Combat Manouvres

[Rophan]

This evening I watched Prince Caspian with my son.  The gamer in me was really struck by the one on one battle between Peter and King Miraz.  They both used some pretty fancy combat manouvres that  really helped me picture what is going on during combat in game sessions.  The one thing that really impressed me was all the shield bashing they did.  It looked much more effective than the 3.5e rules give it credit.

Can anyone recommend any other movies that have helped bring combat (or other game aspects) to life in your games?

Bruce

[Telas]

I have not seen Prince Caspiian (yet).

That said, certain parts of the Lord of the Rings movies did it for me, especially when Boromir is fighting off the Uruk-Hai, or the fighting in Moria.  The Hornburg and Pellenor Fields fights (individually) aren't as realistic. 

Other "that looks real" moments in movies are the stairwell fight in the recent James Bond movie "Casino Royale," the fighting in "13th Warrior" (especially the duel), and the work in "Beowulf and Grendel" (an overlooked foreign/indie film). 

Telas

[asmodeus]

If it were not for marital arts movies, I would be the worst DM ever.  Anything directed by Chang Cheh is worthwhile especially the Venoms period.  It is easy to see the actions as the fight scenes are dominated by static shots with very few cuts.  Even Jackie Chan?s old stuff is good.  There is no hiding behind editing and special effects for Asian stuntmen like in Hollywood.  Also these movies are very bloody, which helps with most hack and slash groups. 

Try these: (although unflagged on YouTube they are bloody)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2o-fOoRYwY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvdKkg9_pUE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUCld8eU69o

[JMeganSnow]

I second 13th Warrior, that film was awesome.  The fight choreography in Lord of the Rings (for the most part) was awful--they had Aragorn doing rapier moves with a longsword.  Ugh, you'd wrench your own wrist out of joint and your enemies would laugh at you, you certainly wouldn't be able to do much damage even if you *did* manage to hit them, they'd just catch the blade on their arm, knock it aside, and skewer you.

I'd advise against most movies if you're interested in realistic combat and start looking into stuff like this:

http://www.thehaca.com/
http://www.swordschool.com/

My housemate and friend were into that stuff for a while, and you learn a lot just by getting a model sword and swinging it around in your backyard a little--for one thing, you learn that it's basically impossible to swing a sword inside a house--and a longsword is NOT a one-handed weapon.  It's really quite interesting.

[VV_GM]

I wouldn't go for realism at all IMO. It isn't fun. I have several pieces of plastic in various parts of my body due to injuries from fighting, and the last thing I want in my games is a realistic fight. Real sword fights are probably "miss, miss, miss, hit and severely injured/possibly dead". I don't want that kind of experience when playing/running a game.

So, for good over the top fight scenes with swords check out the following (some are no brainers, but I'm a fan of them all).

- Conan the Barbarian
- Excalibur
- Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (utterly ridiculous film that for some reason works)
- Highlander
- Dragonslayer (not any sword fighting that I remember, but worth checking out for the dragon vs. mage scene)
- Ladyhawke
- The Princess Bride

Hope those help!

[longcoat000]

Other sources I think would be pretty good (including modern / futuristic fights):

• Any of the six Star Wars movies
• Aliens (This is how you take out characters who think they're all that and a bag of chips)
• The Count of Monte Cristo (remake with James Cavezel (?))
• Any of the Bourne movies
• The first half of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
• The Crow (Especially the fight scene in the club.  That one fueled Cyberpunk games for years.)
• Rapid Fire (Hey, what can I say?  Brandon Lee choreographed brilliant fight scenes.)
• The Street Fighter anime movie
• Rob Roy
• Parkour and Free Running are great examples of what the human body can do without supernatural aid.
• The Incredibles.  I always want to play a Supers game right after I see this.
• The Cube movies are great examples of deathtrap dungeons.

[Kinslayer]

Except Hypercube, which sort of didn't really have traps.  It also had the goofiest ending, which is saying something for the Cube series.  I thoroughly enjoyed them all, but I have a special dislike for making the protagonist/lone survivor a girlfriend-in-refrigerator. 

Some anime is really good for this, such as Rurouni Kenshin/Samurai X.  This series (and movie, and manga) focuses on the combat techniques used.  As it is animated, it's easier for the creators to follow such a focus, without having to resort to tricks like bullet time or hiding all of the fight scenes in the dark (Blade and Underworld series, I'm looking at you).  Kenshin also sneaks in some actual history from time to time.  Other anime is crap for stealing combat manoeuvres, however.  Any one that focuses on the special powers more than the sword-work isn't likely to be as useful. 

Another, even odder, source of inspiration for combat manoeuvres is the Gummi Bears cartoon.  Disney made this back in the Eighties, based on the candy.  Yes, they are basically bouncing with their butts, but think of the Gummis as human-size, with the other characters as giants, and you get a good view of how a smaller, faster, and more acrobatic combatant can overcome one much larger and stronger.  It's set in a fantasy middle ages, with the antagonists being the evil Duke Igthorn and his army of ogres, and little glimpses of an ancient Gummi civilisation.  I have long suspected that it was ripped from someone's D&D campaign, perhaps with the title characters translated from gnomes or halflings. 

[JMeganSnow]

I wouldn't go for realism at all IMO. It isn't fun.

Ha!  Truth.

This is actually why I'd suggest at least *looking at* the modern recreation societies--because they're about as realistic as fencing is.  (Not very much.  Fencing is a game, it's not *fighting*.  I don't think I'd ever want to be in a *real* fight but the silly waving-swords-around game aspect does kind of appeal to me.)  You get a realistic *feel* by playing around with the model weapons, but the result is stylization that is fun in a game.

It just helps you avoid errors that are not fun but just dumb, like the insistence I've seen that 4 lbs. is "way too light" for a sword--no, that's actually about what a metal longsword weighs.  (Less, if you're short and you wield a correspondingly smaller sword.)  The wooden ones are actually *heavier* than the metal ones, go figure.

[Telas]

...a bit more time for a reply now...

I've trained in weapons style martial arts for about eight years now, mostly in Filipino styles which relied on glorified machetes.  We use rattan sticks for training, but we think of it as a blade.  I've also judged a number of full-contact matches with padded weapons.  For what it's worth, Filipino styles are all the rage in Hollywood.  The Bourne movies, Riddick, and Teyla from Stargate:Atlantis are using Filipino styles. 

From the interviews with the old timers, most stickfighting matches between the masters were described as "click-click-thwack!-thud", as the combatants exchanged blows once or twice, one got a shot in, and the other went down (and this is with sticks; imagine a blade).  So yeah, realistic fighting isn't really desired in a game.  Besides, how does a dragon "realistically" fight?  (But if you're interested in realistic full contact stick fighting, search YouTube for "dog brothers".) 

However, the game we play (whatever the system) does try to simulate reality (or at least a version of it), so we can't stray too far.  Which is where we try to get close, or at least try to emulate where movies have made combat "come to life". 

(What am I writing, an essay for college?)

OK, combat to me is physically grueling, and it rewards commitment.  It should look very physical, and not like a dance at all.  There is a place where the two intersect, but one should definitely be violent; the fighter who looks like a ballet dancer doesn't do much to convince me that he's trying.  Also, the combatant who takes a committing move should be rewarded; the ending of the duel in 13th Warrior is the epitome of this for me.  A committing move is one that is daring and calculated at the same time.  Entering in to short or medium range is a committing move, as is a strong riposte (counterattack).

 

Possibly because of my background, a lot of swordfighting in movies doesn't look real.  But then again, I'm a stickler for soldiers with fingers on the trigger, or who "muzzle sweep" their buddies... 

[JMeganSnow]

I had a friend in college who practiced escrima (that's the right word?) and he said that an *extraordinarily* long fight between two highly skilled opponents is 30 seconds.  From what I've seen of the martial arts that retain more of the fighting than the dancing aspect (i.e. the ones with fewer rules about where and how people are allowed to hit you, like muay tai), that's about right.  After all, in D&D, that's 5 rounds, so I try to aim for the 5 rounds range when it comes to combat in games.

[longcoat000]

That's about the same as I've read in any source about fighting.  I myself never really practiced martial arts or got into real fights, but I have taken some fencing (foil & sabre) and used to get together with a group and swordfight with shinai for a couple of years.  Anyway, my point is that generally, you want the fight to be over as quickly and decisively as possible, and fighters use any means necessary to defeat their opponent.  The longer the fight lasts, the greater the chance you have of being hurt.

Which is why I never bought into D&D's assumption of a 1-minute combat round (1E & 2E), or even a 10-second combat round (3.X-4).  With that combat system, fights simply last too long, especially at higher levels (a 20-round combat would last anywhere from almost three-and-a-half minutes to twenty minutes, depending on the edition).  I much prefer smaller segments of time (one to three seconds), which is how I end up breaking down D&D combat.
[/rant]

Where was I?  Oh yeah.  A few books for you to check out for some interesting fight sequences and theories on war / combat:

Starship Troopers - Robert Heinlein
Armor - John Steakly
The Forever War - Joe Haldeman
Ender's Game - Orson Scott Card
The Icewind Dale trilogy - R.A. Salvatore (He may not write the deepest books, but the man knows how to write a good fight sequence).

For those of you who are interested, Answers.com has some interesting information about Eskrima.

[Telas]

Eskrima (or escrima), Kali, Arnis... it's all really the same.

The article missed one of my favorite aspects of FMAs - the flow.  I attack you, you defend and immediately (as part of your defense) attack me, I defend and riposte, etc.  This teaches that a fight "flows," and is not just series of disparate static maneuvers (like RPG combat encourages).  Sometimes the counterattacks are identical, sometimes they are variants of a series, sometimes they are mind-jarringly different.  Entire drills are built around this concept: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypl30xFI0pc

OK, now I'm talking about something I love, and can't shut up. 

[jedion357]

Just an FYI on Combat Maneuvers and gaming:
I remember that Iron Crown's HARP rules (High Adventure Role Playing) have a load of combat maneuvers and shield bashes that could be employed. I only generated a character and never got to play so I cant speak for the system itself but I was very pleased with the possibilities of combat.
It might be worth checking out to adapt to other systems and I remember that they had a free download for HARP lite though I dont expect it had a fully fleshed combat system in it.

[Rick_TWA]

Even some of the more "dancing" martial arts work under the assumption that the way you practice and the way you fight are very different.  When I practiced Tang-Soo-Do (I was a clumsy clumsy child and my parents enrolled me as a teen to help with my coordination) we didn't strike below the belt, or the face, or punch the head.  This was to minimize damage to our practice partners but it was assumed that in real fight conditions, these targets weren't off limits unless for some reason you didn't want to hurt your attacker.

In fact, in college, I had to decline a sparring match from a friend of mine who was a wrestler and wanted to prove that wrestling was every bit as effective as any other martial art, because while his art specialized in neutralization without injury, without limiting myself to the point I couldn't win (like sparring) there was far too much risk of very real injury for him.

Any martial practice has to find a point on the scale between "safe for practice" and "useful in a real situation".

[JMeganSnow]

Any martial practice has to find a point on the scale between "safe for practice" and "useful in a real situation".

Yeah, martial practice.  The ones that I call "dancing" are stuff like foil fencing or competition karate where you are learning to play a sport, not how to fight, because the point is to have perfect forms or fight under super-artificial conditions.  I'd include boxing in this category, actually, because you learn how to box so you can compete in a ring.

Oh, and longcoat, the combat round in D&D has been six seconds since 3.0, not 10--there are 10 rounds in a minute, so 6 seconds per round.  That's actually not so bad if you consider that you can make up to *seven* attacks in that time frame (with two weapons) or sprint 150' with the Run feat.  6 seconds for the 50' yard dash is pretty darn impressive, and keep in mind that a large part of most battles in D&D is taken up with maneuvering, it's not like fighting in a ring where you're already in easy striking distance of your opponent.  I've seen fights where 4 or 5 rounds have passed before anyone actually TRIED to hit anyone.

[Telas]

A good eskrimador can hit a target nine times a second.  On the other hand, there is always some time taken up as the combatants size each other up, and D&D would consider this "one attack".

Train like you fight, because you will fight the way you've trained.  F'rinstance, LARPers who join our martial arts school will regularly revert to leading with their left foot (shield foot), and will leave their head unguarded, because it's not a valid target in LARP combat.  They eventually learn (or get used to bruises on their head and left arm). 

Damn, I'm way off topic again.

[longcoat000]

Oh, and longcoat, the combat round in D&D has been six seconds since 3.0, not 10--there are 10 rounds in a minute, so 6 seconds per round.  That's actually not so bad if you consider that you can make up to *seven* attacks in that time frame (with two weapons) or sprint 150' with the Run feat.  6 seconds for the 50' yard dash is pretty darn impressive, and keep in mind that a large part of most battles in D&D is taken up with maneuvering, it's not like fighting in a ring where you're already in easy striking distance of your opponent.  I've seen fights where 4 or 5 rounds have passed before anyone actually TRIED to hit anyone.

Sorry, I'm getting my editions confused again.  I think it's 10 seconds for 3LBB - Moldavay, 1 minute for Red Box - 2E, and now 6 seconds for 3.X+.  I could be wrong on the Moldavay - Red Box times, but I'm solid on 1E - 4E.  But my issues with combat in D&D 3.X+ stem from things other than time and would bring the thread waaaay off-topic, so I'll drop it.

Anyone else have some more inspirational stuff that they'd like to share?

[JMeganSnow]

Yes, but can a good eskrimador run 150' in one second?  I'm reasonably happy with the six second round for D&D, which, being a super-technical crunchy system, is among the least realistic-feeling.  (It's funny how that works, isn't it?)

The system I designed used an entirely different method where you rolled initiative to figure out when you got to go first, and then I just counted up actions.  Every action had a speed associated with it, so to figure out when you'd go *next*, you just added that number to your current initiative count.

Exalted does something similar, but I'm biased against it because it uses the godawful Storyteller system.

[Telas]

LOL, no.  Filipinos are usually pretty short...

We can get silly with "reality vs. gaming" without even mentioning the Falling Damage rules.  (Oops.) 

Once I started seeing RPG combat as an analogue of real combat (as chess is an analogue of real-world strategy, and not a replacement or simulation), it got much easier to swallow. 

Back to the OP...  Even though the effectiveness of the armor was a bit odd, I liked the combat in Excalibur.  Especially Lancelot's epic-level morningstar work at the end of the film.  Good acting can really 'sell' an action scene.  (You hear me, Bruckheimer and Bay?)

[Kinslayer]

With a big enough explosion, you don't need acting.  That's the current theory, at any rate. 

I'll second (or third) that real combat isn't exciting in a game sense, but rather it's quick, brutal, and often one-sided. 

For a fight other than melee--naval warfare, to be specific--I rather liked Master and Commander.  Not only did it have more than a token nod to historic realism, it showcased how fights at sea were hours (even days) of manoeuvre, followed by less than a minute of terror, smoke, and death.  This movie has more to recommend it as gaming inspiration, but the ship manoeuvring alone is worth the time. 

The closest thing to a good tank battle movie is probably Kelly's Heroes.  You'd think that there would be hundreds of awesome WWII epics of tank battles in North Africa--or entirely fictional thin analogues--but I can't think of a single one.  While Kelly's Heroes didn't show lots of neat tank manoeuvres, it did showcase how difficult it is to do anything in a tank other than move forward slowly over obstacles, while shooting a very large gun, and hoping no one uses an equally large gun on you.