Why defend in combat

[big dummy]

Agree with Hereward here.  If you want to see cinematic combat that is also realistic, I recommend watching a Kirosawa Samurai flick like Yojimbo or the Seven Samurai.  Real fights are very fast, usually real one sided, a fight between unarmored men armed with relatively lethal weapons like swords rarely lasts more than a few exchanges, even between skilled fencers most are ended by a single cut.  But if as you can see in this famous scene from Seven Samurai, because a fight is fast doesn't necessarily make it undramatic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NHrGc36Hu8&feature=related

In a real fight people can't really spend a lot of time on defense, even with shields though a shield makes the fight more defensive there is no doubt about that.  Normally the person with the initiative is usually most likely to win the fight.  That said if you have room to move (i.e. keep backing away and sidestepping) or if you have a shield and / or armor, a spirited dedicated defense is plausible and definitely ads drama to a fight.  There are many real historical anecdotes of knights and soldiers holding off enemies at passes and bridges like the famous (though semi-mythical) story of Roland.

Armor makes things different but in a one on one fight it will quickly go to the ground, (armored combat manuals, of which we have plenty from Europe, heavily emphasize judo-like wrestling and take-downs) which is one of the reasons knights preferred to fight on horseback and do hit and run attacks.

Hereward knows what he is talking about he's had a chance to handle more of the real period kit than most of us have even seen on TV.

G.

[Rauðbjørn]

You misunderstand me, the SCA (while fun) is merely a very Narrativist LARP experience (or a truly simulationist one).  I mean learning to use melee weapons for offensive and defensive purposes.  To strike with intent, and the understanding that if you connect, you could very well kill a man.  And if you think dueling involves a lot of standing around waiting for the other fellow to lose his nerve, I think you might be mistaking dueling with Epee.

While dueling is a form of combat, I suspect you are attempting to refer to a Grand Melee; a fight in which one faces multiple opponents, not allways immediately in your field of view, such as the mass combat scenes found in Braveheart.  Most RPG fights are basicaly impromptu duels (at least for the PC's), only ocassionaly will the GM throw hordes of gebas at the players, usually I think because by the time the players could handle a hundred kobolds, a hundred kobolds really couldn't handle the party.

Most RPGs don't make allowances for realistic combat anyways, and I understand, it bogs down a lot.  The only system I know of that handles anything nearly like realistic (and use the word realistic with reservations) combat is the palladium megaverse, especialy Rifts and TMNT.  Even then, there are problems.  Notably that a man shot four times with a .357 or slashed two or three times with a katana is not going to shrug it off and decide to fight or flee.  Most likely he'll be all "Excuse me, I think I'll just have a bit of a lie-down now and bleed out, thanks."  Hell, I can throw four or five accurate shots in six seconds with a gladius, and two or three with a broadsword.  All of which would either be lethal or debilitating unless parried ar dodged, and I'm nowhere near what D&D would call a 12th to 20th level fighter.  And having built, worn and fought in my own Harness for a while, I figured I've handeled more "kit" than most.

As for cinematic vs realistic combat, try reading some of Joel Rosenberg's work, notably The Keepers of the Hidden Ways series for narative dueling (it makes sense of the blur you see during the olympic fencing matches) and The Guardians of the Flame series for descriptions of what an earnest grand melee is like (especialy with combined arms tactics).

[bspvirgo]

This may be overly simplistic, but a defense maneuver with a shield could be used to switch weapons or to replace a dropped one.   

In the games I've designed, Defense is just another combat skill intended to prevent getting hit - either as a action on it's own, or in conjuntion with a weapon proficiency.  For example, if you are highly proficient with a short sword, you would have the freedom to use a shield effectively at the same time. 

It may not be all that realistic, but I like the way it works in game mechanics.

[Rauðbjørn]

THe way I've done it (since grasping the physics of melee combat) is that armor soaks damage, shields allow you one "extra" action that can be used to block an attack, attacks can be used to parry a blow and a move action (or equivilant) can be used to "dodge" (useing tumbling skill, acrobatics skill,  etc...) any attack that occurs after the dodge, setting the minnimum threshold for hitting higher than "normal".  "Normal" being the equvilant of striking an unarmored, unmoving (but not restrained), aware person with no cover or handicaps.

Using D&D 3.5 as an example:  Bob the barb wats to hit Ronnie the rogue with his great-axe.  Ronnie is wearing studded leather and is armed with a short sword. 

Ronnie loses initiative and decides to go totaly defensive (+4 AC, +5 with a tumbling skill of 5+ ranks), using his attack as a parry and declaring his "Dodge" Feat against Ronnie.  Bob normally would need a total of 10 or better to hit Ronnie, but Ronnie gains a +6 bonus, so a total roll of 16 is neeeded.  Bob gains a +4 from levels, a +3 from strength and a +1 from weapon focus, resulting in a total to hit bonus of +8.  He rolls... an 8!, That's 16, but wait, Ronnie rolls to parry (+3 from levels, a +1 from Weapon Focus and a +4 from Weapon Finesse; total +8) He rolls... a 13, total of 21, the attack fails. 

Ronnie attempts to tumble (dodge) out of range, rolls ... a 15 (+9 Tumble) for a total of 24.  Bob rolls... 18, total of  26 a hit!  The great axe inflicts (rolls) 9 damage (-3 from the Studded Leather Armor) for a total of 6 points of damage, and Ronnie is now clear of melee and can flee (good thing too, he only had 20 HP to start with). 

This drift only slightly increases combat time and makes for more realistic and (IMHO) exciting combat sequences.

[Daniel B]

Maov .. was just reading your rulebook.

Where the HECK did "Stamina" come from??? (page 6, first paragraph) It is mentioned nowhere earlier in the manual. I have yet to read the rest, but a stat shouldn't suddenly appear like that.

[big dummy]

You misunderstand me, the SCA (while fun) is merely a very Narrativist LARP experience (or a truly simulationist one).  I mean learning to use melee weapons for offensive and defensive purposes.  To strike with intent, and the understanding that if you connect, you could very well kill a man.  And if you think dueling involves a lot of standing around waiting for the other fellow to lose his nerve, I think you might be mistaking dueling with Epee.

No you misunderstand us.  Hereward and I are HEMA practitioners, meaning real martial arts with Medieval - Renaissance weapons not SCA, LARP, sport fencing with epees or any of the above.

Here is some information about HEMA
http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/242110-history-mythology-art-rpgs.html#post4491042

I guess Hereward can speak as to who he is who is father is and where he lives if he likes.

G.

[Hereward The Wake]

Yes as BD said. my referances are from Historical European Martial Arts andc research and practice of them, not modern combat sports or live role play or re-enactment. My point about being defensive, "turtleing up" I think was mentioned, is that if one did that against someone who knows what they are doing your opponent will close and grapple with you and you are going to be sent to the ground. Numerous historical masters state that the peson who defends will loose.

My referance to a Duel was in the context of any one on one encounter where there is little/no chance of outside interferance, as opposed to a group fight/melee/skirmish/battle etc. The options of how one would/could fight in these two situations would be different.

I should of referanced that there are movies with more realistic combat in them Kurosawa movies be a good example, but I was refereing to two broad ranges of combat types, one where "defending" is more likely to occur than the other.

Regarding games that have "Realistic" combat, TROS would be one. Swashbuckler would be a good example of "real" cinematic rules especially based in their era, 17th/18th Century Europe. Burning Wheel, would seem to be a system that falls so that it could be used for either.
There is of course now the system that BD has brought out! 8')
Again it comes down to what we want to tell in the story and what we mean be various terms.
Best
JW

[maov]

Maov .. was just reading your rulebook.

Where the HECK did "Stamina" come from??? (page 6, first paragraph) It is mentioned nowhere earlier in the manual. I have yet to read the rest, but a stat shouldn't suddenly appear like that.

Sorry for the late reply, it is a trait which is explained later. I have a lot of problems setting the information, order vs. cohesion is not easy to get right. Also there are some mechanics which are not working totally as intended which needs to be hammered out before the corrections, card graphics and editing goes into final mode.