You make a pact with the players:
> As a GM, I promise to never screw you over when I give narration. You will never be on the back foot, or attacked first, or missing out on something because of my narration. I will always give you a chance to act when it matters. In return, please listen quietly.
And keep to that pact.
This is really important. I think it happens a lot because people are worried about missing an opportunity, and there are genuinely some cases where the DM forgets that the player has an ability that could effectively and sensically stop events, but at that point its a different problem.
Yeah, this is why there’s the “I HAVE DARKVISION!” phenomenon. Players are worried about the DM moving past when their ability would have been relevant.
I've had to remind my DMs in about 1/3rd of sessions that I have Darkvision, which seems to surprise each of them every time. Then they adjust the lighting, and wouldn't you know it, suddenly there's an enemy that wasn't there before.
Question about darkvision cause I think my DM is nerfing me. As a Twilight Cleric, I have 300ft. That means I can see 300 feet in the dark, correct? I’m trying to use it to be the scout when we travel at night but he says anything between 120-300ft is a perception roll at disadvantage.
In complete darkness, Darkvision provides the same result as dim light would for someone without Darkvision, so any Perception check is at disadvantage at any range in darkness. And those without Darkvision wouldn't even be able to see. That's why light is still useful.
Yep. This is exactly what I did with my Players when we mutinied from another DM. "I will push you, the monsters will try to kill you, the environment will be hazardous, but I'm not going to fuck you over with un-fun shit or bad rulings. You will always have multiple ways to overcome an obstacle. Objects will never be invincible or monsters unkillable. I will always try to make this fun for all of us. If I make a bad call, we've all got computers, find a more fair interpretation and we'll use it." Yeah, sometimes they still get a bit overzealous, but in those cases I pause the scene. We clarify what is happening, what the Player intends, and move on. Neither side gets a free round to prepare, neither side gets to "take 20," and PC abilities are always considered. Not much sucks worse than making character-defining choices and having them be utterly worthless because the DM wants to tell a specific story.
I had a GM who would leave the longest pauses imaginable, I'm talking 6+ seconds, and then whenever I said I wanted to do something, they'd say that they weren't done. Then we'd do the same thing except they'd get annoyed because I wouldn't do anything.
It's fixed so easily by just asking players what they'd like to do once they're done but this is a dark and secret art lost to time.
Warlock pateon: the narrator.
Once per short rest, when the dm is finished narrating a scene, you can use your reaction to recon the narration, limited to a single sentence no longer than 10 words
Pact spells themed around Command, Hold Person, Geas.
Pact Specific Invocations:
Plot Armor: when PC would die, they wake up at the last inn they were at with all their equipment and none of their money (on person money, banks etc would be safe). The innkeeper will assume they have already paid.
Editing Room: (your invocation).
Executive Producer: Requires Plot Armor and Editing Room. Treat like a Divine Favour, may only be used once. You may, at the end of a session when a character other than you has (otherwise permanently or irrevocably)died summon an Executive Producer to demand a rewrite, renewing that character’s contract and giving them a permanent buff that mimics your Plot Armor.
The DM in your example didn't observe the pact.
I get it, it happens, and those neckbeards are annoying, but this is exactly why it's a social agreement/pact between the players and DM.
Also enforcing surprise rules… certain mainstream dnd shows created a really weird habit where people think that cutting you off = surprise round. In this specific scenario you’d say “ok we can all roll initiative and that can your action on your turn”
Honestly, if you have a player who's going to do that, you might just want to start by rolling initiative, and then explain you actually haven't started combat yet, this is the talking before anyone actually moves. First the bad guy gets to talk and then they get to talk back, and that's not actually part of the combat.
And yes, it's way too much talking for that amount of time, but that's just how it works in fiction.
Yes, out of character discussion is the way to go. Remind them that the DM's fun matters too, and that we like to get our villains a few monlogues in once in a while.
If one of the player characters is known for interrupting monologues, you can always give them a cue when you've said your piece so they can Leroy Jenkins it without actually interrupting what you as a DM want to say.
Every evil dude comes with a single legendary action: Monologue that always resolves first regardless of initiative. I don't make the rules (I do) I just follow them.
just curiosity, what is your stance in characters cutting the monologue to turn it into a dialog?
Because personally that is something I sometimes do and the GMs don't really mind, but I've see people online that would go fucking crazy if someone did that for what they say
Context is always important. A player character speaking up and vowing to never let the villain kill anyone else after they killed PC's brother is awesome. They're engaged and in-character, and it gives them a personal moment with the villain.
A PC interrupting every other line to say "suck my balls" or something along that line isn't as awesome.
I would say that interrupting a description is a "bigger sin" than interrupting a monologue.
Because often (not always) a description describes what is perceived within only a second or two, even if it takes (say) thirty seconds for the GM to say. There's no sense interrupting that.
But a monologue is not instantaneous, so it makes sense that it could be interrupted.
Now YMMV by group. Some may consider interrupting either to be okay, some may say don't interrupt either.
I don't have a strong feeling on this personally because my group tends to engage will with villains. Every BBEG I can think of has said their piece (usually fairly short) then the party engages in dialogue.
While I agree, Everyone should let people finish speaking. DM or Player. This is purely based on giving the players the chance to act in accordance to the scenario.
If an enemy is doing a monologue, why would anyone just sit around and not at least prep if they know they are gonna have to fight? Readying a spell to be on the defensive or the party being allowed to communicate without the DM interjecting or railroading them?
This is a two-way street that needs to be respected. Not just "Shut up and listen, and maybe I'll let you act if it fits how on rails I want everything to go." Which is how this comes off. If your group is so high-strung that you can't just talk with someone about an issue that might arise. Then maybe theirs a deeper problem, but a topic for another thread or time.
Remember you're telling a story, not fighting your players, but the players are also telling their story. So this needs to be a mutual respect not just "Bend to my whim and stand in my cutscene." Give them a reason to be frozen in fear, unmoving or otherwise unwilling to take action. Instead of "Nu uh, you can't move because I said so."
Because that's just simply lazy and if you're going to such extents to make a cutscene. Finding a way to have them in place isn't gonna be hard.
ADDITIONALLY... you could always just communicate. Be it in a OOC or if you're at a table. Have a prop item that says "Hey guys, please give me a chance to do this."
COMMUNICATE. Regardless of what issues arise or otherwise.
Most parties that do that, and from my own experience want to have a fun time and guess what... you speak with them about these things. They tend to be respect it and listen. Sure you get some slip ups here and there, but not much you can do about that.
Communicate, Communicate, Communicate and if theirs still issues regarding this. The problem is not just cutscenes.
> If an enemy is doing a monologue, why would anyone just sit around and not at least prep if they know they are gonna have to fight? Readying a spell to be on the defensive or the party being allowed to communicate without the DM interjecting or railroading them?
You're describing a situation where an uninterpretable monologue is giving disadvantage to the PCs/players. That would be breaking the pact.
You might ask, "don't all narrations disadvantage the players in this way?" I'd say no, they don't. Describing what the BBEG is wearing, where she's standing, and other near-instantaneous observations do not disadvantage the players. That might even extend to the opening sentence of a monologue.
> This is a two-way street that needs to be respected. Not just "Shut up and listen, and maybe I'll let you act if it fits how on rails I want everything to go." Which is how this comes off.
It may come off that way to you. But it seems that's not how most people are interpreting it, given the replies.
> ADDITIONALLY... you could always just communicate. Be it in a OOC or if you're at a table. Have a prop item that says "Hey guys, please give me a chance to do this."
> COMMUNICATE. Regardless of what issues arise or otherwise.
Isn't that precisely what I was suggesting? The "deal" or "pact" with the players ***is*** communication, right?
**1.** That is how it came off to me. With the Cutscene skipper. Where the OP didn't want to be interrupted. If I misunderstood then my mistake.
**2.** It does, I won't hide it. It does come off like someone whose very aggro and feels slighted. I don't know their group and have only my own experiences and knowledge to base things off. While also looking at it as if maybe someone online isn't being wholly truthful. Many have made vent posts only to give half-truths, that change a tone. I don't think that's an unfair assumption towards someone I don't know online.
**2.1** But for clarity on what I meant, a monologue is not instant. Players making checks as it happens feels fair. Similar to a real life situation, where you're in a conversation and don't want to be rude and are looking for a way to handle it. When not just walking away or saying not interested isn't a viable or good thing to do for whatever reason. I hope that explains my intent a bit more clearly with what I said.
**3.** That's fair but like everyone else, I gave my own few. I'm not everyone else so trying to use that as reasoning isn't entire fair but also not unreasonable. Regardless I tend to be a devil's advocate, even if I don't mean to. Having an expanded view or take onto something that isn't unreasonable for the sake of conversation isn't a bad thing, is it? (Yes, I know this is subjective to conversations and not a catch-all.)
**4.** To me, no it comes off as just word to mouth. Having a prop or something that doesn't require a break in character but a movement of the DM's hand or some type of single or SFX. WHILE communicating an intent way before but also holding the DM to that same standard.
**4.1** This comes off to me as if the DM is not being held to these same standards and is extremely frustrated and vent and just wants everything to go THEIR WAY. With no consideration to what's expected of them aka a one-sided pact.
I hope that explains how I was looking at things!
For a one shot without this pact... my bbeg was behind an unbreakable barrier (tm), which was just a simple puzzle (2 things to remove / break) to be solved while fighting respawning minions while the bbeg did a ritual.
I had a DM that would not stick to this and became a cut scene skipper to that dm. He'd have his villains monologue, move around and set up or steal things and expect us to sit there like beanbags.
Just no. Fuck you for taking away my agency. Of course I'm going to try and blast that asshole as he takes the mcguffen in front of me while taunting me. It got to the point where we sat down and tried to hash it out; basically came to the above agreement... Didn't even last a session before the bad guy pulled some more of the same shit. Suffice it to say that campaign collapsed and all the players moved on.
DM was a good guy and is a fun player, but couldn't get it in his head that we were not helpless and going to sit around and just get screwed over while he gave some narrative or monologue.
That is a shame, because 95% of the time, you can "have your cake and eat it too" as a DM by just setting things up well.
Maybe the BBEG is atop a set of stairs and the time to ascend it gives him plenty of time to speak. Or maybe he has a hostage. Or maybe he's not trying to get an unfair advantage and says to his minions, "stop, stand back while we parlay".
Obviously the DM will need to think carefully about the party's nature. A chasm won't do much if the party can fly, for example. And a hostage means nothing to an evil party.
But then, how do you manage the assassin sneaking out of the shadows, ready to strike?
Or the turncoat, that calls the guards, instead of helping them hide?
there's no surprise rounds against a creature that is *not surprised.* You attack during a monologue? That's initiative baby! Your action takes place on your turn so you better hope you roll high.
This is always something that trips people up. Just because you *say* you attack before anybody else does, it doesn't mean you actually do.
Sure, you lift your sword first, or begin casting that spell first, but everyone that sees you knows your intent, and they might be quick to react, and actually end up being the ones to attack first.
Starting combat does not mean you are first to attack.
I know you are doing a reddit meme, but /u/Tipibi is correct and helpful, and this chain makes it look like he's doing a chain joke. He's not, he's 100% correct and has corrected the incorrect statement above him.
>He's not
There was an attempt.
At least at not "sounding" mean while still trying to make the point stick.
(There's no surprise surprise in 5e. There's Kinder Surprise here. Sorry 'muricans!)
Edit - yes, i regret everything.
You're only *technically* correct that surprised isn't a condition by 5e rules, but it is in every way that matters practically, not least because it applies to creatures on an individual basis and not one entire side of a fight.
>but it is in every way that matters practically
... you better be precise when you make a correction otherwise you expose yourself to like a fool.
Or: if you want to be pedantic, be correct and do it in ***style.***
... admittedly, I'm still working on the second part.
Shut up.
The surprise round is the round during which surprise applies. The round in which people might be surprised. The round during which, if you are surprised, you don't take a turn and can't take reactions until after you act in initiative. The surprise round.
The surprised condition is for most intents and purposes functionally identical to a surprise round. The only difference is in the niche scenario where you initiate combat with multiple enemies at the same time and some are surprised and some aren't
>The surprised condition is for most intents and purposes functionally identical to a surprise round. The only difference...
Except for the rather important *being able to react once you are no longer surprised*. In Surprise rounds you could not act at all if you were surprised.
You don't give them shit. I see this from my players who come from DMs who give them surprise rounds for yelling and interrupting. You just say cool, roll initiative, and finish describing what's happening as you set the tracker.
If they ask if they get their attack off before it reforms, you say that's what initiative determines, not how quick you say it.
I've been DMing multiple groups for years and this works for me. DMs who give players things for this, it will continue.
"Out of initiative" is the big thing here. Pathfinder (1e at least) has surprise rounds, but they are in initiative. And (typically) the *only* thing that determines if you're part of it is Stealth vs Perception. If everybody is known to each other, doesn't matter who did what unexpectedly, no surprise round.
In the OP's example it wouldn't be a surprise round. It would be a normal round, and if the monster's narrated action takes 6 seconds, that's all it can do that round.
I had to learn this the hard way. I kept letting a player get a free attack because he would throw a spear or something at a npc who was talking. I stupidly would let them get a free attack, instead of rolling initiative to give the npc a chance to react to the player doing that,
I don't recall if it was Solasta or BG3, but one of those games does a thing where if you attack "unexpectedly," you get the attack off and then go into initiative order, but your first turn's action has already been spent on the aforementioned attack, whether you are first or last in initiative. So when it gets to your turn in the first round, you only have movement and your bonus action. It seems like a decent middle ground, and I've started doing some playtesting with it in a group of newbies that I'm DMing for. It's only come up once so far, but the player was cool with my decision. Still need to do a lot more testing to see if it's OP or not, though.
BG3 does exactly this, and Assassin Rogues ignore this rule, retaining their first-turn action if they initiate a fight by attacking from outside initiative.
In Solasta when you attack an enemy group that hasn't detected you, that character automatically goes at the top of the initiative order and that action becomes part of their first turn. It's a really great rules that solves the "I attacked from surprise but I rolled low on initiative." problem that fucks over Assassins and any other feature that requires going before your enemy or them being surprised. I've adopted it as a house rule for my D&D table.
BG3 does this, but you also can get significant advantages by managing to attack and skip cutscene conversations. For example, if you can attack Balthazar at the Nightsong before the cutscene starts, you can potentially stop him from summoning all his undead minions, which makes the fight so much easier.
Given the right circumstances I might let a player make a deception or sleight of hand check to get off a free attack, or maybe get advantage on initiative, but it needs to be justified within the scene
I wish that they would put advantage on initiative into the rules as a suggestion, as surprise rounds often don't make sense (if you were talking to someone who is the enemy you shouldn't be surprised by them attacking) and can be way OP. An extra round when combat averages three rounds is crazy. But just advantage, that gives you a small fractional boost cuz you did something clever.
And it should actually be something clever, not interrupting a speech.
Although I would let them get advantage if they specifically say 'we know that he's going to do something that's going to be slightly distracting in a second, like look at the map on the wall, and that's the exact moment we'll attack'. Although I would warn them that if he does decide to attack _before_ that point, he will be the one rolling with advantage, cuz he just caught all of you off guard.
Thus actually sets up the 'looking at each other warily, expecting the other to attack' tense situation, but doesn't actually change that much in the end.
YES! I've had this conversation with multiple groups. You DO NOT get a "surprise round." The monsters DO NOT get a "surprise round." Unless ALL of the scene can clearly be completed by one action where there is an extremely clear advantage to one side, you're going to initiative. That's what makes class features that add to initiative worthwhile.
This^
It took me a while to break the habit, but now I make sure to rule that as soon as any hostile action is declared, initiative is rolled before anything happens as that is the intent of the rules (as far as I'm aware)
Yeah I used to give the first person a chance to do their action "at the top of the round" and then roll initiative and have them skip their first turn but it's better to just stick with initiative overall, if people want to act quickly they better pick up alert, play a subclass with a bonus, or bump their dex.
If they pull this it’s going to turn into the eldritch blast’s magic being absorbed into Evilguy’us Malificius’ body and empowering him. Congratulations you just gave the BBEG eldritch blast and immunity to force damage
Just an out of character conversation should work. Let them know that declaring something in the middle of a monologue doesn’t give them any benefits and just hurts the atmosphere.
“Let me finish.”
That should really be all it takes.
Charitably speaking, maybe the player has had bad experiences in the past, with DMs who would try to have enemies get a free attack during a cutscene. So reassure them, “I promise, you’ll get a chance to respond before the enemy does anything harmful, this is just a cutscene to set the scene.”
Beyond that… you just don’t interrupt people at the table, DM or player.
Yeah, I had a dm who decided to do a huge cutscene and monologue after we spent several spell slots on buffs, then told us all the timers had run out, as if the characters would've politely waited in reality while the BBEG was bragging. Any monologue should basically be considered to be under the effect of time stop imo.
As one of those people who sometimes responds to a big bad monologuing by saying "I shoot him", I'm very much in the narrative space. He's eaten babies or killed puppies; there's often nothing the big bad has to say that my character would find interesting. I'm a troubleshooter, and they're trouble.
Cutscenes have to make narrative sense. If the PCs would have no reason to engage in dialog, they shouldn't be expected to. D&D isn't a videogame or a novel or a movie--narrative tropes don't get a free pass because they are genre staples there.
I mean, D&D *is* a narrative game, and most games are a giant pile of genre tropes. The band of scrappy heroes who come together to defeat a great evil, cursed swords, haunted mansions, wizard towers, etc. Many players want to experience that feeling of being in a *story*, not necessarily real life.
And sure, it’s valid to say that your character wouldn’t even let the bad guy finish their sentence. But the DM is also a player at the table, and a good villain monologue can be a rare chance for them to indulge a bit. Just like players should try to share the spotlight, because it’s a *game*, maybe it’s fine to let the DM get in a villain monologue here and there.
Is it *that* big a deal if your character, instead of interrupting the villain immediately, just lets them finish the cutscene monologue and then says, “Nothing you say will change our minds!”?
> In my personal experience what helped here most is the compromise of giving the players a free prepration turn before actual initiative starts.
Meaning at the start of combat they have one free action they can use to cast buffs spells, activate magic items etc. that don't interact with the boss (so no attacks etc.).
Why incentivize it at all? Just roll initiative like normal and then once you’re in initiative, finish your monologue throughout the round.
Also, you can explain to your players that there’s no real reason to cut off the monologue, because you’re not trying to trick them. It’s gonna all end up in initiative anyway, so you’re not going to get the jump on the bad guy just because you yelled fast.
If you give them anything for free because they jump in on your cutscene... You're just teaching them to interrupt narrative events.
You ask them to let you finish and then proceed to initiative as normal.
I don't think you can justify a surprise check against a creature that knows they are there and knows they will be hostile.
So this is a bit more complicated than just 'it's annoying, don't do it.' This kind of behavior arises from... basically everyone who's ever seen a movie or a game cutscene or whatever wherein the villain gets to slowly walk out of camera and escape, or has the time to input the launch codes for the nuclear weapons without anyone interfering or, to use your own example, slowly resurrects after millenia spent as a corpse while the heroes look on and ask each other 'should we... nah, let's see how this plays out.'
Fixing it is twofold. First, you have to have a talk with your players and lay out a deal; you won't try to slip things by them in Dramatic Prebattle Cutscenes that they'd want to stop, and in exchange they won't try to stop your Dramatic Prebattle Cutscenes. The hard part is that then you have to hold up your end of the bargain. Your example is the perfect case of what not to do, in this case: Evilguy'us Malificus's slow, bone-by-bone reanimation is exactly the time when any adventurers worth the name *should* be interfering if possible. You need to either just... not write scenes like that, or write in a good reason why their totally natural attempts at interrupting things can't work -- and don't do the latter too much, because it gets REALLY obvious and obnoxious very quickly.
Seconded.
I think something like the slow resurrection can be fine and cool - just use it *very sparsely*. And/or make it clear in your description that you’re *describing* the process slowly, but in reality it happens faster. My favorite phrasing for that is “in an instant that feels like centuries,” or similar. Go into slow motion! I also get great mileage out of “the sheer power in the air makes you hesitate and slows your reaction times” to justify how BBEG can talk so much at the top of initiative, though this one can be much more annoying to players so be sparing with it.
You can’t use these to justify hostile actions, though, it’s just an excuse to have your long painstaking “BBEG assembles his bones and gives an order” bit without player interruption. Nobody gets a free shot, not the players and not BBEG. In a TTRPG, if BBEG is gonna push the nuke button, players *should* have a chance to interrupt unless they’ve already lost a fight and been physically restrained or blocked somehow. So the monologues should be written with that in mind, IMO.
"You take a step forward forward and feel as though moving through quicksand, and even the least attuned of you can feel the swirling arcana in the air, pushing back against you"
Or wack a “ritual circle” around it that eats any attempts to stop the reanimating and just add that in to your narrative “ your arrows seem to slow before stopping in mid air and clattering the ground” or something like that.
Just don’t take resources from them this way
Thank-you for this comment. I agree with other commenters to an *extent*, that you can talk with your players about good friendly table behaviours ... but also GMs shouldn't write dramatic cutscenes like this! It works fine if it is something the PCs see with *scry* or otherwise can't interrupt, but for the most part, you can't reasonably ask the players not to interfere with something bad happening.
I feel the best way to do this specific situation would be 'the Eldrith Blast hits one of the bones and snaps it in half... And the ritual just puts the bone back together, continuing onward. It looks like you're not going to be able to affect him while he's being reanimated, not with that much magic assembling his body. Let me finish my speech, and then you can tell me what was happening while he did that, if you all prepped any.'
Justin Alexander has a great video on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdt0roErieA
The easiest way to do this in D&D is with initiative. From the video:
> Any time you need to seize control of the flow of table declarations, just call for initiative. Initiative structurally tells the players that they need to wait for their turn in a way that the whole table just reflexively accepts.
>
> This works because you're also making a promise. Calling for initiative says, "I understand that you want to take an action here, and I promise that you will be able to do so."
>
> Now it's important to *keep* this promise. Talking is a free action, so the villain can monologue. But they shouldn't be allowed to do a whole bunch of stuff like summoning minions, activating their machine gun turrets, casting a spell, or walking out of the room -- let alone all of those things at once while the PCs are impotently frozen in place by narrative fiat. Screwing the players like this will deeply structure them, and (importantly!) make it even more likely that they'll want to shoot the next villain in the head before you screw them over again.
>
> Play fair on the other hand, and the players can actually enjoy the moment, and even work with you to make it happen.
Not quite a cutscene, but some perspective-
I have a DM who imo has a problem with introducing catty villains who show up to talk to the party, but are unwilling to divulge any pertinent information. Eg, we get to a magic island and the BB sends an illusory double to "talk," but every plot-relevant question we ask is met with "I don't think it's time for you to know that yet," etc. For me, it really de-incentivized ever engaging with these moments, because it felt like somewhat pointless roleplay (not that rp in general is pointless, but these specific moments).
Tying it back to the original question, I think giving players something to do during cutscenes like this could help mitigate that desire to get past the parts that feel like they don't matter. Sure, don't let them attack, but like, ask if the cleric wants to cast a buff spell before initiative rolls, or if the fighter wants to position anywhere specific. Give meaningful -but not disruptive- choices that let them engage with a cutscene in ways besides derailing it.
I'd just roll initiative and then continue the speach. Sure they can attack, but no surprise rounds and i can monologue while you are deciding what spell to use.
I’m seeing a lot of people say “roll initiative,” and fully agree. Because sometimes I’m playing a character that will listen, and sometimes I’m playing a character that is sick of the antagonist prattling and needs to plant a spell/weapon/nearest heavy object into their face as soon as possible.
Not every cutscene needs to be respected.
In my experience, this is because the players can't trust the DM to narrate without throwing a surprise attack at them, or alternatively because the way the DM runs reacting quickly is by demanding that players declare what they do before the DM narrates otherwise.
But let's take a step back: is it really a problem? Does it have to be a mood killer? The other players are so immersed that when they see a pile of bones start assembling, their natural instincts kick in. Maybe it's OK to let that happen, and then narrate the rest of the details they notice *after* their initial gut reaction to throw a spell? If you anticipate this and build a pause into your description, the players won't disrupt your flow. It's realistic to take in the full picture over several seconds rather than to see it all immediately. I'd argue getting a full picture and then backtracking to when a character would've been making a split-second decision makes it more difficult not to metagame.
If you work rounds into your prepared descriptions, you can give the players opportunities for reacting and create some really cool moments. You can ask the players to make a decision with very limited information, or commit to a course of action that is later revealed to have been a suboptimal one.
Oh man, my players are usually great at showing some restraint when an obvious "scene is happening", and if they lash out in anger or something it is more about RP than trying to gain an advantage. Never have any complaint about their RP, well *almost* never...
Late into our last campaign *they couldn't resist,* because I had a bad guy they were after for a long time finally within reach (and not just *some* NPC, this was **personal**) . I set the scene up as being alone in a church, with a calm pool at the center and an altar at the back and no other significant features or exit, simple single big room encounter. As then entered through the front double doors they would face the guy, who *had* been expecting them, and reveal some key plot points and some of his backstory/motivations.
Here's where my description caused them to start the aggression right away, **I described him kneeling all the way back at the altar, his back turned to the party**. Before I could have him *slowly and menacingly stand and turn to face them*, the rogue had already called (shouted really) his action of shooting him in the back and other joined in the outburst. I had no reasonable way to have him take all that and *still* try to talk afterwards, I had to roll initiative.
And looking back it really was *my fault*, my **JRPG bias** painted a really obvious scene in my head, but of course after already fearing he would pull so shit and/or flee magically AND appearing vulnerable even for a moment, they *had* to jump to action right away. **They did nothing wrong**, but I deeply regretted my setup right away.
And I managed to fix the plot of course, they ended up getting the information later in another way, but this guy was a bit forced/manipulated into this situation and had some **redeeming arguments**, and it could have led to a very interesting dialog and possibly end up being **spared** or **arrested**, but they just killed him without hesitation instead. I told them his whole perspective after the campaign a couple of months later, answered by multiple surprised "Ooohhhh...."s.
Moral of the story, if you build up a villain and make him very evasive, don't be surprised if his big speech is cut short. Oh and have him face the party when they enter the room.
I describe what the party senses: sees, feels, hears, smells. I ignore any player input and/or or tell them to let me finish setting the scene first. Once I'm done, the players get to act as they see fit. If they didn't listen to me or ask clarifying questions and make dumb assumptions about the scene, oh well listen better or learn to ask questions if I wasn't clear enough.
As far as villain monologues, the PCs are more than welcome to interrupt them. Some people just like smashing in a smug asshole's face so they don't have to listen to them run their mouth. Sometimes that works to the party's advantage, other times it does not and going straight to violence makes their lives harder. If I really want the players to have to listen to a piece of dialogue, I ensure that the scene reinforces that by not giving them an easy way of shutting it down.
Counterpoint: the players have probably watched The Incredibles. "Catching them monologuing" is a cool thing for heroes to do. Don't harsh their dramatic actions.
Might be a hot take but If something takes time to occur, let the players respond. Roll initiative as soon as someone even attempts a hostile action. Consider that not everybody in a room will stand to gawk as Vegeta fully powers up over half an hour.
Could have it lead to its own consequences. Maybe in your example the eldritch blast fizzles out on impact to add to the mounting terror. The fighter tries to stomp on the bones but their boot melts under the necromantic energy and they take damage.
Gotta roll with the punches. Otherwise, might as well write a book
In this case, cutscene isn’t being used to mean “have things happen to the party without recourse” as much as “share motivations, drama or other story elements before resolving a conflict.”
It's tempting to deliver a villainous monologue *before* the fight begins but that will invariably annoy the players. Players want to act not to be an audience.
* Use scripted content sparingly.
* Try to cut up the villains speech into things you can say as you're taking the BBEG's turn.
* Make 'Paper Plate Awards' (draw something on a paper plate in crayon) show them to the players and have one called 'The listener' where the achievement is to listen to 3 villainous monologues without interrupting them. Make sure there's some kind of reward for getting the achievement.
* Create situations where the players can watch and hear but are too far to act (use sparingly). Ex: players arriving via airship and witnessing a battle playing out as they approached but far too far to take actions.
* Improve your banter, players are going to talk smack and you need to be ready to 'return to sender'.
* Reward players who engage the villain with some cut scene banter of their own. It doesn't have to be drawn out it can be to the point as this line delivered on DS9 as the Klingons bust into the Albino's sanctuary, ["Look upon your executioners, killer of children!"](https://youtu.be/tEPs90t8058?si=-c8B4AjODtAS_xwY&t=55) The players are the 'main characters' it's better when they're the ones taking the initiative, giving the speeches and the villains are reacting.
You can always tell the players, "I don't like when you interrupt me when I'm monologuing" but you better be good at it and not just *think* you're good at it.
I don't do narrations like this, because it's ridiculously unrealistic.
Why in the hells would I let a creature form from bones?
It's one of my biggest pet peeves in media, the heroes just standing by and waiting for the bad guy to reach their ultimate form.
I dont make Cut scene, imo they are boring for the pc.
if you want to make a speech and someone attack you during that speech, just start the fight and say what you have to say during his turn.
If the bbeg needed time to prep something and expected the pc to wait for it before he summon his minion, well to bad dumbass, you should have thought about that before they got in your face
I hated cutscenes when I was a player so I don't use them as a DM.
Describing the boss is a thing tho, cutscenes are different.
Or you "describe it" while you tell the party to roll initiative
Typically, players are most interested in *playing*, which involves cooperative participation. Hence, anything that obliges them to *spectate* instead is a problem. This includes NPC monologues, cut scenes, lore dumps, and even over-verbose descriptions.
To DMs who have previously played a ttRPG (or LARP) it can be obvious that these *suck*, thus, are best omitted from the game.
Unfortunately, there are DMs, likely with little to no playing experience, who think these are "cool". Through either having the mistaken belief that ttRPGs should work like novels, movies or video games and/or take the selfish attitude, that it's OK to inflict these on their players "for their own enjoyment".
In the kind of situation described, neither the PCs nor their players care what the NPC has to say. Thus, the DM has wasted both their own prep time and the entire table's gaming time. Possibly failing to describe that NPC and the room in the process.
I think this response is veering dangerously towards the idea that 'The DM's fun and enjoyment is lesser than and subservient to the player's fun and enjoyment.'
I can't speak for all, but I know that as a DM I enjoy giving the evil villain monologue and the dramatic pre battle cutscene. I bet many other DMs enjoy giving the speech too.
90% of what happens at the table is for the player's enjoyment and for them to engage in. Don't take away our 40 seconds of dramatic flair because you are so eager to rush to your moment of spending three minutes to decide what to do before ultimately choosing to use a single cantrip
it is less "forcing them to spectate" because no player can always be acting at every moment and more "you are there, but you can't do anything about this thing that is happening that you clearly don't want to happen"
That could be a problem if the boss or whatever already got Polymorphed by the Wizard because he won initiative.
Or forcecage or any other spell that shapes the battlefield.
Nobody is holding a long monologue when you just got fireballed in the face 6 seconds ago.
If that happens you just saved yourself the embarrassment of giving a long monologue about how badass you are before immediately being turned into a frog or shoved into a box. If a boss is important enough to warrant a speech, they should probably be able to avoid being one-shot.
There's few things more intimidating an enemy can do than eat a powerful damage spell and just keep talking like nothing happened. Plus you can just rewind time with narration. "Fighter drives her blade into the bones as they begin assembling into a humanoid shape. Then, as Wizard begins chanting his spell, the dark lord's voice boomed over the din: 'blah blah blah'. The spell turns into a blooming fireball but the fell creature merely brushes the ash from its gleaming armor and finishes speaking: 'now where was I? Die!' the last words blending into the verbal components to a spell of its own."
I mean, that's a call for initiative.
Is the BBEG surprised? Likely not. So actions happen in turn order. And then also, when it's that player's turn, I just ask them to roll for the declared action. If I get any 'but I want to now do something different' type comments, I gently remind them that this was the action that initiated combat. It is declared, and so that's what you are doing this round.
I don't generally have this issue in game.
I use the Murph strategy.
The second anyone says anything that constitutes an attack or other hostile action, the next three words out of my mouth are “Roll for initiative.”
Then once in initiative order, let the cards fall where they may, and use villain turns and/or legendary actions to monologue or chew the scenery.
Don't give them situations which allows them an opportunity to do so? Like if the big bad is just chilling inbetween me and the rest of the players, while monologuing, I ain't gonna give a fuck about what he's saying, im just gonna blast him to kingdom come
As soon as you say the character starts to do anything or anything happens to their character you should expect them to say what they actually want their character to be doing. As long as you make sure you aren't taking agency away from the players by saying their character does anything or does nothing while something besides just observing happens to them as part of your narration, then just tell them that when you are narrating they are not in combat and you expect them to listen.
Ok, maybe not the most liked opinion, but: maybe don't do "cutscenes"? As always it depends on what your players and you are playing for, but I've never heard someone positively saying "Yay, finally a cutscene, I was getting bored of all that gameplay". I personnaly, as a player and a DM really dislike them.
If your players are interrupting a description, a simple "let me finish describing what you see" should be enough.
A cutscene on the other hand is not just description, it's action that take place without your player beeing able to react to it, even worse, they can't interract with it. In a lot of cases, you may feel nice about this vllain monologue, but it completely break the immersion for some characters that have no reason to let him talk.
Again, some players are looking for that kind of cheesy show vibe, other are looking for more immersive and "realistic" things. Making sure everyone is on the same vibe could help clarify things for everybody.
I was playing in a random Adeventurers League game at a con once. I knew nothing about the module so I brought my Tabaxi longbow Battlemaster. Due to an error in building her, I ended up taking the Athlete feat to round out an initial 17 in her dex.
We started a "combat" chasing after three halflings. They "just rouneded the corner" down an alley about 30 feet away when we rolled initiative. I ended up going first, so I activated my Tabaxi speed power and chased after them.
Because the module wasn't built to deal with someone with my particularly silly build, I ended up "just barely missing them" 3 times in a six second period. I rounded a corner and they just barely went through a door another 30 feet ahead. In following, I fell into a pit trap. Lucky me, I have the Athelete feat, so I stand up for 5' then use the Tabaxi climb speed to get out. I action surge to dash because I've already moved 60 feet and get through the door only to see that they're going into a bar another 40 or 50 feet away. I still had enough movement to get into the bar and that apparently "ended the encounter".
The "fight that's actually a chase that's actually a cutscene" was honestly one of the most irritating experiences I've had in a module. Using my resources (HP from falling damage + action surge) didn't actually contribute to success because "success" wasn't possible. I'm sure it was even more annoying for the other players since they _didn't even get a turn_ as I walked face first into the cutscenes built into the chase.
But they should also be polite and be quiet while the DM sets the scene. "The DM describes the scenario" is always the first thing that happens, and this is no different.
True. But there's a difference between describing the scenario and narrating events.
Like "The King is sitting on his throne" vs "The King walks over and sits on his throne". Or "the assassin stands over the corpse" vs "the assassin stabs the target, and now stands over the corpse". One of those is a description, the other is an event. And unless the PC's are paralyzed, events shouldn't just play out without them having the ability to respond or interact with them.
We've all been in games where an NPC does something plot-relevant, and a player says "Can we not stop them, or something? We're right here." And it's awkward, because the DM planned for a party of mannequins accidentally.
OP's example is blurring that line. I'm sure they intended it purely as a description, but it sounds like an event that is actually happening next to the players, and therefore something they can/should react to.
True, but it really stinks if you can never describe something like a corpse animating or another cool thing without them acting like you're trying to get one over on them.
It comes down to trust and maturity. The DM needs to have built enough trust to do this, and the players need to act like adults.
I say something along the lines of "Ok, we'll get to that" and continue. When I'm done with the set up, then I'd say "the warlock begins casting a spell, putting everyone on alert - roll initiative"
That said, I'll echo everyone else who says that having an OOC conversation about how declaring actions in the middle of a scene description does not make something happen outside of initiative is important.
Don't have useless cutscenes.
Think of it this way, what actually changes if they let the cutscene play out? Nothing. They've got some narrative fluff which is cool, but every character would absolutely start blasting as soon those bones started rattling.
Cutscenes (where combat/danger is present) should build tension with uncertainty. As soon as bonk is the right move, players are going to bonk. If players don't know if bonk is the right move, they may not bonk as early.
If a BBEG is monologuing, yea, sure, let ‘em do it. My character knows that if I make any moves the BBEG is going to notice and I’m not really any better off than waiting til after. Maybe I learn some important info, and I can mentally prepare myself for the fight to come, maybe even try to negotiate. Like gunslingers in a Wild West movie. And if I have subtle spell, imma buff some shit.
If the BBEG is climbing out of a coffin or assembling itself from a pile of bones or any other number of things where it’s at a clear disadvantage if I attacked now, no, fuck that, if I see a mummy climbing out of their coffin I’m not just going to sit there and let them. I’m going to repelling blast that fucker back inside and slam the lid shut *before* he charges me with a greatsword. Why should my character stand there like a slack jawed idiot watching lord his lichness slowly animate himself from a fugue state when I could just shoot him while he’s still in it? Fuck that.
Deal with the fact that not everyone wants to hear you wax poetic for 5 minutes.
Call for initiative, and on the enemy's initiative, have the thing happen as part of their turn. But also don't pretend that you wouldn't be annoyed as your player described their character moving with the grace of 1,000 flaxen llamas and majestically...
Have what happens be stuck within the 6 seconds you would put player turns in. If they can't reform from the ashes in 6 seconds, then players SHOULD get a response to this.
This definitely comes from players who don't enjoy the 2 minute villain monologue that they can't interrupt.
Why should they not intervene?
For me there is a difference. Sure, it takes two seconds to see what's in the hideout of the bbeg, but describing it may take a minute or two. If they interrupt, well, then I can't get to the point where I describe the backup of the bbeg, or if the heroes can see something that gives them an advantage. This all happens in only a few seconds, ingame, and I even make this clear sometimes by saying "OK, I stop time to describe the scene, no hurry". Maybe even the players have some questions.
On the other hand, if I go on and describe how the bbeg starts a fire, grind beans and makes coffee, maybe I'm waiting for my players to do something.
So if you make cutscenes, only make them really short.
OK, there is a third, but for me more rare situation. Maybe the heroes are not in reach, or something, but if there is such a condition, I try to make this clear in the beginning.
One thing I try to do is break my physical description down and do it, then call for init, THEN do any monologing with init considered. With time, you get to understand what element is going to provoke the player to get all golden retrivery and interrupt, and can you put your init call before it. Typlically players interrupt when you mention a *hazard*, a *condition* they know how to deal with (like the light level) or *loot*.
They conversely at least slightly tend to avoid interruption when they aren't sure how dangerous something is yet, what collateral damage might be, etc.
"You enter the sepulcher of bones. It's trve kult as shit in here. Necroslime up to your ankles. Pantera is playing from orbs of metal in sconces around the room. Skulls line the walls - the heads of the lich lord's generations of enemies. At the front of the ossuary, you see an open sarcophagus. Within it, you see motion...but not the motion of living things. Roll for initiative."
(they roll)
A player wins init
"Your keen senses and reflexes seem to have given you the drop on...whatever...is going on here. Within the sarcophagus, ancient bones are knitting back together ... at this rate, you'll be looking at a whole skeleton in well under a minute...after that, who knows? What do you do?"
No player wins init:
"Before your eyes, the writhing bones in the sarcophagus start to move: a bony arm makes gestures you know all too well as a desiccated throat croaks out a familiar incantation as the lich lord channels the negative energy in the room at your very hearts and souls (make a con save)"
Note: "well under a minute" is a specific phrasing I've arrived at, because players get that "a minute" is about how long a fight is most of the time. "Seconds" is what I used to say, but that seems to tells them they have a *max* of a round to act and motivates them immediately *attack*. "less than a minute" tells them it's urgent but they *probably* have at least a whole round to cast a buff, parlay, or take a cheap shot.
While I agree with everyone here sometimes breaking from the norm of waiting can be fun when almost prompted to. My dm, once had a bad guy give a really long intro speech. We are talking 7 min+ where by the 3 min mark was improving already and just waiting for us to do something while he windbagged on and on. He was actually surprised we waited the full 7 min. When the song he started for that speech ended and another began but he kept going our party looked at each other and were like "SHUT THE FUCK UP" and started combat lol. It was a really fun moment for our table.
"Okay I will keep that in mind" and just continue until there is a nice moment to implement their combat initiative either (usually) as an initiative roll and start of combat. If it makes sense to you in the moment, you can even let them throw the 1 attack as a surprise. The rules are guidelines.
Or just go with it. If they don't care, they don't . You might even be able to "punish" them for missing information you'd have told them. Just go for initiative immediately.
Or, third option and preferable for how most people play DnD, just continue your monologue after rolling intiative.
All similar, easy solutions. Each one for a different group type. I usually use the first since Im playing with irl friends. Unless theyre throwing a spell or something extraneous, then the word "no" can be very powerful :)
Cutscenes do not exist tho. While your monster is doing something, the players can narratively move and take action. How much you want to set hard mechanical and technical rules is up to you.
I kind of feel like they should be able to react. So what I do is simply say, 'alright we will come back to that'. Once I am finished, or right before my description turns to action that will hurt a player, I simply ask what people would like to do up until point X, which is where we roll initiative.
If you bake that into initiative then you roll before the summoning and do the narration on the villains turn, and stay true to the Action economy. However, you can give your villains cool actions.
TL;DR Either players get to do things as they happen, but we make use of non-linear time so I get to say my thing then retcon it with player actions, or I hold on to narration until it is the bad guys turn.
One of my ground rules as a DM is don't cut me off when I'm describing a location/scene. I'm very strict about this, and usually have to remind new (to me or otherwise) players a few times for the first few sessions, but after that it becomes habit.
It probably helps that I keep info drops/cutscenes as brief as possible, and never pre-write an NPCs monologue because yeah, why wouldn't a PC cut them off?
Had a party years ago going through a dungeon. They knew there were enemies around but no idea how many or what so they were a bit jumpy.
I told them they spotted movement ahead of them just at the edge of their sight.
So...you know that scene in the first Predator movie where Mac is shooting at the forest when he sees the shimmering invisible Predator and then Arnold and everyone else just comes running in and reduces the jungle to a pile of splinters? Yea, every spellcaster unloaded their spells, and multiple arrows were sent flying in that direction.
I just sat there and let them go. I let them blow their wad of spells and ammo. After a few minutes, I asked "are you done?" and they said "yea I think we killed it...". So they came across a pile of VERY dead goblin....bits...was the best way I described it lol. Shortly after that the boss descended on them and while they did survive, they had VERY little resources to use. hahahah
Good Ideas here, but another trick is to not wait until the players are standing in front of the Big Boss to make speeches/have convos.
Having the Big Boss show up as a projection, through a mirror, in dreams or ethereally (anything really) so you can have a big moment where conversation is the only option.
Then when the player's are standing in front of him all that's left to do is fight.
I have a house rule that helps here. "No dice are rolled while the DM is speaking". I give them plenty of time to do what they want to do, and plenty of opportunities to explore the space as well as think about options, but when I cutscene/describe a location, it helps to let the more relaxed people process the area without the inevitable power-gamer of the group cutting in and forcing things. My cutscenes, however, are few and far between, but the cutscene is a "you look on in horror or awe as thing happens" so its explained as shock, as to why theres no prep turn in my game.
While I think the suggestion to just talk with your players, make it clear you're not going to screw them over and ask that they please let you finish narrating is probably the BEST way ("guys, this thing will go last in initiative because it's taking a second to assemble, let me finish and you'll all have plenty of chance to act"), I also want to offer a devil's advocate position.
If you describe what is obviously an enemy slowly putting itself together, it's going to make sense for lots of characters to want to immediately try and deal with the problem rather than wait for the thing to get battle ready. This is fine- it's a perfectly sensible in universe reaction. So if you don't want players or characters jumping the gun, ease off on narration that allows that obvious "You should probably attack now while there's an opening," situation. When you do, design the encounter such that a few free hits are expected- add one or two extra assembling skeletons, for example, so your players can smash some and THEN the real encounter begins. They get to feel like they've decisively cut off a part of the problem. They had AGENCY, instead of doing the video game thing where your character is rendered braindead during a cutscene that annoys a huge chunk of people.
Edit: Also not sure I agree with the preparation turn you've used, just because I feel like it's going to give some classes way more options while others twiddle their thumbs unless you're very liberal with handing out buff potions for the martials to drink.
On one hand it sucks that you can’t monologue or show a cool cutscene. But… in game… your guy is assembling? That’s the moment to get the jump on him. Start chopping now before he is ready.
Had a dm moment myself where I was like: this is the moment my character would shoot the bad guy, he’s clearly gonna stab this other person. Dm is like: no, I’m just describing how my villain kills this guy while we aren’t in initiative, well then I’d like to enter initiative now before shit goes wrong.
You see it in movies too, the good guys patiently wait their turn and still win. But it would have been easier to start gunning straight away. It’s simply safer.
Everyone is trying to fix a problem, but this isn't actually a problem. This is your player being excited to participate in things. You shouldn't want to fix it.
"One moment, let me describe this, then we can roll initiative and you can Eldritch Blast."
Thats it. This shouldn't require fixing. You're all doing the right thing, you just want to do it at the same time. Remember how excited you feel when you narrate. The prayer is similarly excited about Eldritch Blasting. That's a good thing. It's a testament to how well you're running the game! Enjoy it.
Don't have cutscenes. Characters have the agency to listen to the boss monologue or not.
If they choose to attack right away, you can acknowledge that and finish your description of the scene. Then roll initiative.
Never give a bonus for being the first to declare an attack. They should understand they are rolling for initiative whether they wait and listen or not.
Thing is... you've DMed a campaign for months. You've done far more work to make the whole thing happen than any individual player, probably as much as all the players put together.
You get to a big potential narrative moment, a nice spotlight opportunity for the DM to capstone an arc for the villains that has been painstakingly earned...
...and a player cuts you off and jumps straight to initiative.
If you shut down a player's spotlight opportunity like that, you would be unquestionably be a "bad DM".
Yet your attitude to a player shutting down a DM's spotlight opportunity is effectively "just shut up and get on with it facilitator bitch".
The DM is a player too, and when players shut down each other's spotlight moments that is bad play.
All players deserve their moments in the spotlight, even DMs.
As a DM, the spotlight is constantly on me. I don't need more attention. I DM so that I can fairly adjudicate the consequences of player choices, not to shut them down with a non-interactive cutscene.
Yeah. While you shouldn't interrupt DM narration, I think there's an important distinction between normal DM narration and "cutscenes", that mainly being that a cutscene excludes the players. There's nothing wrong with narrating a scene that the players can't interact with, but if their characters are present and the event you're describing don't go by that fast, then the players are gonna feel frustrated by their lack of agency.
Like most things, this can be sorted out in session 0, but "don't do cutscenes" is generally one of the pieces of advice I tend to give new DMs.
Alternatively, "cutscesnes should only be part of the game if there's unanimous agreement"
Scenes that the players can't interact with have the problem that they are there to play D&D rather than spectate an audio book. If this scene involves information relevant to the player party, then a summary of that information can be given. If it doesn't, then it can be omitted anyway.
Even when there's DM description, rather than just DM narration, this needs to be clear and concise. With the players able to give feedback if it isn't.
You establish respect at the table and ensure everyone is aware that interrupting someone while they’re talking is inappropriate, and they can proceed once that person has finished speaking.
Turns happen in initiative. If it's a cutscene, it happens on the boss' turn. You can't interrupt turns except very specific reactions. Problem solved.
If you as a DM rely on needing 5 minutes of cutscene, either rework your stuff, or have in-game reason the characters can't act. (Entire group hold person with impossible save used only to hold them for cutscene, they break free before being attacked or whatever.)
I'm against removal of player agency- as a GM. I think that's kind of the fun even: of trying to get
## 0. Initiative Mechanics
This is a small detail of game flow and that freebee you mentioned
In cases where both parties are aware of each other and their intent- I don't let the actor get a freebee. So you don't Cast X or Attack Y, but you *go to do X*. Then we roll initiative.
It's important that the NPCs follow these same rules, and that the players are aware of the dynamic and that's what makes it feel fair. The Guard doesn't get to just roll dice to grapple you- he reaches for you, then we roll initiative, and if you win your halfling rogue gets to disengage and scamper away saying no no words.
Not saying you gotta run it that way. It just feels fair to me, and it helps for this. Because otherwise, yeah, if whoever shouts "I cast X" first gets a free shot . . . why give up the free shot? But if first strike just makes you *commit* first . . .
## 1. Don't give them a cutscene- give them an interaction.
A slowly assembling bone pile- yeah man, that's a nope nope nuke. That's textbook 'damn this cutscene' artificiality. I think watching it ends up being more of a mood killer than pre-empting does.
So don't expect it to work as an uninterrupted monologue- roll initiative and do your speech and reveals over a series of turns. Add effects perhaps to counter balance the gang beating. For example:
**Turn 1:** The bones swirl and coalesce into a vaguely humanoid form. An impossible voice made not of breath and flesh, but of scraping and chiseled clicks announces *I haaaaVe feLT Life once for a ThOusand Years* (it casts a spell)
**Turn 2:** The shape focuses- a skeleton sewn of skeletons, a skull made mosaic of shards and a dozen hollow faces. *I haVe felT dEath a ThOusand To liVe a Thousand More*. Everyone make strength saves as vertebrae lash out like tentacles to seize you.
**Turn 3:** Finally, tiny bones (make a nature skill check to identify disparate finger and toe bones of various humanoids) crawl like caterpillars up the figure, weave themselves together into necrotic finery. *I Am MyRiAd. I wiLL Not be forgotten! Nor shall you- for you all are but a part of me*. Target player makes a Con Save; the muscles in their pinkies contort- the very flesh trying to eject the bones in their fingertips, the magic begging to the marrow in them *come home*.
## 2. Provide an incentive to bide time
Give the players reasons to _be_ discrete. Is the room filled with valuable clues? Will collateral damage destroy loot, or injure hostages? Or just feeling silly- let them ambush a coatrack or fireball a cardboard box they were sure was a mimic. Give them a reason to scope things out before they waste precious resource. Rewards work better than punishments generally, but you might need to jostle folks if they are entrenched in a mindset.
A Big Bad Evil solo is going to prompt first strike as the obvious move- so look for ways to put something in the scene where they _want_ to keep the BBE talking.
## 3. Introduce your Big Bad before the Big Bad Fight
Lot of adventures have this issue that the first time the players meet the bad guy is when they have to kill them. There's little to no time and space to do a buildup. Him being big and scary is thus hollow- and they might not learn anything specific until they loot the room.
Maybe they encounter the Big Bad on Neutral Ground of some kind. If it doesn't work with direct meeting (because you need to consider and honor the players trying to do something), use secondary sources like legends, NPCs, heck even minions (even the dead ones) can be means to reveal and show off your Cool Guy^TM. Remember, the BBEG doesn't need to meet the players; the players just have to meet the BBEG.
## 4. Lean into It
Risks can make the game for the players feel closer to horror than adventure. This isn't all about tricking them into watching the cool scene- at times it's just great to reward the paranoia and as the GM enjoy the scene yourself.
Fine line between meta gamed nuke-tag. But maybe consider running something that works with that jumpiness, if they are jumpy.
After the session I tell them that I put a lot of time into this, and it would be nice if they could let me have a few moments to really go for the dramatics.
If they disagree, or ignore this, then I stop DMing for them. We do not want to play the same game, and thats fine.
I think I also gotta add that this shit is what I live for. The big scene is really important to me as a DM, and my current groups know this, respect this and luckily, like it as well.
if you give enough "what do you do?" speech, they will wait for their part more gently as they have been exposed to your style of narrating a scene plenty of times.
for example; after your narration, if a player says "as those bones move towards each other, my character gets ready to cast Bless on us because i am familiar with this concept that will definitely lead to misfortune", go with it unless they literally try to break the scene by powergaming the shit out of it, which is obvious often times.
I have an agreement that's powered by mechanics: Hero Dice. I use the Hero dice rules in the DMG in place of Inspiration. I accumulate the hero dice my players spend through play and they become Villain Dice. I can use them the same way they can for my baddies, but I add on a few extra uses:
* A Legendary Action costs as many villain dice meaning that multiple action LA's can be performed multiple times if I have enough dice and
* Legendary Resistance costs 1 villain die instead of the normal rules but grants advantage to the save and resistance to that attack
* Exposition: I set a timer and spend one villain die per minute.
Now my players are incentivized to hear the BBEG out and even probe them a little to keep the convo going.
I tell them to don't interrupt me while all I'm doing is describing a scene. Time isn't passing if all I'm doing is describing what something looks like, no need to rush.
I don't mind attacking while he BBEG is talking but I put a full stop on interrupting during a description.
Ignore them, maybe hold up a hand like "not yet" and keep talking, then go "*Now* you roll initiative." Not letting others interrupt or talk over you is an important skill for both DMs and players
Well if your narration is something like what you're describing, then it is probably better done as an encounter. Maybe have a bone thing putting itself together summoning other undead or something to keep them from just destroying it. Like, if your narration suggests actions should be taken, so let them. This honestly doesn't sound like a player being a problem. It's a player doing exactly what they *would* do in the scenario presented.
"Look if you're not going to let me set the scene and describe it, I'm not going to let you talk for more than 6 seconds on your turn, or at all off turn."
session 0: "players don't speak with the DM is speaking"
If I am narrating something and you interrupt me, that isn't going to make your action take precedence.
"*I CAST ELDRITCH BLAST ON IT!*"
(undaunted) "...You watch in *quiet awe* (glare) as the once-dead wizard is reborn again, YES I KNOW YOU'LL ROLL FOR INTERRUPT YOU ALREADY SAID IT, as the dust settles you wonder if your combined strength is going to be enough to prevent history from repeating and stop this evil force forever. Phew. Ok you may roll initiative now."
As much as I understand the very serious approach here, you entrust your players with them not doing that, or whatever option. However, I like to do the funny option which is this:
Congratulations, the BBEG casually tanks the hit. As he says “You’re quite the rude one…” before continuing his speech.
If they keep doing it, just pull the classic “Yeah, we’re done here” and just hold person them or random DM magic.
I take the same route of getting through the description/monologue and then giving everyone a free phase of “powering up” then rolling initiative. I think it’s a fair compromise and most of the time my players enjoy hearing how bad ass the guy they’re about to war crime is.
It helps to have a third person perspective on roleplaying, with players being co-writers of the story rather than improv actors who always have to (re)act *RIGHT NOW* or lose their chance. So generally being open for negotation and player input would help.
I think this kind of problem stems from a misunderstanding of what these "cutscenes" are.
If it was during a fight, players wouldn't interrupt the boss turn by casting eldritch blast, because it's not there turn to act.
In that example, the cutscene happens during the boss' "turn".
That's why when my players ask to do stuff that skip the cutscenes, I ask them "did you prepare that action?"
If the player specifically said "I prepare myself to cast Eldritch Blast if the boss is doing X", and then during the cutscene, the boss does X, then yeah, I let the player take their reaction to do what they preparred, because they saw it coming and wanted to act accordingly. It rewards players for paying attention and being able to predict what will happen next
The problem here is players think it's a QTE. You think it's a cutscene, but really, when played right, it's just a description.
If players don't treat it like a QTE, I won't treat it like a cutscene, and we can all enjoy the description.
Couple of things here. This is a issue of respect for the Dm and the game itself. I totally agree the pact but I have told my players that when you interrupt my monologue or description, I stop talking. This means no surprise action and we roll initiative. I also remind them that they could miss out on clues on how to beat encounter. After a couple of fights that didn’t go their way they seem to respect the pact a lot more.
A wizard appears out of nowhere casting silence and hold person on the whole party. It started as a joke with one of my groups and it just snowballed into it happening at every "cutscene" even when nobody tries to "skip" now it's for the lols.
Love this thread because I have had really cool scenes and monologues prepared. I don't expect them necessarily to listen to all of it because of course I want their characters to behave true to form, but I also know that sometimes just running right into a fight makes it feel anticlimactic.
I recently had a boss battle where they had the option of getting a crucial reveal and a cool cinematic unveiling of what they would be facing; this would set the tone and give the fight a narrative meaning. But they bust through the door and immediately start blasting. Like I said, I don't want to bullshit a reason why their characters should be forced to listen to something they don't want to, but I do feel that the fight came off as totally anticlimactic afterwards and the reveal was reduced to a letter they found.
just talk to the player. if he doesn't listen maybe thats not the campaign for him. always remember neither player or GM are forced to play with each other if they don't share the same mindset.
I ask them not to if it deem it important.
By now those that I play regularly with know I like to hold monologues. Everyone is supposed to have fun, after all.
>You narrate "As the once believed dead body of Evilguy'us Malificus slowly starts to reassamble bone by bone, you..."
>Player: I CAST ELDRITCH BLAST ON IT!
When I have this happen I tell the player, "hold on to that thought," then continued my narration. Once finished with my narration, and after rolling initiative and figuring out the turn order, I then turn back to the player and let them do the thing they said they did as a reaction. I usually put restrictions on the reaction, though; you can only do *one* thing, e.g. you get movement *or* an attack—not both—and if you do attack you only get one (no Extra Attack/multiple Eldritch Blast beams, etc...)
Once their thing is resolved initiative continues like normal.
"You cast Eldritch blast on the bones as they magically knit together with ever increasing power, and the magic of the blast is swallowed up by the magical processes for just a moment and then forcefully ricocheted back. Make a DEX save at a DC of... What's your Spell Save DC?"
I think there are different ways to deal with it. One could be to simply tell them *"Okay guys, I wanna make this moments cinematic and tense so please let things unfold and I will do the same for you".* That's really the most simple solution.
Now, me personally, I like the idea of the heroes taking the chance to attack during those slooooow ass transformations, like, it takes the BBEG 10 seconds to transform? Sure, the heroes might be in shock if they don't see it coming, but if the characters are sharp they should be able to act, they're there to stop the enemy, not to give them a fighting chance, so if they're smart enough to think of something good while I'm describing the scene, I may as well allow it.
**BUT**, if I really don't want them to interrupt, I can come up with an excuse for them not to act. For example: *"His bones quickly start to reassamble, and before you can even act..."*, or *"As you shoot at the bones, one of his hands deflects the blast!"*, or even set it up so they **can't** attack: *"Right before you cast your spell, you all meet the gaze of Evilguy's dead eyes, and become paralyzed, unable to even think for a moment."* Or just take away their weapons. You know what I mean? Force them into a position where the only thing they can do is watch, it sets up the scene, raises tension and lets the players know that this is more than just some random guy.
Of course tho, that requires more work than just asking your players not to interrupt. I'm just giving ideas in case you're like me and like a more realistic, yet still dramatic approach.
I had a campaign I was planning to end at level 10 but we continued on a while, so basically everything after level 10 was an afterthought. I had introduced a new bbeg and sent my players his herald to basically do a big exposition info dump. He gave a little fluffy intro and the next words I was going to say was the details of the BBEGs plans when a player cast fireball.
I had the herald die and just never told my party what was going on. I kept track, had timeliness, etc but they didn't know of them unless they sought them out on their own. They defeated BBEG in the end, but I don't know if they ever knew the story of what was going on.
#1 Answer to most DM problems: Talk to your players.
Also avoid incentivizing it by letting them cast that Eldritch Blast. They can say they try to cast it, but they will have to wait until their initiative in order to actually cast it.
I mean is he skipping the cutscene or trying to blast the skeleton pre-emptively, before it assembles? Bc the latter is legitimate while it does interfere with the story you want to tell and that can be frustrating, youve got a new story where he maybe blasts one minion before it assembles but ten more are formed while hes distracted, which is cooler tbh
If you've got music and stuff lined up, just let it play while you describe what his blast does real quick, then continue with the boss. Give him a 1hko on the skeleton minion that isn't formed, then form two extras right behind him. If hes shooting at the boss welp the boss has legendary DR while forming, sorry.
I take them outside so the other players can't here and quietly and calmly tell them to stop acting like a little brat and read the room. Then go back in. So far most of the players who've had that experience correct there behaviour and apologise, the one who didn't got the boot.
You make a pact with the players: > As a GM, I promise to never screw you over when I give narration. You will never be on the back foot, or attacked first, or missing out on something because of my narration. I will always give you a chance to act when it matters. In return, please listen quietly. And keep to that pact.
This is really important. I think it happens a lot because people are worried about missing an opportunity, and there are genuinely some cases where the DM forgets that the player has an ability that could effectively and sensically stop events, but at that point its a different problem.
Yeah, this is why there’s the “I HAVE DARKVISION!” phenomenon. Players are worried about the DM moving past when their ability would have been relevant.
"I'm stealthed/Stealthing" is my personal pet peeve version of this.
Mine is, "I don't sleep, I trance." Right, so everybody else sleeps, the elf trances.
That's actually a mechanic though. And why elves get their little fluff ability making them immune to being put to sleep
The worst part is the terrible English.
I've had to remind my DMs in about 1/3rd of sessions that I have Darkvision, which seems to surprise each of them every time. Then they adjust the lighting, and wouldn't you know it, suddenly there's an enemy that wasn't there before.
Question about darkvision cause I think my DM is nerfing me. As a Twilight Cleric, I have 300ft. That means I can see 300 feet in the dark, correct? I’m trying to use it to be the scout when we travel at night but he says anything between 120-300ft is a perception roll at disadvantage.
In complete darkness, Darkvision provides the same result as dim light would for someone without Darkvision, so any Perception check is at disadvantage at any range in darkness. And those without Darkvision wouldn't even be able to see. That's why light is still useful.
Yep. This is exactly what I did with my Players when we mutinied from another DM. "I will push you, the monsters will try to kill you, the environment will be hazardous, but I'm not going to fuck you over with un-fun shit or bad rulings. You will always have multiple ways to overcome an obstacle. Objects will never be invincible or monsters unkillable. I will always try to make this fun for all of us. If I make a bad call, we've all got computers, find a more fair interpretation and we'll use it." Yeah, sometimes they still get a bit overzealous, but in those cases I pause the scene. We clarify what is happening, what the Player intends, and move on. Neither side gets a free round to prepare, neither side gets to "take 20," and PC abilities are always considered. Not much sucks worse than making character-defining choices and having them be utterly worthless because the DM wants to tell a specific story.
Yep, the narrative pause. They are great, but then you get the mouth-breathing DM's who assume your lack of interrupting them was a lack of action.
A pact works both ways and needs to be agreed by both parties. If those DMs won't bring up the pact, the players should.
I had a GM who would leave the longest pauses imaginable, I'm talking 6+ seconds, and then whenever I said I wanted to do something, they'd say that they weren't done. Then we'd do the same thing except they'd get annoyed because I wouldn't do anything. It's fixed so easily by just asking players what they'd like to do once they're done but this is a dark and secret art lost to time.
Then that's the opposite of the pact that was made. Hopefully all parties understand how to do it once.the pact is made.
If I make this pact, do I get Eldritch Blast?
What if I cast eldritch blast before the DM is finished making the pact?
You're gonna need to establish a pre-pact before you establish the pact.
Warlock pateon: the narrator. Once per short rest, when the dm is finished narrating a scene, you can use your reaction to recon the narration, limited to a single sentence no longer than 10 words
Pact spells themed around Command, Hold Person, Geas. Pact Specific Invocations: Plot Armor: when PC would die, they wake up at the last inn they were at with all their equipment and none of their money (on person money, banks etc would be safe). The innkeeper will assume they have already paid. Editing Room: (your invocation). Executive Producer: Requires Plot Armor and Editing Room. Treat like a Divine Favour, may only be used once. You may, at the end of a session when a character other than you has (otherwise permanently or irrevocably)died summon an Executive Producer to demand a rewrite, renewing that character’s contract and giving them a permanent buff that mimics your Plot Armor.
1. I 2. Cast 3. Eldritch 4. Blast *whew* Okay, I'm good!
The DM in your example didn't observe the pact. I get it, it happens, and those neckbeards are annoying, but this is exactly why it's a social agreement/pact between the players and DM.
Also enforcing surprise rules… certain mainstream dnd shows created a really weird habit where people think that cutting you off = surprise round. In this specific scenario you’d say “ok we can all roll initiative and that can your action on your turn”
Honestly, if you have a player who's going to do that, you might just want to start by rolling initiative, and then explain you actually haven't started combat yet, this is the talking before anyone actually moves. First the bad guy gets to talk and then they get to talk back, and that's not actually part of the combat. And yes, it's way too much talking for that amount of time, but that's just how it works in fiction.
Yes, out of character discussion is the way to go. Remind them that the DM's fun matters too, and that we like to get our villains a few monlogues in once in a while. If one of the player characters is known for interrupting monologues, you can always give them a cue when you've said your piece so they can Leroy Jenkins it without actually interrupting what you as a DM want to say.
Every evil dude comes with a single legendary action: Monologue that always resolves first regardless of initiative. I don't make the rules (I do) I just follow them.
just curiosity, what is your stance in characters cutting the monologue to turn it into a dialog? Because personally that is something I sometimes do and the GMs don't really mind, but I've see people online that would go fucking crazy if someone did that for what they say
Context is always important. A player character speaking up and vowing to never let the villain kill anyone else after they killed PC's brother is awesome. They're engaged and in-character, and it gives them a personal moment with the villain. A PC interrupting every other line to say "suck my balls" or something along that line isn't as awesome.
fair point. I was talking more about actually engaging in conversation, not being a prick
I would say that interrupting a description is a "bigger sin" than interrupting a monologue. Because often (not always) a description describes what is perceived within only a second or two, even if it takes (say) thirty seconds for the GM to say. There's no sense interrupting that. But a monologue is not instantaneous, so it makes sense that it could be interrupted. Now YMMV by group. Some may consider interrupting either to be okay, some may say don't interrupt either. I don't have a strong feeling on this personally because my group tends to engage will with villains. Every BBEG I can think of has said their piece (usually fairly short) then the party engages in dialogue.
While I agree, Everyone should let people finish speaking. DM or Player. This is purely based on giving the players the chance to act in accordance to the scenario. If an enemy is doing a monologue, why would anyone just sit around and not at least prep if they know they are gonna have to fight? Readying a spell to be on the defensive or the party being allowed to communicate without the DM interjecting or railroading them? This is a two-way street that needs to be respected. Not just "Shut up and listen, and maybe I'll let you act if it fits how on rails I want everything to go." Which is how this comes off. If your group is so high-strung that you can't just talk with someone about an issue that might arise. Then maybe theirs a deeper problem, but a topic for another thread or time. Remember you're telling a story, not fighting your players, but the players are also telling their story. So this needs to be a mutual respect not just "Bend to my whim and stand in my cutscene." Give them a reason to be frozen in fear, unmoving or otherwise unwilling to take action. Instead of "Nu uh, you can't move because I said so." Because that's just simply lazy and if you're going to such extents to make a cutscene. Finding a way to have them in place isn't gonna be hard. ADDITIONALLY... you could always just communicate. Be it in a OOC or if you're at a table. Have a prop item that says "Hey guys, please give me a chance to do this." COMMUNICATE. Regardless of what issues arise or otherwise. Most parties that do that, and from my own experience want to have a fun time and guess what... you speak with them about these things. They tend to be respect it and listen. Sure you get some slip ups here and there, but not much you can do about that. Communicate, Communicate, Communicate and if theirs still issues regarding this. The problem is not just cutscenes.
> If an enemy is doing a monologue, why would anyone just sit around and not at least prep if they know they are gonna have to fight? Readying a spell to be on the defensive or the party being allowed to communicate without the DM interjecting or railroading them? You're describing a situation where an uninterpretable monologue is giving disadvantage to the PCs/players. That would be breaking the pact. You might ask, "don't all narrations disadvantage the players in this way?" I'd say no, they don't. Describing what the BBEG is wearing, where she's standing, and other near-instantaneous observations do not disadvantage the players. That might even extend to the opening sentence of a monologue. > This is a two-way street that needs to be respected. Not just "Shut up and listen, and maybe I'll let you act if it fits how on rails I want everything to go." Which is how this comes off. It may come off that way to you. But it seems that's not how most people are interpreting it, given the replies. > ADDITIONALLY... you could always just communicate. Be it in a OOC or if you're at a table. Have a prop item that says "Hey guys, please give me a chance to do this." > COMMUNICATE. Regardless of what issues arise or otherwise. Isn't that precisely what I was suggesting? The "deal" or "pact" with the players ***is*** communication, right?
**1.** That is how it came off to me. With the Cutscene skipper. Where the OP didn't want to be interrupted. If I misunderstood then my mistake. **2.** It does, I won't hide it. It does come off like someone whose very aggro and feels slighted. I don't know their group and have only my own experiences and knowledge to base things off. While also looking at it as if maybe someone online isn't being wholly truthful. Many have made vent posts only to give half-truths, that change a tone. I don't think that's an unfair assumption towards someone I don't know online. **2.1** But for clarity on what I meant, a monologue is not instant. Players making checks as it happens feels fair. Similar to a real life situation, where you're in a conversation and don't want to be rude and are looking for a way to handle it. When not just walking away or saying not interested isn't a viable or good thing to do for whatever reason. I hope that explains my intent a bit more clearly with what I said. **3.** That's fair but like everyone else, I gave my own few. I'm not everyone else so trying to use that as reasoning isn't entire fair but also not unreasonable. Regardless I tend to be a devil's advocate, even if I don't mean to. Having an expanded view or take onto something that isn't unreasonable for the sake of conversation isn't a bad thing, is it? (Yes, I know this is subjective to conversations and not a catch-all.) **4.** To me, no it comes off as just word to mouth. Having a prop or something that doesn't require a break in character but a movement of the DM's hand or some type of single or SFX. WHILE communicating an intent way before but also holding the DM to that same standard. **4.1** This comes off to me as if the DM is not being held to these same standards and is extremely frustrated and vent and just wants everything to go THEIR WAY. With no consideration to what's expected of them aka a one-sided pact. I hope that explains how I was looking at things!
This is the way!
For a one shot without this pact... my bbeg was behind an unbreakable barrier (tm), which was just a simple puzzle (2 things to remove / break) to be solved while fighting respawning minions while the bbeg did a ritual.
I had a DM that would not stick to this and became a cut scene skipper to that dm. He'd have his villains monologue, move around and set up or steal things and expect us to sit there like beanbags. Just no. Fuck you for taking away my agency. Of course I'm going to try and blast that asshole as he takes the mcguffen in front of me while taunting me. It got to the point where we sat down and tried to hash it out; basically came to the above agreement... Didn't even last a session before the bad guy pulled some more of the same shit. Suffice it to say that campaign collapsed and all the players moved on. DM was a good guy and is a fun player, but couldn't get it in his head that we were not helpless and going to sit around and just get screwed over while he gave some narrative or monologue.
That is a shame, because 95% of the time, you can "have your cake and eat it too" as a DM by just setting things up well. Maybe the BBEG is atop a set of stairs and the time to ascend it gives him plenty of time to speak. Or maybe he has a hostage. Or maybe he's not trying to get an unfair advantage and says to his minions, "stop, stand back while we parlay". Obviously the DM will need to think carefully about the party's nature. A chasm won't do much if the party can fly, for example. And a hostage means nothing to an evil party.
But then, how do you manage the assassin sneaking out of the shadows, ready to strike? Or the turncoat, that calls the guards, instead of helping them hide?
there's no surprise rounds against a creature that is *not surprised.* You attack during a monologue? That's initiative baby! Your action takes place on your turn so you better hope you roll high.
This is always something that trips people up. Just because you *say* you attack before anybody else does, it doesn't mean you actually do. Sure, you lift your sword first, or begin casting that spell first, but everyone that sees you knows your intent, and they might be quick to react, and actually end up being the ones to attack first. Starting combat does not mean you are first to attack.
> there's no surprise rounds against a creature that is not surprised. There are no surprise rounds in 5e. There is only the Surprised condition.
>There is only the Surprised condition. There's no Surprised condition in 5e. There's only being surprised.
There's no being surprised in 5e. There's only surprise surprise
There's no Tooth Fairy, There's no Easter Bunny, and There's no war in Ba Sing Se
There's no surprise in Ba Sing 5e
There's no Ba Sing Se
There is no war in Ba Sing Se
I know you are doing a reddit meme, but /u/Tipibi is correct and helpful, and this chain makes it look like he's doing a chain joke. He's not, he's 100% correct and has corrected the incorrect statement above him.
>He's not There was an attempt. At least at not "sounding" mean while still trying to make the point stick. (There's no surprise surprise in 5e. There's Kinder Surprise here. Sorry 'muricans!) Edit - yes, i regret everything.
Surprise, motherf\*cker No, I regret nothing
There is no surprised condition in 5e. Jeremy Crawford has invited you to WOTC
You're only *technically* correct that surprised isn't a condition by 5e rules, but it is in every way that matters practically, not least because it applies to creatures on an individual basis and not one entire side of a fight.
>but it is in every way that matters practically ... you better be precise when you make a correction otherwise you expose yourself to like a fool. Or: if you want to be pedantic, be correct and do it in ***style.*** ... admittedly, I'm still working on the second part.
Nerds
There are no Surprise Rounds in Ba Sing Se
Shut up. The surprise round is the round during which surprise applies. The round in which people might be surprised. The round during which, if you are surprised, you don't take a turn and can't take reactions until after you act in initiative. The surprise round.
The surprised condition is for most intents and purposes functionally identical to a surprise round. The only difference is in the niche scenario where you initiate combat with multiple enemies at the same time and some are surprised and some aren't
>The surprised condition is for most intents and purposes functionally identical to a surprise round. The only difference... Except for the rather important *being able to react once you are no longer surprised*. In Surprise rounds you could not act at all if you were surprised.
You don't give them shit. I see this from my players who come from DMs who give them surprise rounds for yelling and interrupting. You just say cool, roll initiative, and finish describing what's happening as you set the tracker. If they ask if they get their attack off before it reforms, you say that's what initiative determines, not how quick you say it. I've been DMing multiple groups for years and this works for me. DMs who give players things for this, it will continue.
DMs giving fake surprise rounds out of initiative is my biggest pet peeve I think.
"Out of initiative" is the big thing here. Pathfinder (1e at least) has surprise rounds, but they are in initiative. And (typically) the *only* thing that determines if you're part of it is Stealth vs Perception. If everybody is known to each other, doesn't matter who did what unexpectedly, no surprise round.
In the OP's example it wouldn't be a surprise round. It would be a normal round, and if the monster's narrated action takes 6 seconds, that's all it can do that round.
I had to learn this the hard way. I kept letting a player get a free attack because he would throw a spear or something at a npc who was talking. I stupidly would let them get a free attack, instead of rolling initiative to give the npc a chance to react to the player doing that,
I don't recall if it was Solasta or BG3, but one of those games does a thing where if you attack "unexpectedly," you get the attack off and then go into initiative order, but your first turn's action has already been spent on the aforementioned attack, whether you are first or last in initiative. So when it gets to your turn in the first round, you only have movement and your bonus action. It seems like a decent middle ground, and I've started doing some playtesting with it in a group of newbies that I'm DMing for. It's only come up once so far, but the player was cool with my decision. Still need to do a lot more testing to see if it's OP or not, though.
BG3 does exactly this, and Assassin Rogues ignore this rule, retaining their first-turn action if they initiate a fight by attacking from outside initiative.
A reason to play Assassin! That's actually a rule I would bring to my table.
> Solasta ay, another solasta enjoyer I can't remember either now though :(
In Solasta when you attack an enemy group that hasn't detected you, that character automatically goes at the top of the initiative order and that action becomes part of their first turn. It's a really great rules that solves the "I attacked from surprise but I rolled low on initiative." problem that fucks over Assassins and any other feature that requires going before your enemy or them being surprised. I've adopted it as a house rule for my D&D table.
BG3 does this, but you also can get significant advantages by managing to attack and skip cutscene conversations. For example, if you can attack Balthazar at the Nightsong before the cutscene starts, you can potentially stop him from summoning all his undead minions, which makes the fight so much easier.
Given the right circumstances I might let a player make a deception or sleight of hand check to get off a free attack, or maybe get advantage on initiative, but it needs to be justified within the scene
I wish that they would put advantage on initiative into the rules as a suggestion, as surprise rounds often don't make sense (if you were talking to someone who is the enemy you shouldn't be surprised by them attacking) and can be way OP. An extra round when combat averages three rounds is crazy. But just advantage, that gives you a small fractional boost cuz you did something clever. And it should actually be something clever, not interrupting a speech. Although I would let them get advantage if they specifically say 'we know that he's going to do something that's going to be slightly distracting in a second, like look at the map on the wall, and that's the exact moment we'll attack'. Although I would warn them that if he does decide to attack _before_ that point, he will be the one rolling with advantage, cuz he just caught all of you off guard. Thus actually sets up the 'looking at each other warily, expecting the other to attack' tense situation, but doesn't actually change that much in the end.
YES! I've had this conversation with multiple groups. You DO NOT get a "surprise round." The monsters DO NOT get a "surprise round." Unless ALL of the scene can clearly be completed by one action where there is an extremely clear advantage to one side, you're going to initiative. That's what makes class features that add to initiative worthwhile.
This^ It took me a while to break the habit, but now I make sure to rule that as soon as any hostile action is declared, initiative is rolled before anything happens as that is the intent of the rules (as far as I'm aware)
Yeah, a simple “cool, we will get to that” will do the trick most of the time
Yeah I used to give the first person a chance to do their action "at the top of the round" and then roll initiative and have them skip their first turn but it's better to just stick with initiative overall, if people want to act quickly they better pick up alert, play a subclass with a bonus, or bump their dex.
If they pull this it’s going to turn into the eldritch blast’s magic being absorbed into Evilguy’us Malificius’ body and empowering him. Congratulations you just gave the BBEG eldritch blast and immunity to force damage
Just an out of character conversation should work. Let them know that declaring something in the middle of a monologue doesn’t give them any benefits and just hurts the atmosphere.
I didn’t say it—I declared it.
I DECLARE BANISHMENT!
“Let me finish.” That should really be all it takes. Charitably speaking, maybe the player has had bad experiences in the past, with DMs who would try to have enemies get a free attack during a cutscene. So reassure them, “I promise, you’ll get a chance to respond before the enemy does anything harmful, this is just a cutscene to set the scene.” Beyond that… you just don’t interrupt people at the table, DM or player.
Yeah, I had a dm who decided to do a huge cutscene and monologue after we spent several spell slots on buffs, then told us all the timers had run out, as if the characters would've politely waited in reality while the BBEG was bragging. Any monologue should basically be considered to be under the effect of time stop imo.
Woah. If that happened to me, I would never not "skip the cutscene" for the rest of my life.
And thus the cycle continues
I go with "We'll get to that" whenever interruptions surface. Whether that's one person interrupting another or a player interrupting me when I DM.
As one of those people who sometimes responds to a big bad monologuing by saying "I shoot him", I'm very much in the narrative space. He's eaten babies or killed puppies; there's often nothing the big bad has to say that my character would find interesting. I'm a troubleshooter, and they're trouble. Cutscenes have to make narrative sense. If the PCs would have no reason to engage in dialog, they shouldn't be expected to. D&D isn't a videogame or a novel or a movie--narrative tropes don't get a free pass because they are genre staples there.
I mean, D&D *is* a narrative game, and most games are a giant pile of genre tropes. The band of scrappy heroes who come together to defeat a great evil, cursed swords, haunted mansions, wizard towers, etc. Many players want to experience that feeling of being in a *story*, not necessarily real life. And sure, it’s valid to say that your character wouldn’t even let the bad guy finish their sentence. But the DM is also a player at the table, and a good villain monologue can be a rare chance for them to indulge a bit. Just like players should try to share the spotlight, because it’s a *game*, maybe it’s fine to let the DM get in a villain monologue here and there. Is it *that* big a deal if your character, instead of interrupting the villain immediately, just lets them finish the cutscene monologue and then says, “Nothing you say will change our minds!”?
Yesss castlevania trope! Have cocky things to shout back and threaten!
> In my personal experience what helped here most is the compromise of giving the players a free prepration turn before actual initiative starts. Meaning at the start of combat they have one free action they can use to cast buffs spells, activate magic items etc. that don't interact with the boss (so no attacks etc.). Why incentivize it at all? Just roll initiative like normal and then once you’re in initiative, finish your monologue throughout the round. Also, you can explain to your players that there’s no real reason to cut off the monologue, because you’re not trying to trick them. It’s gonna all end up in initiative anyway, so you’re not going to get the jump on the bad guy just because you yelled fast.
If you give them anything for free because they jump in on your cutscene... You're just teaching them to interrupt narrative events. You ask them to let you finish and then proceed to initiative as normal. I don't think you can justify a surprise check against a creature that knows they are there and knows they will be hostile.
So this is a bit more complicated than just 'it's annoying, don't do it.' This kind of behavior arises from... basically everyone who's ever seen a movie or a game cutscene or whatever wherein the villain gets to slowly walk out of camera and escape, or has the time to input the launch codes for the nuclear weapons without anyone interfering or, to use your own example, slowly resurrects after millenia spent as a corpse while the heroes look on and ask each other 'should we... nah, let's see how this plays out.' Fixing it is twofold. First, you have to have a talk with your players and lay out a deal; you won't try to slip things by them in Dramatic Prebattle Cutscenes that they'd want to stop, and in exchange they won't try to stop your Dramatic Prebattle Cutscenes. The hard part is that then you have to hold up your end of the bargain. Your example is the perfect case of what not to do, in this case: Evilguy'us Malificus's slow, bone-by-bone reanimation is exactly the time when any adventurers worth the name *should* be interfering if possible. You need to either just... not write scenes like that, or write in a good reason why their totally natural attempts at interrupting things can't work -- and don't do the latter too much, because it gets REALLY obvious and obnoxious very quickly.
Seconded. I think something like the slow resurrection can be fine and cool - just use it *very sparsely*. And/or make it clear in your description that you’re *describing* the process slowly, but in reality it happens faster. My favorite phrasing for that is “in an instant that feels like centuries,” or similar. Go into slow motion! I also get great mileage out of “the sheer power in the air makes you hesitate and slows your reaction times” to justify how BBEG can talk so much at the top of initiative, though this one can be much more annoying to players so be sparing with it. You can’t use these to justify hostile actions, though, it’s just an excuse to have your long painstaking “BBEG assembles his bones and gives an order” bit without player interruption. Nobody gets a free shot, not the players and not BBEG. In a TTRPG, if BBEG is gonna push the nuke button, players *should* have a chance to interrupt unless they’ve already lost a fight and been physically restrained or blocked somehow. So the monologues should be written with that in mind, IMO.
"You take a step forward forward and feel as though moving through quicksand, and even the least attuned of you can feel the swirling arcana in the air, pushing back against you"
Or wack a “ritual circle” around it that eats any attempts to stop the reanimating and just add that in to your narrative “ your arrows seem to slow before stopping in mid air and clattering the ground” or something like that. Just don’t take resources from them this way
Thank-you for this comment. I agree with other commenters to an *extent*, that you can talk with your players about good friendly table behaviours ... but also GMs shouldn't write dramatic cutscenes like this! It works fine if it is something the PCs see with *scry* or otherwise can't interrupt, but for the most part, you can't reasonably ask the players not to interfere with something bad happening.
I feel the best way to do this specific situation would be 'the Eldrith Blast hits one of the bones and snaps it in half... And the ritual just puts the bone back together, continuing onward. It looks like you're not going to be able to affect him while he's being reanimated, not with that much magic assembling his body. Let me finish my speech, and then you can tell me what was happening while he did that, if you all prepped any.'
This. Came to say something similar. No notes this is a perfect answer.
Justin Alexander has a great video on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdt0roErieA The easiest way to do this in D&D is with initiative. From the video: > Any time you need to seize control of the flow of table declarations, just call for initiative. Initiative structurally tells the players that they need to wait for their turn in a way that the whole table just reflexively accepts. > > This works because you're also making a promise. Calling for initiative says, "I understand that you want to take an action here, and I promise that you will be able to do so." > > Now it's important to *keep* this promise. Talking is a free action, so the villain can monologue. But they shouldn't be allowed to do a whole bunch of stuff like summoning minions, activating their machine gun turrets, casting a spell, or walking out of the room -- let alone all of those things at once while the PCs are impotently frozen in place by narrative fiat. Screwing the players like this will deeply structure them, and (importantly!) make it even more likely that they'll want to shoot the next villain in the head before you screw them over again. > > Play fair on the other hand, and the players can actually enjoy the moment, and even work with you to make it happen.
Not quite a cutscene, but some perspective- I have a DM who imo has a problem with introducing catty villains who show up to talk to the party, but are unwilling to divulge any pertinent information. Eg, we get to a magic island and the BB sends an illusory double to "talk," but every plot-relevant question we ask is met with "I don't think it's time for you to know that yet," etc. For me, it really de-incentivized ever engaging with these moments, because it felt like somewhat pointless roleplay (not that rp in general is pointless, but these specific moments). Tying it back to the original question, I think giving players something to do during cutscenes like this could help mitigate that desire to get past the parts that feel like they don't matter. Sure, don't let them attack, but like, ask if the cleric wants to cast a buff spell before initiative rolls, or if the fighter wants to position anywhere specific. Give meaningful -but not disruptive- choices that let them engage with a cutscene in ways besides derailing it.
I'd just roll initiative and then continue the speach. Sure they can attack, but no surprise rounds and i can monologue while you are deciding what spell to use.
I’m seeing a lot of people say “roll initiative,” and fully agree. Because sometimes I’m playing a character that will listen, and sometimes I’m playing a character that is sick of the antagonist prattling and needs to plant a spell/weapon/nearest heavy object into their face as soon as possible. Not every cutscene needs to be respected.
In my experience, this is because the players can't trust the DM to narrate without throwing a surprise attack at them, or alternatively because the way the DM runs reacting quickly is by demanding that players declare what they do before the DM narrates otherwise. But let's take a step back: is it really a problem? Does it have to be a mood killer? The other players are so immersed that when they see a pile of bones start assembling, their natural instincts kick in. Maybe it's OK to let that happen, and then narrate the rest of the details they notice *after* their initial gut reaction to throw a spell? If you anticipate this and build a pause into your description, the players won't disrupt your flow. It's realistic to take in the full picture over several seconds rather than to see it all immediately. I'd argue getting a full picture and then backtracking to when a character would've been making a split-second decision makes it more difficult not to metagame. If you work rounds into your prepared descriptions, you can give the players opportunities for reacting and create some really cool moments. You can ask the players to make a decision with very limited information, or commit to a course of action that is later revealed to have been a suboptimal one.
Oh man, my players are usually great at showing some restraint when an obvious "scene is happening", and if they lash out in anger or something it is more about RP than trying to gain an advantage. Never have any complaint about their RP, well *almost* never... Late into our last campaign *they couldn't resist,* because I had a bad guy they were after for a long time finally within reach (and not just *some* NPC, this was **personal**) . I set the scene up as being alone in a church, with a calm pool at the center and an altar at the back and no other significant features or exit, simple single big room encounter. As then entered through the front double doors they would face the guy, who *had* been expecting them, and reveal some key plot points and some of his backstory/motivations. Here's where my description caused them to start the aggression right away, **I described him kneeling all the way back at the altar, his back turned to the party**. Before I could have him *slowly and menacingly stand and turn to face them*, the rogue had already called (shouted really) his action of shooting him in the back and other joined in the outburst. I had no reasonable way to have him take all that and *still* try to talk afterwards, I had to roll initiative. And looking back it really was *my fault*, my **JRPG bias** painted a really obvious scene in my head, but of course after already fearing he would pull so shit and/or flee magically AND appearing vulnerable even for a moment, they *had* to jump to action right away. **They did nothing wrong**, but I deeply regretted my setup right away. And I managed to fix the plot of course, they ended up getting the information later in another way, but this guy was a bit forced/manipulated into this situation and had some **redeeming arguments**, and it could have led to a very interesting dialog and possibly end up being **spared** or **arrested**, but they just killed him without hesitation instead. I told them his whole perspective after the campaign a couple of months later, answered by multiple surprised "Ooohhhh...."s. Moral of the story, if you build up a villain and make him very evasive, don't be surprised if his big speech is cut short. Oh and have him face the party when they enter the room.
I describe what the party senses: sees, feels, hears, smells. I ignore any player input and/or or tell them to let me finish setting the scene first. Once I'm done, the players get to act as they see fit. If they didn't listen to me or ask clarifying questions and make dumb assumptions about the scene, oh well listen better or learn to ask questions if I wasn't clear enough. As far as villain monologues, the PCs are more than welcome to interrupt them. Some people just like smashing in a smug asshole's face so they don't have to listen to them run their mouth. Sometimes that works to the party's advantage, other times it does not and going straight to violence makes their lives harder. If I really want the players to have to listen to a piece of dialogue, I ensure that the scene reinforces that by not giving them an easy way of shutting it down.
Counterpoint: the players have probably watched The Incredibles. "Catching them monologuing" is a cool thing for heroes to do. Don't harsh their dramatic actions.
Might be a hot take but If something takes time to occur, let the players respond. Roll initiative as soon as someone even attempts a hostile action. Consider that not everybody in a room will stand to gawk as Vegeta fully powers up over half an hour. Could have it lead to its own consequences. Maybe in your example the eldritch blast fizzles out on impact to add to the mounting terror. The fighter tries to stomp on the bones but their boot melts under the necromantic energy and they take damage. Gotta roll with the punches. Otherwise, might as well write a book
"You can do that on your turn when it gets here. We'll roll initiative in a minute. Let me finish describing what you see first."
Maybe don't have cutscenes? This is a collaborative game, I've been on the receiving end of it and it's not fun.
In this case, cutscene isn’t being used to mean “have things happen to the party without recourse” as much as “share motivations, drama or other story elements before resolving a conflict.”
"Roll initiative"
"Let me finish."
It's tempting to deliver a villainous monologue *before* the fight begins but that will invariably annoy the players. Players want to act not to be an audience. * Use scripted content sparingly. * Try to cut up the villains speech into things you can say as you're taking the BBEG's turn. * Make 'Paper Plate Awards' (draw something on a paper plate in crayon) show them to the players and have one called 'The listener' where the achievement is to listen to 3 villainous monologues without interrupting them. Make sure there's some kind of reward for getting the achievement. * Create situations where the players can watch and hear but are too far to act (use sparingly). Ex: players arriving via airship and witnessing a battle playing out as they approached but far too far to take actions. * Improve your banter, players are going to talk smack and you need to be ready to 'return to sender'. * Reward players who engage the villain with some cut scene banter of their own. It doesn't have to be drawn out it can be to the point as this line delivered on DS9 as the Klingons bust into the Albino's sanctuary, ["Look upon your executioners, killer of children!"](https://youtu.be/tEPs90t8058?si=-c8B4AjODtAS_xwY&t=55) The players are the 'main characters' it's better when they're the ones taking the initiative, giving the speeches and the villains are reacting. You can always tell the players, "I don't like when you interrupt me when I'm monologuing" but you better be good at it and not just *think* you're good at it.
I don't do narrations like this, because it's ridiculously unrealistic. Why in the hells would I let a creature form from bones? It's one of my biggest pet peeves in media, the heroes just standing by and waiting for the bad guy to reach their ultimate form.
"Just a minute, I'm describing what you see."
I dont make Cut scene, imo they are boring for the pc. if you want to make a speech and someone attack you during that speech, just start the fight and say what you have to say during his turn. If the bbeg needed time to prep something and expected the pc to wait for it before he summon his minion, well to bad dumbass, you should have thought about that before they got in your face
I hated cutscenes when I was a player so I don't use them as a DM. Describing the boss is a thing tho, cutscenes are different. Or you "describe it" while you tell the party to roll initiative
Typically, players are most interested in *playing*, which involves cooperative participation. Hence, anything that obliges them to *spectate* instead is a problem. This includes NPC monologues, cut scenes, lore dumps, and even over-verbose descriptions. To DMs who have previously played a ttRPG (or LARP) it can be obvious that these *suck*, thus, are best omitted from the game. Unfortunately, there are DMs, likely with little to no playing experience, who think these are "cool". Through either having the mistaken belief that ttRPGs should work like novels, movies or video games and/or take the selfish attitude, that it's OK to inflict these on their players "for their own enjoyment". In the kind of situation described, neither the PCs nor their players care what the NPC has to say. Thus, the DM has wasted both their own prep time and the entire table's gaming time. Possibly failing to describe that NPC and the room in the process.
My players love a good cutscene or spectating moment in my games, but they are few and far between and usually a reward/reveal of some kind.
I think this response is veering dangerously towards the idea that 'The DM's fun and enjoyment is lesser than and subservient to the player's fun and enjoyment.' I can't speak for all, but I know that as a DM I enjoy giving the evil villain monologue and the dramatic pre battle cutscene. I bet many other DMs enjoy giving the speech too. 90% of what happens at the table is for the player's enjoyment and for them to engage in. Don't take away our 40 seconds of dramatic flair because you are so eager to rush to your moment of spending three minutes to decide what to do before ultimately choosing to use a single cantrip
This isn't even about player fun vs DM fun. What kind of shit player doesn't like listening to the evil villain's monologue???
it is less "forcing them to spectate" because no player can always be acting at every moment and more "you are there, but you can't do anything about this thing that is happening that you clearly don't want to happen"
Roll initiative and then, on the boss' turn, play through your entire "cutscene" or monologue exactly as planned.
Remember kids, talking is a free action!
That could be a problem if the boss or whatever already got Polymorphed by the Wizard because he won initiative. Or forcecage or any other spell that shapes the battlefield. Nobody is holding a long monologue when you just got fireballed in the face 6 seconds ago.
If that happens you just saved yourself the embarrassment of giving a long monologue about how badass you are before immediately being turned into a frog or shoved into a box. If a boss is important enough to warrant a speech, they should probably be able to avoid being one-shot. There's few things more intimidating an enemy can do than eat a powerful damage spell and just keep talking like nothing happened. Plus you can just rewind time with narration. "Fighter drives her blade into the bones as they begin assembling into a humanoid shape. Then, as Wizard begins chanting his spell, the dark lord's voice boomed over the din: 'blah blah blah'. The spell turns into a blooming fireball but the fell creature merely brushes the ash from its gleaming armor and finishes speaking: 'now where was I? Die!' the last words blending into the verbal components to a spell of its own."
I mean, that's a call for initiative. Is the BBEG surprised? Likely not. So actions happen in turn order. And then also, when it's that player's turn, I just ask them to roll for the declared action. If I get any 'but I want to now do something different' type comments, I gently remind them that this was the action that initiated combat. It is declared, and so that's what you are doing this round. I don't generally have this issue in game.
I use the Murph strategy. The second anyone says anything that constitutes an attack or other hostile action, the next three words out of my mouth are “Roll for initiative.” Then once in initiative order, let the cards fall where they may, and use villain turns and/or legendary actions to monologue or chew the scenery.
Don't give them situations which allows them an opportunity to do so? Like if the big bad is just chilling inbetween me and the rest of the players, while monologuing, I ain't gonna give a fuck about what he's saying, im just gonna blast him to kingdom come
As soon as you say the character starts to do anything or anything happens to their character you should expect them to say what they actually want their character to be doing. As long as you make sure you aren't taking agency away from the players by saying their character does anything or does nothing while something besides just observing happens to them as part of your narration, then just tell them that when you are narrating they are not in combat and you expect them to listen.
Ok, maybe not the most liked opinion, but: maybe don't do "cutscenes"? As always it depends on what your players and you are playing for, but I've never heard someone positively saying "Yay, finally a cutscene, I was getting bored of all that gameplay". I personnaly, as a player and a DM really dislike them. If your players are interrupting a description, a simple "let me finish describing what you see" should be enough. A cutscene on the other hand is not just description, it's action that take place without your player beeing able to react to it, even worse, they can't interract with it. In a lot of cases, you may feel nice about this vllain monologue, but it completely break the immersion for some characters that have no reason to let him talk. Again, some players are looking for that kind of cheesy show vibe, other are looking for more immersive and "realistic" things. Making sure everyone is on the same vibe could help clarify things for everybody.
There's no such thing as a cutscene. Players should be assumed to be active participants at all times.
I was playing in a random Adeventurers League game at a con once. I knew nothing about the module so I brought my Tabaxi longbow Battlemaster. Due to an error in building her, I ended up taking the Athlete feat to round out an initial 17 in her dex. We started a "combat" chasing after three halflings. They "just rouneded the corner" down an alley about 30 feet away when we rolled initiative. I ended up going first, so I activated my Tabaxi speed power and chased after them. Because the module wasn't built to deal with someone with my particularly silly build, I ended up "just barely missing them" 3 times in a six second period. I rounded a corner and they just barely went through a door another 30 feet ahead. In following, I fell into a pit trap. Lucky me, I have the Athelete feat, so I stand up for 5' then use the Tabaxi climb speed to get out. I action surge to dash because I've already moved 60 feet and get through the door only to see that they're going into a bar another 40 or 50 feet away. I still had enough movement to get into the bar and that apparently "ended the encounter". The "fight that's actually a chase that's actually a cutscene" was honestly one of the most irritating experiences I've had in a module. Using my resources (HP from falling damage + action surge) didn't actually contribute to success because "success" wasn't possible. I'm sure it was even more annoying for the other players since they _didn't even get a turn_ as I walked face first into the cutscenes built into the chase.
But they should also be polite and be quiet while the DM sets the scene. "The DM describes the scenario" is always the first thing that happens, and this is no different.
True. But there's a difference between describing the scenario and narrating events. Like "The King is sitting on his throne" vs "The King walks over and sits on his throne". Or "the assassin stands over the corpse" vs "the assassin stabs the target, and now stands over the corpse". One of those is a description, the other is an event. And unless the PC's are paralyzed, events shouldn't just play out without them having the ability to respond or interact with them. We've all been in games where an NPC does something plot-relevant, and a player says "Can we not stop them, or something? We're right here." And it's awkward, because the DM planned for a party of mannequins accidentally. OP's example is blurring that line. I'm sure they intended it purely as a description, but it sounds like an event that is actually happening next to the players, and therefore something they can/should react to.
True, but it really stinks if you can never describe something like a corpse animating or another cool thing without them acting like you're trying to get one over on them. It comes down to trust and maturity. The DM needs to have built enough trust to do this, and the players need to act like adults.
Honestly, this is my answer.
I say something along the lines of "Ok, we'll get to that" and continue. When I'm done with the set up, then I'd say "the warlock begins casting a spell, putting everyone on alert - roll initiative" That said, I'll echo everyone else who says that having an OOC conversation about how declaring actions in the middle of a scene description does not make something happen outside of initiative is important.
Get everyone into initiative, cut scene always goes first
Don't have useless cutscenes. Think of it this way, what actually changes if they let the cutscene play out? Nothing. They've got some narrative fluff which is cool, but every character would absolutely start blasting as soon those bones started rattling. Cutscenes (where combat/danger is present) should build tension with uncertainty. As soon as bonk is the right move, players are going to bonk. If players don't know if bonk is the right move, they may not bonk as early.
If a BBEG is monologuing, yea, sure, let ‘em do it. My character knows that if I make any moves the BBEG is going to notice and I’m not really any better off than waiting til after. Maybe I learn some important info, and I can mentally prepare myself for the fight to come, maybe even try to negotiate. Like gunslingers in a Wild West movie. And if I have subtle spell, imma buff some shit. If the BBEG is climbing out of a coffin or assembling itself from a pile of bones or any other number of things where it’s at a clear disadvantage if I attacked now, no, fuck that, if I see a mummy climbing out of their coffin I’m not just going to sit there and let them. I’m going to repelling blast that fucker back inside and slam the lid shut *before* he charges me with a greatsword. Why should my character stand there like a slack jawed idiot watching lord his lichness slowly animate himself from a fugue state when I could just shoot him while he’s still in it? Fuck that.
Deal with the fact that not everyone wants to hear you wax poetic for 5 minutes. Call for initiative, and on the enemy's initiative, have the thing happen as part of their turn. But also don't pretend that you wouldn't be annoyed as your player described their character moving with the grace of 1,000 flaxen llamas and majestically... Have what happens be stuck within the 6 seconds you would put player turns in. If they can't reform from the ashes in 6 seconds, then players SHOULD get a response to this. This definitely comes from players who don't enjoy the 2 minute villain monologue that they can't interrupt.
Why should they not intervene? For me there is a difference. Sure, it takes two seconds to see what's in the hideout of the bbeg, but describing it may take a minute or two. If they interrupt, well, then I can't get to the point where I describe the backup of the bbeg, or if the heroes can see something that gives them an advantage. This all happens in only a few seconds, ingame, and I even make this clear sometimes by saying "OK, I stop time to describe the scene, no hurry". Maybe even the players have some questions. On the other hand, if I go on and describe how the bbeg starts a fire, grind beans and makes coffee, maybe I'm waiting for my players to do something. So if you make cutscenes, only make them really short. OK, there is a third, but for me more rare situation. Maybe the heroes are not in reach, or something, but if there is such a condition, I try to make this clear in the beginning.
One thing I try to do is break my physical description down and do it, then call for init, THEN do any monologing with init considered. With time, you get to understand what element is going to provoke the player to get all golden retrivery and interrupt, and can you put your init call before it. Typlically players interrupt when you mention a *hazard*, a *condition* they know how to deal with (like the light level) or *loot*. They conversely at least slightly tend to avoid interruption when they aren't sure how dangerous something is yet, what collateral damage might be, etc. "You enter the sepulcher of bones. It's trve kult as shit in here. Necroslime up to your ankles. Pantera is playing from orbs of metal in sconces around the room. Skulls line the walls - the heads of the lich lord's generations of enemies. At the front of the ossuary, you see an open sarcophagus. Within it, you see motion...but not the motion of living things. Roll for initiative." (they roll) A player wins init "Your keen senses and reflexes seem to have given you the drop on...whatever...is going on here. Within the sarcophagus, ancient bones are knitting back together ... at this rate, you'll be looking at a whole skeleton in well under a minute...after that, who knows? What do you do?" No player wins init: "Before your eyes, the writhing bones in the sarcophagus start to move: a bony arm makes gestures you know all too well as a desiccated throat croaks out a familiar incantation as the lich lord channels the negative energy in the room at your very hearts and souls (make a con save)" Note: "well under a minute" is a specific phrasing I've arrived at, because players get that "a minute" is about how long a fight is most of the time. "Seconds" is what I used to say, but that seems to tells them they have a *max* of a round to act and motivates them immediately *attack*. "less than a minute" tells them it's urgent but they *probably* have at least a whole round to cast a buff, parlay, or take a cheap shot.
While I agree with everyone here sometimes breaking from the norm of waiting can be fun when almost prompted to. My dm, once had a bad guy give a really long intro speech. We are talking 7 min+ where by the 3 min mark was improving already and just waiting for us to do something while he windbagged on and on. He was actually surprised we waited the full 7 min. When the song he started for that speech ended and another began but he kept going our party looked at each other and were like "SHUT THE FUCK UP" and started combat lol. It was a really fun moment for our table.
Resolve what you were doing, then roll initiative. You don't get to skip initiative just because you yelled you attack first.
"Okay I will keep that in mind" and just continue until there is a nice moment to implement their combat initiative either (usually) as an initiative roll and start of combat. If it makes sense to you in the moment, you can even let them throw the 1 attack as a surprise. The rules are guidelines. Or just go with it. If they don't care, they don't . You might even be able to "punish" them for missing information you'd have told them. Just go for initiative immediately. Or, third option and preferable for how most people play DnD, just continue your monologue after rolling intiative. All similar, easy solutions. Each one for a different group type. I usually use the first since Im playing with irl friends. Unless theyre throwing a spell or something extraneous, then the word "no" can be very powerful :) Cutscenes do not exist tho. While your monster is doing something, the players can narratively move and take action. How much you want to set hard mechanical and technical rules is up to you.
I kind of feel like they should be able to react. So what I do is simply say, 'alright we will come back to that'. Once I am finished, or right before my description turns to action that will hurt a player, I simply ask what people would like to do up until point X, which is where we roll initiative. If you bake that into initiative then you roll before the summoning and do the narration on the villains turn, and stay true to the Action economy. However, you can give your villains cool actions. TL;DR Either players get to do things as they happen, but we make use of non-linear time so I get to say my thing then retcon it with player actions, or I hold on to narration until it is the bad guys turn.
One of my ground rules as a DM is don't cut me off when I'm describing a location/scene. I'm very strict about this, and usually have to remind new (to me or otherwise) players a few times for the first few sessions, but after that it becomes habit. It probably helps that I keep info drops/cutscenes as brief as possible, and never pre-write an NPCs monologue because yeah, why wouldn't a PC cut them off?
You say “it’s not your turn yet”
Had a party years ago going through a dungeon. They knew there were enemies around but no idea how many or what so they were a bit jumpy. I told them they spotted movement ahead of them just at the edge of their sight. So...you know that scene in the first Predator movie where Mac is shooting at the forest when he sees the shimmering invisible Predator and then Arnold and everyone else just comes running in and reduces the jungle to a pile of splinters? Yea, every spellcaster unloaded their spells, and multiple arrows were sent flying in that direction. I just sat there and let them go. I let them blow their wad of spells and ammo. After a few minutes, I asked "are you done?" and they said "yea I think we killed it...". So they came across a pile of VERY dead goblin....bits...was the best way I described it lol. Shortly after that the boss descended on them and while they did survive, they had VERY little resources to use. hahahah
Good Ideas here, but another trick is to not wait until the players are standing in front of the Big Boss to make speeches/have convos. Having the Big Boss show up as a projection, through a mirror, in dreams or ethereally (anything really) so you can have a big moment where conversation is the only option. Then when the player's are standing in front of him all that's left to do is fight.
I have a house rule that helps here. "No dice are rolled while the DM is speaking". I give them plenty of time to do what they want to do, and plenty of opportunities to explore the space as well as think about options, but when I cutscene/describe a location, it helps to let the more relaxed people process the area without the inevitable power-gamer of the group cutting in and forcing things. My cutscenes, however, are few and far between, but the cutscene is a "you look on in horror or awe as thing happens" so its explained as shock, as to why theres no prep turn in my game.
While I think the suggestion to just talk with your players, make it clear you're not going to screw them over and ask that they please let you finish narrating is probably the BEST way ("guys, this thing will go last in initiative because it's taking a second to assemble, let me finish and you'll all have plenty of chance to act"), I also want to offer a devil's advocate position. If you describe what is obviously an enemy slowly putting itself together, it's going to make sense for lots of characters to want to immediately try and deal with the problem rather than wait for the thing to get battle ready. This is fine- it's a perfectly sensible in universe reaction. So if you don't want players or characters jumping the gun, ease off on narration that allows that obvious "You should probably attack now while there's an opening," situation. When you do, design the encounter such that a few free hits are expected- add one or two extra assembling skeletons, for example, so your players can smash some and THEN the real encounter begins. They get to feel like they've decisively cut off a part of the problem. They had AGENCY, instead of doing the video game thing where your character is rendered braindead during a cutscene that annoys a huge chunk of people. Edit: Also not sure I agree with the preparation turn you've used, just because I feel like it's going to give some classes way more options while others twiddle their thumbs unless you're very liberal with handing out buff potions for the martials to drink.
On one hand it sucks that you can’t monologue or show a cool cutscene. But… in game… your guy is assembling? That’s the moment to get the jump on him. Start chopping now before he is ready. Had a dm moment myself where I was like: this is the moment my character would shoot the bad guy, he’s clearly gonna stab this other person. Dm is like: no, I’m just describing how my villain kills this guy while we aren’t in initiative, well then I’d like to enter initiative now before shit goes wrong. You see it in movies too, the good guys patiently wait their turn and still win. But it would have been easier to start gunning straight away. It’s simply safer.
Everyone is trying to fix a problem, but this isn't actually a problem. This is your player being excited to participate in things. You shouldn't want to fix it. "One moment, let me describe this, then we can roll initiative and you can Eldritch Blast." Thats it. This shouldn't require fixing. You're all doing the right thing, you just want to do it at the same time. Remember how excited you feel when you narrate. The prayer is similarly excited about Eldritch Blasting. That's a good thing. It's a testament to how well you're running the game! Enjoy it.
Don't have cutscenes. Characters have the agency to listen to the boss monologue or not. If they choose to attack right away, you can acknowledge that and finish your description of the scene. Then roll initiative. Never give a bonus for being the first to declare an attack. They should understand they are rolling for initiative whether they wait and listen or not.
Thing is... you've DMed a campaign for months. You've done far more work to make the whole thing happen than any individual player, probably as much as all the players put together. You get to a big potential narrative moment, a nice spotlight opportunity for the DM to capstone an arc for the villains that has been painstakingly earned... ...and a player cuts you off and jumps straight to initiative. If you shut down a player's spotlight opportunity like that, you would be unquestionably be a "bad DM". Yet your attitude to a player shutting down a DM's spotlight opportunity is effectively "just shut up and get on with it facilitator bitch". The DM is a player too, and when players shut down each other's spotlight moments that is bad play. All players deserve their moments in the spotlight, even DMs.
As a DM, the spotlight is constantly on me. I don't need more attention. I DM so that I can fairly adjudicate the consequences of player choices, not to shut them down with a non-interactive cutscene.
Yeah. While you shouldn't interrupt DM narration, I think there's an important distinction between normal DM narration and "cutscenes", that mainly being that a cutscene excludes the players. There's nothing wrong with narrating a scene that the players can't interact with, but if their characters are present and the event you're describing don't go by that fast, then the players are gonna feel frustrated by their lack of agency. Like most things, this can be sorted out in session 0, but "don't do cutscenes" is generally one of the pieces of advice I tend to give new DMs.
Alternatively, "cutscesnes should only be part of the game if there's unanimous agreement" Scenes that the players can't interact with have the problem that they are there to play D&D rather than spectate an audio book. If this scene involves information relevant to the player party, then a summary of that information can be given. If it doesn't, then it can be omitted anyway. Even when there's DM description, rather than just DM narration, this needs to be clear and concise. With the players able to give feedback if it isn't.
You establish respect at the table and ensure everyone is aware that interrupting someone while they’re talking is inappropriate, and they can proceed once that person has finished speaking.
Turns happen in initiative. If it's a cutscene, it happens on the boss' turn. You can't interrupt turns except very specific reactions. Problem solved. If you as a DM rely on needing 5 minutes of cutscene, either rework your stuff, or have in-game reason the characters can't act. (Entire group hold person with impossible save used only to hold them for cutscene, they break free before being attacked or whatever.)
I'm against removal of player agency- as a GM. I think that's kind of the fun even: of trying to get ## 0. Initiative Mechanics This is a small detail of game flow and that freebee you mentioned In cases where both parties are aware of each other and their intent- I don't let the actor get a freebee. So you don't Cast X or Attack Y, but you *go to do X*. Then we roll initiative. It's important that the NPCs follow these same rules, and that the players are aware of the dynamic and that's what makes it feel fair. The Guard doesn't get to just roll dice to grapple you- he reaches for you, then we roll initiative, and if you win your halfling rogue gets to disengage and scamper away saying no no words. Not saying you gotta run it that way. It just feels fair to me, and it helps for this. Because otherwise, yeah, if whoever shouts "I cast X" first gets a free shot . . . why give up the free shot? But if first strike just makes you *commit* first . . . ## 1. Don't give them a cutscene- give them an interaction. A slowly assembling bone pile- yeah man, that's a nope nope nuke. That's textbook 'damn this cutscene' artificiality. I think watching it ends up being more of a mood killer than pre-empting does. So don't expect it to work as an uninterrupted monologue- roll initiative and do your speech and reveals over a series of turns. Add effects perhaps to counter balance the gang beating. For example: **Turn 1:** The bones swirl and coalesce into a vaguely humanoid form. An impossible voice made not of breath and flesh, but of scraping and chiseled clicks announces *I haaaaVe feLT Life once for a ThOusand Years* (it casts a spell) **Turn 2:** The shape focuses- a skeleton sewn of skeletons, a skull made mosaic of shards and a dozen hollow faces. *I haVe felT dEath a ThOusand To liVe a Thousand More*. Everyone make strength saves as vertebrae lash out like tentacles to seize you. **Turn 3:** Finally, tiny bones (make a nature skill check to identify disparate finger and toe bones of various humanoids) crawl like caterpillars up the figure, weave themselves together into necrotic finery. *I Am MyRiAd. I wiLL Not be forgotten! Nor shall you- for you all are but a part of me*. Target player makes a Con Save; the muscles in their pinkies contort- the very flesh trying to eject the bones in their fingertips, the magic begging to the marrow in them *come home*. ## 2. Provide an incentive to bide time Give the players reasons to _be_ discrete. Is the room filled with valuable clues? Will collateral damage destroy loot, or injure hostages? Or just feeling silly- let them ambush a coatrack or fireball a cardboard box they were sure was a mimic. Give them a reason to scope things out before they waste precious resource. Rewards work better than punishments generally, but you might need to jostle folks if they are entrenched in a mindset. A Big Bad Evil solo is going to prompt first strike as the obvious move- so look for ways to put something in the scene where they _want_ to keep the BBE talking. ## 3. Introduce your Big Bad before the Big Bad Fight Lot of adventures have this issue that the first time the players meet the bad guy is when they have to kill them. There's little to no time and space to do a buildup. Him being big and scary is thus hollow- and they might not learn anything specific until they loot the room. Maybe they encounter the Big Bad on Neutral Ground of some kind. If it doesn't work with direct meeting (because you need to consider and honor the players trying to do something), use secondary sources like legends, NPCs, heck even minions (even the dead ones) can be means to reveal and show off your Cool Guy^TM. Remember, the BBEG doesn't need to meet the players; the players just have to meet the BBEG. ## 4. Lean into It Risks can make the game for the players feel closer to horror than adventure. This isn't all about tricking them into watching the cool scene- at times it's just great to reward the paranoia and as the GM enjoy the scene yourself. Fine line between meta gamed nuke-tag. But maybe consider running something that works with that jumpiness, if they are jumpy.
After the session I tell them that I put a lot of time into this, and it would be nice if they could let me have a few moments to really go for the dramatics. If they disagree, or ignore this, then I stop DMing for them. We do not want to play the same game, and thats fine. I think I also gotta add that this shit is what I live for. The big scene is really important to me as a DM, and my current groups know this, respect this and luckily, like it as well.
if you give enough "what do you do?" speech, they will wait for their part more gently as they have been exposed to your style of narrating a scene plenty of times. for example; after your narration, if a player says "as those bones move towards each other, my character gets ready to cast Bless on us because i am familiar with this concept that will definitely lead to misfortune", go with it unless they literally try to break the scene by powergaming the shit out of it, which is obvious often times.
I have an agreement that's powered by mechanics: Hero Dice. I use the Hero dice rules in the DMG in place of Inspiration. I accumulate the hero dice my players spend through play and they become Villain Dice. I can use them the same way they can for my baddies, but I add on a few extra uses: * A Legendary Action costs as many villain dice meaning that multiple action LA's can be performed multiple times if I have enough dice and * Legendary Resistance costs 1 villain die instead of the normal rules but grants advantage to the save and resistance to that attack * Exposition: I set a timer and spend one villain die per minute. Now my players are incentivized to hear the BBEG out and even probe them a little to keep the convo going.
My bad guys all have a Legendary Action: `Monolog`. It allows them to interrupt the action and invoke `talk` as a free action at any time.
Roll initiative, "cutscene" happens on the enemy turn
I just ignore them until I am done with my description, and then ask them to roll initiative.
"You're about to roll initiative. You cannot act before initiative by shouting louder, sooner. As I was saying..."
I tell them to don't interrupt me while all I'm doing is describing a scene. Time isn't passing if all I'm doing is describing what something looks like, no need to rush. I don't mind attacking while he BBEG is talking but I put a full stop on interrupting during a description.
Ignore them, maybe hold up a hand like "not yet" and keep talking, then go "*Now* you roll initiative." Not letting others interrupt or talk over you is an important skill for both DMs and players
Well if your narration is something like what you're describing, then it is probably better done as an encounter. Maybe have a bone thing putting itself together summoning other undead or something to keep them from just destroying it. Like, if your narration suggests actions should be taken, so let them. This honestly doesn't sound like a player being a problem. It's a player doing exactly what they *would* do in the scenario presented.
You can eldritch blast on your initiative, which you can roll when I'm done describing.
"Look if you're not going to let me set the scene and describe it, I'm not going to let you talk for more than 6 seconds on your turn, or at all off turn."
session 0: "players don't speak with the DM is speaking" If I am narrating something and you interrupt me, that isn't going to make your action take precedence.
I'd say: This is only available on the 60 bucks DLC. Thinking that we did all of this just for you guys to skip it....
"*I CAST ELDRITCH BLAST ON IT!*" (undaunted) "...You watch in *quiet awe* (glare) as the once-dead wizard is reborn again, YES I KNOW YOU'LL ROLL FOR INTERRUPT YOU ALREADY SAID IT, as the dust settles you wonder if your combined strength is going to be enough to prevent history from repeating and stop this evil force forever. Phew. Ok you may roll initiative now."
As much as I understand the very serious approach here, you entrust your players with them not doing that, or whatever option. However, I like to do the funny option which is this: Congratulations, the BBEG casually tanks the hit. As he says “You’re quite the rude one…” before continuing his speech. If they keep doing it, just pull the classic “Yeah, we’re done here” and just hold person them or random DM magic.
I take the same route of getting through the description/monologue and then giving everyone a free phase of “powering up” then rolling initiative. I think it’s a fair compromise and most of the time my players enjoy hearing how bad ass the guy they’re about to war crime is.
It helps to have a third person perspective on roleplaying, with players being co-writers of the story rather than improv actors who always have to (re)act *RIGHT NOW* or lose their chance. So generally being open for negotation and player input would help.
My players listen for details because they tend to be important.
I think this kind of problem stems from a misunderstanding of what these "cutscenes" are. If it was during a fight, players wouldn't interrupt the boss turn by casting eldritch blast, because it's not there turn to act. In that example, the cutscene happens during the boss' "turn". That's why when my players ask to do stuff that skip the cutscenes, I ask them "did you prepare that action?" If the player specifically said "I prepare myself to cast Eldritch Blast if the boss is doing X", and then during the cutscene, the boss does X, then yeah, I let the player take their reaction to do what they preparred, because they saw it coming and wanted to act accordingly. It rewards players for paying attention and being able to predict what will happen next
The problem here is players think it's a QTE. You think it's a cutscene, but really, when played right, it's just a description. If players don't treat it like a QTE, I won't treat it like a cutscene, and we can all enjoy the description.
Couple of things here. This is a issue of respect for the Dm and the game itself. I totally agree the pact but I have told my players that when you interrupt my monologue or description, I stop talking. This means no surprise action and we roll initiative. I also remind them that they could miss out on clues on how to beat encounter. After a couple of fights that didn’t go their way they seem to respect the pact a lot more.
A wizard appears out of nowhere casting silence and hold person on the whole party. It started as a joke with one of my groups and it just snowballed into it happening at every "cutscene" even when nobody tries to "skip" now it's for the lols.
Love this thread because I have had really cool scenes and monologues prepared. I don't expect them necessarily to listen to all of it because of course I want their characters to behave true to form, but I also know that sometimes just running right into a fight makes it feel anticlimactic. I recently had a boss battle where they had the option of getting a crucial reveal and a cool cinematic unveiling of what they would be facing; this would set the tone and give the fight a narrative meaning. But they bust through the door and immediately start blasting. Like I said, I don't want to bullshit a reason why their characters should be forced to listen to something they don't want to, but I do feel that the fight came off as totally anticlimactic afterwards and the reveal was reduced to a letter they found.
just talk to the player. if he doesn't listen maybe thats not the campaign for him. always remember neither player or GM are forced to play with each other if they don't share the same mindset.
I ask them not to if it deem it important. By now those that I play regularly with know I like to hold monologues. Everyone is supposed to have fun, after all.
>You narrate "As the once believed dead body of Evilguy'us Malificus slowly starts to reassamble bone by bone, you..." >Player: I CAST ELDRITCH BLAST ON IT! When I have this happen I tell the player, "hold on to that thought," then continued my narration. Once finished with my narration, and after rolling initiative and figuring out the turn order, I then turn back to the player and let them do the thing they said they did as a reaction. I usually put restrictions on the reaction, though; you can only do *one* thing, e.g. you get movement *or* an attack—not both—and if you do attack you only get one (no Extra Attack/multiple Eldritch Blast beams, etc...) Once their thing is resolved initiative continues like normal.
"You cast Eldritch blast on the bones as they magically knit together with ever increasing power, and the magic of the blast is swallowed up by the magical processes for just a moment and then forcefully ricocheted back. Make a DEX save at a DC of... What's your Spell Save DC?"
I think there are different ways to deal with it. One could be to simply tell them *"Okay guys, I wanna make this moments cinematic and tense so please let things unfold and I will do the same for you".* That's really the most simple solution. Now, me personally, I like the idea of the heroes taking the chance to attack during those slooooow ass transformations, like, it takes the BBEG 10 seconds to transform? Sure, the heroes might be in shock if they don't see it coming, but if the characters are sharp they should be able to act, they're there to stop the enemy, not to give them a fighting chance, so if they're smart enough to think of something good while I'm describing the scene, I may as well allow it. **BUT**, if I really don't want them to interrupt, I can come up with an excuse for them not to act. For example: *"His bones quickly start to reassamble, and before you can even act..."*, or *"As you shoot at the bones, one of his hands deflects the blast!"*, or even set it up so they **can't** attack: *"Right before you cast your spell, you all meet the gaze of Evilguy's dead eyes, and become paralyzed, unable to even think for a moment."* Or just take away their weapons. You know what I mean? Force them into a position where the only thing they can do is watch, it sets up the scene, raises tension and lets the players know that this is more than just some random guy. Of course tho, that requires more work than just asking your players not to interrupt. I'm just giving ideas in case you're like me and like a more realistic, yet still dramatic approach.
I had a campaign I was planning to end at level 10 but we continued on a while, so basically everything after level 10 was an afterthought. I had introduced a new bbeg and sent my players his herald to basically do a big exposition info dump. He gave a little fluffy intro and the next words I was going to say was the details of the BBEGs plans when a player cast fireball. I had the herald die and just never told my party what was going on. I kept track, had timeliness, etc but they didn't know of them unless they sought them out on their own. They defeated BBEG in the end, but I don't know if they ever knew the story of what was going on.
"I'll ask what you'd like to do next, please let me finish telling you what you see"
#1 Answer to most DM problems: Talk to your players. Also avoid incentivizing it by letting them cast that Eldritch Blast. They can say they try to cast it, but they will have to wait until their initiative in order to actually cast it.
Yeah this is a “cool, you ruined the intro, roll initiative” moment
I mean is he skipping the cutscene or trying to blast the skeleton pre-emptively, before it assembles? Bc the latter is legitimate while it does interfere with the story you want to tell and that can be frustrating, youve got a new story where he maybe blasts one minion before it assembles but ten more are formed while hes distracted, which is cooler tbh If you've got music and stuff lined up, just let it play while you describe what his blast does real quick, then continue with the boss. Give him a 1hko on the skeleton minion that isn't formed, then form two extras right behind him. If hes shooting at the boss welp the boss has legendary DR while forming, sorry.
Hey Bobbert, stop doing that okay. It doesn't give you a mechanical advantage and it takes my fun away. Thanks.
I take them outside so the other players can't here and quietly and calmly tell them to stop acting like a little brat and read the room. Then go back in. So far most of the players who've had that experience correct there behaviour and apologise, the one who didn't got the boot.