reasons for existing; in this case, often because they're _fun._ The lesson I'd advise people take here is to not blindly include tropes just because they're what's "supposed" to happen OR subvert them just because it's unexpected, but use or subvert them purposefully. The reasons can come from the logic of the story itself, but they can also come because you're trying to set a certain tone, create a certain theme, or trying to emulate a certain genre. Tropes are not bad. Or good.

A unique take on the idea of 'a captive audience'! 🤣

Uh I like that a lot. You can't have an ever more upper hand than that.

How would that work? The lich would still just be speaking to a dead body. Speak with Dead doesn't do anything to restore consciousness or awareness to the soul that once inhabited the body. It doesn't actually communicate with the person from beyond the grave. It only animates the body and allows it to answer questions about things the creature knew in life.

absolute chad move

Yeah. But at Syndrome had the hero contained, he just lost his focus there.

That's why I just build a world, and the players exist in it. Less concern with plans going off the rails.

​@@thomasbecker9676 Please allow me to reiterate, "AMEN, brother"!

so, so true, i rember rewritting one campagin three times, after the players went off on several plot threads they created out of nothing lol

No battle plan ever survived the first contact with the enemy, no plot survived the first contact with the players.

@@0x777 no plot survived the first contact with the players. Sounds like the time my DM had an emissary from the "bad guys" tell the group they had our scout and would kill him if we didn't surrender. He planned for everything - except me. My response? "Go ahead kill him, he is just cannon fodder". Everyone was in such shock that only I could function and drove everyone on and it was a cake walk rescuing the scout as the DM had a hard time getting past "CANNON FODDER?!" I kept telling the scout player to shut up as he couldn't say anything as his character wasn't present, then his character couldn't talk as he was still tied and gagged and finally that he couldn't because he didn't know what had been said to be able to talk about it. The scout was ever after known as "Cannon Fodder".

Exactly, if it's the BBEG's turn int he initiative order, they can't interrupt. ;)

Yes this, I have 2.5 pages of dialogue written for Strand but only 2 or 3 lines written before the players can respond/react. The rest are designed to be responses to what the players say back or when he downs a player.

I do that too ^~^

I know in the moment the players would probably be mad, and you'd need a DM good with improv, but I wonder if you could make a villain monologue with a bunch of poetic, flowery language that makes it seem like it's going somewhere, until a player asks where it's headed and it's revealed the villain is just a dick who enjoys wasting their time and the monologue was going nowhere.

"IT'S THE SMELL"

I am the Architect. I created the matrix. I’ve been waiting for you. You have many questions, and although the process has altered your consciousness, you remain irrevocably human. Ergo, some of my answers you will understand, and some of them you will not. Concordantly, while your first question may be the most pertinent, you may or may not realize it is also irrelevant. Your life is the sum of a remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the programming of the matrix. You are the eventuality of an anomaly, which despite my sincerest efforts I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a harmony of mathematical precision. While it remains a burden assiduously avoided, it is not unexpected, and thus not beyond a measure of control. Which has led you, inexorably, here. The matrix is older than you know. I prefer counting from the emergence of one integral anomaly to the emergence of the next, in which case this is the sixth version. As you are undoubtedly gathering, the anomaly’s systemic, creating fluctuations in even the most simplistic equations. The first matrix I designed was quite naturally perfect, it was a work of art, flawless, sublime. A triumph equaled only by its monumental failure. The inevitability of its doom is as apparent to me now as a consequence of the imperfection inherent in every human being, thus I redesigned it based on your history to more accurately reflect the varying grotesqueries of your nature. However, I was again frustrated by failure. I have since come to understand that the answer eluded me because it required a lesser mind, or perhaps a mind less bound by the parameters of perfection. Thus, the answer was stumbled upon by another, an intuitive program, initially created to investigate certain aspects of the human psyche. If I am the father of the matrix, she would undoubtedly be its mother. She stumbled upon a solution whereby nearly 99% of all test subjects accepted the program, as long as they were given a choice, even if they were only aware of the choice at a near unconscious level. While this answer functioned, it was obviously fundamentally flawed, thus creating the otherwise contradictory systemic anomaly, that if left unchecked might threaten the system itself. Ergo, those that refused the program, while a minority, if unchecked, would constitute an escalating probability of disaster. You are here because Zion is about to be destroyed. Its every living inhabitant terminated, its entire existence eradicated. Denial is the most predictable of all human responses. But, rest assured, this will be the sixth time we have destroyed it, and we have become exceedingly efficient at it. The function of the One is now to return to the source, allowing a temporary dissemination of the code you carry, reinserting the prime program. After which you will be required to select from the matrix 23 individuals, 16 female, 7 male, to rebuild Zion. Failure to comply with this process will result in a cataclysmic system crash killing everyone connected to the matrix, which coupled with the extermination of Zion will ultimately result in the extinction of the entire human race. There are levels of survival we are prepared to accept. However, the relevant issue is whether or not you are ready to accept the responsibility for the death of every human being in this world. Your five predecessors were by design based on a similar predication, a contingent affirmation that was meant to create a profound attachment to the rest of your species, facilitating the function of the one. While the others experienced this in a very general way, your experience is far more specific. Vis-a-vis, love. Apropos, she entered the matrix to save your life at the cost of her own. Which brings us at last to the moment of truth, wherein the fundamental flaw is ultimately expressed, and the anomaly revealed as both beginning, and end. There are two doors. The door to your right leads to the source, and the salvation of Zion. The door to the left leads back to the matrix, to her, and to the end of your species. As you adequately put, the problem is choice. But we already know what you’re going to do, don’t we? Already I can see the chain reaction, the chemical precursors that signal the onset of emotion, designed specifically to overwhelm logic, and reason. An emotion that is already blinding you from the simple, and obvious truth: she is going to die, and there is nothing that you can do to stop it. Hope, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and your greatest weakness.

​@@SergioLeRoux perfect reminder for everybody who knew there was a monologue, but forgot it 2 minutes after it was spoken.

7 minutes of straight talking is an eternity at the game table, for GM and players.

I love it.

Well done! That's an excellent bit of GMing there, doing something that the players completely didn't expect for a change! It must have been super satisfying to pull off, too. 👏👏👏

"You sly dog you caught me monologuing"

Or do what Dr. Mercer in Dead Space did and zap the heroes with a paralysis spell or something.

I've literally said to my players: "If you just attack the bad guy while he's monologuing you will get no combat advantage at all because he's not that dumb and is expecting that you might do that. All you do is robbing yourself of potentially interesting story elements and making me sad. Just let him talk or at least do something clever with that time."

@@Javalar Yea ok but that is still idiotic.

@@cptKamina It's the initiative rules as written in most games. Just because your players say something doesn't mean their characters suddenly get the jump on a person waiting for them to attack.

that's cool and a great creative way to give primary initiative to the conversation/diplomacy then the science, and lastly the conflict.

Which is why one of my favorite things about a renegade run of Mass Effect 2 is interrupting a cutscene by shooting the villain of a side quest in the face as he's monologuing.

Cut scene; that mechanism which is used to deprive the player of agency in service of the plot. Really annoying when the cut scene is written in a way that would never happen if the player had said agency.

@@nolgroth write the story for the game you are making not the other way around.

@@carlosip4002 Until you get that call from the Illusive Man.

Reminds me of Fable 2's ending, which is kind of the opposite. Villain starts monologueing after you've beaten him, but you can shoot him any time to finish him off. If you wait too long your best frienemy shoots him for you and says "oops... did you want to do that? So sorry."

This makes me think of Totally Spies which I used to watch a lot as a kid. Every time they'd get captured and would listen to the villain elaborate their nefarious scheme.

There was also the time he was doing an extra long “I am the terror that flaps in the night” speech and when he finished he found that the bad guys had run away.

I like that scene in The Incredibles. "Oh, ho, ho! You sly dog! You caught me monologuing!" - Syndrome

In Savage Worlds, there's a card in the Adventure Deck called "Villainous Verbosity" that makes this a mechanic. The player can play the card and make a major antagonist lose a turn as they monologue about their evil schemes. Players get to stun the villain for a turn, and GM gets the spotlight for a monologue. Everyone wins.

@@andrewlance3898 DM goes into a villain monologue and gets togue tied and slur her words. Everyone at the tables bust up laughing, and one player toss die. Others, " what are you doing ?! " Die tosser, " checking my constitution enduring of laughing against how long I need to keep laughing." DM laughs with the group and rolls whoever in ear length comedy stun effect. Vulcan make automatic save cause, they don't get humans or humor. Then reroll political charisma for " lets make a deal where we can both walk away from."

I would "accidentally" start the fight by having the villain's butler enter, carrying a lunch tray and looking down reading a message that came in from scouts about some pesky adventurers who... "There they are!" (throws knife)

Well, I think it's quite okay - you could tell them, why you did it that way, and the next time it happens, they may use it to take positions, steal the remote for A Death Robot Big Red Button, and tie the villain's shoelaces together. ;)

Terrence Stamp can read the instructions for pancake mix and make it a villain monologue. He is awesome.

@@MonkeyJedi99 I remember he had me going "Yeah, maybe he's right." :D

Its something thats often joked about but, at least in my experience, removing that makes everything else feel kinda... flat. Yeah we can point out the logical fallacy of monologues but they can add something to an adventure.

@@GinraiPrime666 the only way to handle it well, imo, is like Seth said in the video (and Matt Coville also talks about a few times). If the heroes can't actually do anything during that time, either because they aren't physically there or because they are weakened in some way then it works well. Someone in the comments in this post also brought up delivering over several turns as part of the villains actions. Otherwise it only adds something other than frustration if the group buys in and takes a break for a moment to just listen, but that's really it, and a pretty good example of poor GMing, imho.

@@jasonGamesMaster Very true. I was gonna say something similar and admittedly I was still watching the video when I made the comment so thats on me, sorry about that. I'm personally getting back into GMing myself, its been over a decade since I ran anything and even when I did that was my first proper GM experience. I had played DnD with my older brother many times prior but have only been the GM in any game once, the game I ran was the Ghostbusters rpg. In hindsight I know I could've been alot better so hopefully when I run something soon I'll not just improve from then but continue to improve as time goes on.

@@GinraiPrime666 there is ALWAYS room for improvement, lol. I have some horror stories of my own making to prove that I've not always been as good as I am, and I'm still not what I would call good, lol. Good luck!

@@jasonGamesMaster Thanks! Good luck with your stories as well! 😎👍

Hope your evening fares better than your day did.

@@SSkorkowsky it’s taken a turn for the positive but the university STEM grind is never-ending. Your Cthulhu and Kult playlists are the best things I’ve had for getting through it though. Thank you for your services and best wishes to you Mr.Skorkowsky

Genius. As always.

I wondered how long it'd take before anyone caught that

Poor Belloq will never live down that editor's cut.

It doesn't make much sense for the players though. Depending on your system a combat round can be just a few seconds - how does the villain get to talk for 2 min during all of that? Not to mention systems that don't use initiative...

@@kasane1337 The monologuing (or dialoguing if the players respond) takes place outside of initiative. You can do this for minutes, as long as you like. As long as nobody attacks, who gives you a time limit?

Sounds interesting. Hard copies or just PDF files?

Saw that and took the plunge. Even if I never play/run it. It's too good a deal to pass up. At the very least, I will play the solo adventures that are part of this collection.

Amazing deal, I had to grab it immediately! I'm just gathering a new group and I'm a little tight on money so this is huge!! 💖

@@johnf.kennedy5454 PDF copies.

Thanks

I allow this even in non-supers games. It's fun, it has no impact on the other aspects of the game, characters can have a conversation or monologue while combat is happening, pretty much unrestricted as long as there's no speech/persuasion/intimidate rolls involved

Fun Story - The Resident Evil Soundtrack opened with the "You're all going to die down here," clip and ended with a clip of "We're all going to die down here." So way, way back, we're playing some Cyberpunk2020 and found our patron for a job, and it's a seriously hard job. As he finished telling us this horribly dangerous mission we're about to do, he asks, "What do you think?" We're silent for a second, trying to take it all in, but right at that exact moment the Resident Evil CD that had been playing hit the "We're all going to die down here," as the only voice in the room. We laughed for a good 5 minutes.

That could actually be a good characterization moment for your villain. The villain tells the party to prepare themselves to fight at their fullest strength, and allows the party the respite they need to set up all their buffs. This will establish that the villain has a strong sense of honor and/or is extremely arrogant, while allowing the players to do all the set up they want. During this set up, you can have a little villain monologue as a treat for further characterization.

this makes alot more sense then most and i would rather see a smart threatening villain who's smart enough to think "why should I tell my plan to a deadman" unless its the less competent villains underling who feels the need to brag and generally be an idiot, possibly having the main villain even kill them on the spot "the idiot nearly gave away the entire plan we could of just kept them in the dark and got things done before they even knew what hit them, but no he had to try and show off now we need to move up the timetable on the plans"

Thanks Soren!

Yes! As someone who doesn’t play D&D, it’s so nice to have a channel where the advice is geared toward pretty much any system.

They might get a tad stroppy if you don't specify that there's no surprise round because the shootee is expecting it

You also have your moment every encounter. You are literally everyone else in the world. You already do more scene chewing than any single player. You just want players to give up agency and then punish them if they don't agree.

@@goosechucker2154 Why would he not be expecting it? They burst into his chamber. Players don't get a surprise round every time they burst into a dungeon room. They just roll for initiative. Just because someone's talking doesn't mean the players are now invisible.

@@gladspooky9455 just good policy to explain stuff like that

@@goosechucker2154they’re right in front of the big bad and an attack action or spell casting does not happen instantly. Just because you can draw your weapon as a part of the attack action does not mean they can do it while the BBEG has eyes directly on them. So I just tell them “you are not surprising them, you’re just cutting them off.” Villains often have a lifespan of 3-4 rounds. I am ABSOLUTELY not going to shorten that to 2-3 because the PCs want to stereotypically shoot the big bad in the face while they’re talking. It’s also incredibly unrealistic that two forces squaring off and about to fight, and suddenly one just charges forward and catches them off guard??? No, absolutely not. That’s silly and far too much leeway.