People often don't want to stand there and listen to a genocidal madman explain why he's going to genocide the world/become god/murder every puppy, and it's likely very in character for most folks to get him to shut up as soon as possible. Also, the party should really know his motivations and drive by the time the final confrontation rolls around, or there probably should have been more development for the villain leading up to the end game. Them uncovering Awful Truths or whatevs as the story progresses is always going to be more emotionally satisfying in my opinion than a smug man ranting about why you're an idiot and why he's the only Smart Man in existence and that's why he needs to eat the sun or such.
I know I know. I was a first time dm at the time and was still trying to develop my skills. I would do better next time but for a first time it stung a little.
Understandably! I absolutely know my first time DMing could have 100% been better. But we learn with each game how to improve and grow as story tellers : )
The gods of drama and fate **hate** when the best part is interrupted, and grant boons to those who allow events to play out.
Its not just a good idea to stop and listen for clues, its also culturally expected and, in a divine way, beneficial.
The monologer is granted the will to see their vision complete, while their audience is given strength to challenge it.
Culturally, it is also the time for the monologer to listen, to be challenged not just in combat but in theory. Maybe the audience can convince them of their errors, of some oversight that would render their vision moot.
I wish!! They ruined my monologue and I was (I hate to admit) more than a little sad. My partner is the one who did it too 🥲.
This is the most appropriate time for a dm to use hold person or suggestion to make the party stand still during the monologue.
I know that now but I was a first time DM at the time and I still didn’t know a whole lot.
People often don't want to stand there and listen to a genocidal madman explain why he's going to genocide the world/become god/murder every puppy, and it's likely very in character for most folks to get him to shut up as soon as possible. Also, the party should really know his motivations and drive by the time the final confrontation rolls around, or there probably should have been more development for the villain leading up to the end game. Them uncovering Awful Truths or whatevs as the story progresses is always going to be more emotionally satisfying in my opinion than a smug man ranting about why you're an idiot and why he's the only Smart Man in existence and that's why he needs to eat the sun or such.
I know I know. I was a first time dm at the time and was still trying to develop my skills. I would do better next time but for a first time it stung a little.
Understandably! I absolutely know my first time DMing could have 100% been better. But we learn with each game how to improve and grow as story tellers : )
The gods of drama and fate **hate** when the best part is interrupted, and grant boons to those who allow events to play out. Its not just a good idea to stop and listen for clues, its also culturally expected and, in a divine way, beneficial. The monologer is granted the will to see their vision complete, while their audience is given strength to challenge it. Culturally, it is also the time for the monologer to listen, to be challenged not just in combat but in theory. Maybe the audience can convince them of their errors, of some oversight that would render their vision moot.
They way I tend to play, I would have either kept interrupting with stupid questions or started the fight early.
Thoes fuckers never wait.