Only the GM enjoys dialogue during combat.

[Xuc Xac]

"A round represents about six seconds in the game world" -PHB, 189

So no, you can't justify a monologue in combat as anything other then a GM attitude problem.

Is that the same PHB that says talking doesn't take up your action?

[JoeJ]

The first time it happens, I confront them after the game. If they don't agree to cut it out, or it slips in again after they do, I'm out. That's my rule for dealing with this kind of stuff.

That's fine. If having NPCs make comments during combat interferes that much with your enjoyment of the game, then you definitely shouldn't play with people who like it.

[KillianHawkeye]

Afaict he seems to think that combat is combat and RP is RP and never the twain shall meet.

I disagree with your player 1000000%.

There is no reason to not RP during the combat phase of the game, whether that's dialogue between PCs or between a PC and an NPC or even just weighing your combat options based on in-character reasoning rather than whatever is most tactically efficient.

Personally, I often have characters speak during combat both as a player and as the DM. Then again, I suppose I've played a couple characters in the past that would just as soon shoot the villain than talk to them, but that's more a case of the villain being an overbearing ass combined with a character who's a bit of a loose cannon. But really, if it's from an in-character justification, is that not also a form of roleplaying?

[Neknoh]

Honestly? As a DM?

It does feel kinda cringey when the villains try to drop one-liners that doesn't land, or try to speak, it breaks the flow. We are there to give the players a good time and help them tell their story, which is why it's more okay when the players are talking, taking focus and staying in character, than when you, the DM, who's pretty much constantly in focus, pauses combat to say something you might think is cool but you have no idea of knowing if the players think the same way until after you've said it.

It often sounds too much like a poorly voiced video games as soon as lines are longer than a few words.

Compare this to the way that both Chris Perkins and Matthew Mercer does villains during combat, they will "speak" as in they will utter a word or three, and that will almost always be that, the villains are still memorable because the encounters and other ways of characterization tends to be.

Compare your line of "you guys are tougher than I expected, I guess I can go all out." which sounds much more like something an anime hero or villain would say, than her growling "FINE!" and changing, sure, the second one doesn't give her so much of a cocksure way of being, however, it still conveys that she was holding back and did not want to use it ("I did not want to use this." is a dreadful line unless you have something REALLY good up your sleeve after, however, it is also very short).

Also remember that the six seconds is six seconds of everything on the battlefield happening at once, a "round" of combat is six seconds, a turn takes place at the same time as all other turns within this round.

[JoeJ]

I disagree with your player 1000000%.

There is no reason to not RP during the combat phase of the game, whether that's dialogue between PCs or between a PC and an NPC or even just weighing your combat options based on in-character reasoning rather than whatever is most tactically efficient.

"You are using Bonetti's defense against me, eh?"
"I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain."

[War_lord]

Honestly? As a DM?

It does feel kinda cringey when the villains try to drop one-liners that doesn't land, or try to speak, it breaks the flow. We are there to give the players a good time and help them tell their story, which is why it's more okay when the players are talking, taking focus and staying in character, than when you, the DM, who's pretty much constantly in focus, pauses combat to say something you might think is cool but you have no idea of knowing if the players think the same way until after you've said it.

Compare your line of "you guys are tougher than I expected, I guess I can go all out." which sounds much more like something an anime hero or villain would say,

And dubbed anime has the excuse of having to translate a Japanese sentence into English, while preserving the lip sync. It would just destroy my immersion if I'm hearing goofy anime/video game lines in a game that isn't trying for parody.

[KillianHawkeye]

"You are using Bonetti's defense against me, eh?"
"I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain."

For example.

But really, in my view combat in a game serves two main purposes. The main one is to provide the primary challenge and pivotal excitement of the game as well as to reward the players with treasure and experience points.

But the second function, which is just as important, is to further the story in some way. Random encounters might not fulfill this usage, but most other fights should do so. And they can't do that if you take all the drama out of it.

The fight needs to be about something important, or the enemies need to have dreadful goals that must be stopped. Important information can be revealed in a fight. Decisions will be made. Fates determined.

If a character is charismatic, they should deliver taunts or quips or retorts, no matter if they are PC or NPC. Any character should curse or howl with rage if they find themselves losing a fight, or cry out with fear, or emote satisfaction or superiority if they are on the winning side. A character can try to reason with a foe that they would rather not be forced to fight against, even while exchanging blows.

It's important to remember that NPCs are characters, too. Let them have a voice when appropriate. Any fight that is meant to advance the story is a perfect scene to inject a little roleplaying.

[Talakeal]

A few things:

1: Rounds are an abstraction. Six second rounds doubly so.
2: In real fights there are often long periods of inaction where people are catching their breath or circling around looking for an opening.
3: Cringe-worthy lines are equally cringe-worthy whether they are spoken in or out of combat, and don't really have a direct bearing on a discussion of dialogue in combat.

[mAc Chaos]

These people sound bizarre, OP.

[Darth Ultron]

Anyone else share this oppinion? He stated it as if it was a universal truth, and I am wondering if it really is a common viewpoint that I have never noticed before. Or is this just one hack and slash gamer talking for everyone? Thoughts?

Sure sounds like a typical hack and slash gamer.

My game has tons of dialogue. Dialogue is where the DM gets to talk, so I do that a lot.

And....well....a player that said they hated villain monologues would regret it quickly...Muuuhahahahaha.

[icefractal]

We are there to give the players a good time and help them tell their story, which is why it's more okay when the players are talking, taking focus and staying in character, than when you, the DM, who's pretty much constantly in focus, pauses combat to say something you might think is cool but you have no idea of knowing if the players think the same way until after you've said it.

I'd disagree. The GM is a player also, and needs to have fun too. A campaign where the GM is just doing it all for the players and not enjoying it themselves is a campaign that won't last long. Either because tension builds up and makes it implode, or simply because the GM burns out.

And while the GM is in-focus most of the time, a lot of that is simply describing things or resolving player actions - being an impartial interface isn't the same thing as getting to perform a bit.

[Pauly]

If you know that they're a murderer, and they plan to attack you in the very near future, the smart thing to do is to kill that person before they can kill you. When you are in a life or death situation, your body makes a bunch of drastic chemistry changes to get you ready to respond. One of the results of that is that you're not going to be making any dramatic speeches. Even in a non-life threatening situation, most fist fights start with a sucker punch (maybe some posturing beforehand) not a soliloquy about how good one is at punching. That's a device of dramatic fiction. And it's in your players rights to care about winning fights, particularly if they aren't playing honor obsessed characters.

EDIT: And a GM seeing any player interaction with the game as a "middle finger to the DM" is bad GMing. You need to be impartial. If your players don't like chatter, don't punish them, stop chattering.

I disagree. Lots of real life fights and murders have dialogues.
Ranging from, but not limited to:
- Threats (I’m going to kill you)
- Attempts to talk down and de-escalate the conflict (put the gun down and let’s talk)
- Attempts to talk-up and escalate the conflict (who are you looking at?)
- A verbal disagreement leading to a physical disagreement (Well your team sucks)
- Interjections (WTF, why did you hit me?)
- Warnings (Look out he’s got a knife)

The idea of people determinedly and silently going about mayhem usually only occurs in pre-meditated situations. Most people will rather talk than initiate violence, which is why “I don’t want to fight” is what prefaces most sucker punches.

[denthor]

I surrender is still okay?

[Satinavian]

Afaict he seems to think that combat is combat and RP is RP and never the twain shall meet. Although in truth I suspect it ir probably just because he is looking for an excuse to be an attention whore.

Dramatic speeches in combat situation is a genre convention. It is not realistic at all.

And that means it is utterly inappropriate if you are not in a genre that has it or if you do play "combat as war".


There is a place for pre-combat speeches. Those happen either in a situation where combatants can't yet hurt each other or when it is not yet certain that combat will actually happen, even if everyone is prepared for it and showing that. Sometimes you have even cultural rules in place that make pre-combat speeches possible. Meeting for a last negotiation on the battlefield under a truce is not a strange thing.
But if the combat is actually about to start or already started ? Time for talk is over.


That does not mean that i let my characters/NPCs never talk during combat. But if i do, it is :

- Orders to people on the own side
- Giving warnings/pointing out important developments their comrades might not have noticed
- Coordinating/relaying tactics
- "I surrender"

I think the most hammy or clichee thing i would ever use is
- "Stop fighting ! This is all a big misunderstanding !"

But no quips (Those are for practice fights or tournaments) and certainly no villain monologues.

[DMwithoutPC's]

First of I think that was very rude. Let DM's have their fun as well, and quipping as your villains is fun.

a true monologue probably goes to far, especially if they are not behind a forcefield or something to protect them for a prolonged period of time.

Any discussion about realism, and trying to determine how much can be said in the abstraction of a "round" or the "6 seconds" is not very usefull to me. If you start thinking like that the versimillitude falls apart anyway.

If they told you they hated the potatoes, why insist on serving the potatoes, do you just like being obstinate?

Since I host the dinner party every time, after a few weeks I would make a potatoe side dish. Because I want to eat it, because they are not the only guest, and because I make plenty of food specifically for them allready.

[Talakeal]

There's at least four players and one GM, it behoves me to actually listen to my players. The first thing I ask after every session is what can I do better next time, what did they like and what did they not like. (didn't you witness this before you vanished?) Even so, if I get the sense that my players didn't like something, even if they didn't say anything verbally, I change things for next time. I'm entertained by them being entertained.

If they told you they hated the potatoes, why insist on serving the potatoes, do you just like being obstinate?

Then again, even outside of gaming I'm the kind of person who is very fortright about my opinions, and expects the same back in return. If a player, I'll tell the GM the game sucks, if a GM, I'll listen to someone when they tell me the game sucks.



To which I'd respond that they just talked for over six seconds, while moving back and forth thus they spent their actions.

Just to clarify here, I am not saying that the GM should ignore their players desires. I am saying that there are multiple people at the table, including the dm, who all need to have fun and compromise.

If the DM flat out ignores one or more players desires, they are a jerk.

If a PC refuses to interact with a piece of content, or actively goes out of their way to make sure the other players cant interact with it, they are a jerk.


On this particular issue I am not really made up one way or another. Occasional Quips during combat break up the monotony and allow for some characterization of the villains, but arent really a big deal or something I do all the time.

Prefight monologues are something I save for really special occassions.

The one the really annoys me is post fight interrogations, when the PCs are trying to beat information out of a defeated villain and one of the PCs executes them first, that seems to throw a wrench int he works for everyone.


I have actually been on the other side of the issue as well, a few years ago my ranger, a sheperdess with favored enemy wolf, was fighting an orc warlord with a pet warg and I wanted to shoot his pet during his monologue. The DM said no, and also wouldnt let me ready an action or even get a bonus to initiative for when he was done. I even started a thread about it. So I do have some sympathy negstive feelings on the manner.

[Bastian Weaver]

1. Nope. I usually enjoy dialogue during combat as a player.
2. Concerning "people only do it in superhero comics and japanese cartoons".
The Witch-King Nazgul and Darth Vader are two non-japanese villains who come to my mind immediately.

[The Jack]

"You are using Bonetti's defense against me, eh?"
"I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain."

I want to thank this forum for directing me to such a fantastic film. A truly inspirational masterclass of cinema.


On to the main topic.


Get good.

There are two ways to do it
Full Ham
Or realistic.

If you go full ham, you gotta go full ham. Accidental ham is terrible.
Never, under any circumstance, just blindly ape what you've seen in movies and anime, and be serious about it, unless you're definitely portraying an awful character. You need charisma and intensity to pull of 'MY FINAL FORM' in combat, and if you're not doing it as a joke, you need a rationalization for why your character is saying that, because they're not saying anime lines because they've watched anime (No joke though, I once said 'my father always told me to use my head' after I headbutted a bully in the playground... I continue to want to kill my past self) They're saying lines to buy time, intimidate, confuse... don't just be blindly following a trope, understand why it's there. You're not going to create any tension by delivering hackney lines whilst the players swarm and hack at you. honestly, if you deliver the line poor enough, the players are going to care a lot less for the final form reveal. You can add a sense of underwhelm to even getting a dragon out of shapechange.


Make things more gritty.
Bargaining. Honestly Bargaining is the best use of your mouth when it comes to fights. Get your enemies to surrender or flee, buy your enemies, buy your escape, cease fighting.
Rage/intimidation- Screams and curses.
wounds. -Grunts, curses.
Commands- Having an officer tell a grunt to worry about the Flanks or to charge or to 'STAND AND FIGHT' or whatever is awesome. Especially because you can give players good feedback by having an officer struggle to deal with them.

[Beleriphon]

1. Nope. I usually enjoy dialogue during combat as a player.
2. Concerning "people only do it in superhero comics and japanese cartoons".
The Witch-King Nazgul and Darth Vader are two non-japanese villains who come to my mind immediately.

In fairness, they've both backed off their targets, and are intentionally mocking/goading their enemy. In the Witch-King's case he's threatening Théoden, and then laughing at Éowyn.

In the case of Vader he's either mocking Obi-Wan, trying to convince Luke to join him, or having second thoughts about what he's doing with his life (ie. when he's fighting Luke at the end of RotJ).

[Jay R]

A player may only initiate an attack on his or her own turn, or in reaction to some other rules-defined method. If the rules do not define talking as an action that provokes an Attack of Opportunity, then talking does not provoke an attack of opportunity.

Sure, if you assume everyone else is literally frozen in place for six seconds waiting for their "go" and not dueling back and forth.

That's a false interpretation of the rules. Everybody knows that actual combat is fluid and continuous. Everybody knows that the simulation of combat is discrete and turn-based. The simulation, like all simulations, is much more simplistic than the action being simulated. But if we change the rules at whim, there's no game left.

When I fence, I do not get an opportunity to lunge exactly every six seconds. Sometimes I'll have three in as many seconds, and sometimes it will be a minute or more between potential shots. The "six second" description is, at best, an average over time. Some rounds are longer; some rounds are shorter.

In any event, conversation is a part of combat in literature, in films, and in real life. [I certainly talk to my opponent in a fencing bout.] Just because a player doesn't like this fact does not mean that the rules no longer apply.

A player may only initiate an attack on his or her own turn, or in reaction to some other rules-defined method.

[Xuc Xac]

A player may only initiate an attack on his or her own turn, or in reaction to some other rules-defined method.

Especially if the player listens to the NPC say two sentences and then says "I attack as soon as she opens her mouth." No you don't. You just sat there listening to her before deciding to attack.

[Talakeal]

Especially if the player listens to the NPC say two sentences and then says "I attack as soon as she opens her mouth." No you don't. You just sat there listening to her before deciding to attack.

He actually interrupted me about half way through the second sentence. Not sure if that makes it better or worse.

[Jay R]

He actually interrupted me about half way through the second sentence. Not sure if that makes it better or worse.

It shouldn't mater. The response I recommend is, "The book doesn't state that talking provokes an attack of opportunity, so your attack will occur on your next turn."

[D+1]

Combat and roleplay aren't oil and water as if they should never be mixed. That some people don't like them to mix doesn't mean that is a trueism. Mixing them is also NOT an all-or-nothing proposition. Furthermore, just because a villain is talking doesn't mean he's monologuing. Just because none of the PC's choose to verbally respond also does not make it monologuing. Just because one of the players/PC's doesn't want to hear it also doesn't mean the DM/bbeg is monologuing.

I find SILENT combats far more irksome than those where nobody says anything. The exchange between Inigo and Wesley in Princess Bride is a good example of how roleplaying and combat can mix perfectly. How insufferably dull would that fight have been if neither of them spoke throughout the whole exchange? No dramatic lead-in "I promise I will not harm you until you reach the top", no mystery "Who ARE you?", no amusing "I am not left-handed!" Not every fight needs to include conversation between opponents but, "No talking EVER!" is an awfully narrow idea of what BOTH combat and roleplaying even ARE, much less how they CAN be used in the game.

[The Jack]

The fight in the princess bride is fantastic, but they're self aware and hamming it up with camp.

That's key.

The OP was using generic, uninspired lines that might've been fun if he went silly, but he apparently didn't, so they were no good.

Go natural or go silly. Between is no-man's land.

[Quertus]

"You guys are tougher than you look. I guess I don't have the luxury of holding back."

One of the players interrupted me half way through and said "Oh no, I hate it when villains monoglue. I attack her the second she opens her mouth." Keep in mind that this was during her turn after said PC had already taken his turn.

My friend then told that nobody likes dialogue in combat. It is bad but tolerable when they are making an in combat quip during their turn, worse when they want to do a monologue before the fight, and worst of all if they have already lost but want to give a speech before they die. Regardless of context, if an NPC is talking during a fight only the DM is having fun.

"nobody likes dialogue in combat" - false.

"It is bad but tolerable when they are making an in combat quip during their turn" - only if it's a bad quip.

"worse when they want to do a monologue before the fight," - agreed.

and worst of all if they have already lost but want to give a speech before they die - agreed.

"You guys are tougher than you look. I guess I don't have the luxury of holding back" - tolerable. Pushing 6 seconds, depending on delivery.

"Oh no, I hate it when villains monoglue. I attack her the second she opens her mouth" - perfectly acceptable outside combat, pretty dumb in combat. I'll second (or third or whatever) the "talking does not provoke an AoO". Also, I'll have all NPCs "take their AoO" whenever he opens his mouth outside combat from now on*.

”combat is combat and RP is RP and never the twain shall meet” - false.

* In jest, not actually.

Actually the NPC's making quips during combat are those that the players often find most memorable.

You're sort of proving the premise that only GMs enjoy these tedious speeches.

Hmmm... I was going to agree with RazorChain here, but my senility is preventing me from remembering offhand any good combat quips from my own games (a few from games I've read about, yes, but none from games I've experienced 1st hand).

So... The jury's out? I'll get back to you.

I wonder what would happen if the motormouth PC was attacked mid-sentence every time they opened their mouth in combat.

Great minds...

"You are using Bonetti's defense against me, eh?"
"I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain."

Awesome reference!

If a PC refuses to interact with a piece of content,

That's their right. Participationism is not mandatory.

On this particular issue I am not really made up one way or another. Occasional Quips during combat break up the monotony and allow for some characterization of the villains, but arent really a big deal or something I do all the time.

Making quips (or not) should help characterize everyone in combat, not just the NPCs. And, much like teaching, yes, you should aim for "not monotony" in your games.

[Talakeal]

The fight in the princess bride is fantastic, but they're self aware and hamming it up with camp.

That's key.

The OP was using generic, uninspired lines that might've been fun if he went silly, but he apparently didn't, so they were no good.

Go natural or go silly. Between is no-man's land.

Actually, I was going for a silly line, although as I was interrupted 2/3 of the way through I never got to the punchline.

[The Jack]

Actually, I was going for a silly line, although as I was interrupted 2/3 of the way through I never got to the punchline.

Do you do voices?

[Pauly]

The fight in the princess bride is fantastic, but they're self aware and hamming it up with camp.

That's key.

The OP was using generic, uninspired lines that might've been fun if he went silly, but he apparently didn't, so they were no good.

Go natural or go silly. Between is no-man's land.

The old Hollywood swashbucklers were about 90%-95% fighting and 5-10% dialogue in the sword fights. Often there was some dialogue before crossing blades. Some examples.

Ty Power -v- Basil Rathbone
https://youtu.be/nB8tiSMCwRE

Errol Flynn -v- Basil Rathbone
https://youtu.be/4MqmpL6X_8w

Errol Flynn -v- Basil Rathbone
https://youtu.be/q9rT7hvb6Aw

Gene Kelly and company in the three musketeers. Which probably has the inspiration for the fighters in the Princess Bride starting the duel left handed
Cardinal’s guard: “why don’t you use your right”
Athos “l save my right hand for drinking”
https://youtu.be/LDQAtdFlREA

Most of the dialogue in those fights is far from inspired, but it adds to the fun.

[Jerrykhor]

The best way to stop a villain monologue is to be naked.

"So, the heroes have finally a.... Wait, why are you all naked?"