Master Swordsman and the Flank Attack

[Rigil_Kent]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Really? I don't think I've ever seen it. Can you give an example?

Kill Bill Sword Fight Jump ahead to about 5 minutes in.

I was going to say the same thing. This is what the OP wants, not some exotic ability (although Danger Sense doesn't hurt with the concept, either). This is clearly a combat technique that the character is doing. Making it into 360 degree vision is like doing a Cross Parry as Reflexive DR or something.

Yeah, this is probably what I'm looking at...

[MIB.6361]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Really? I don't think I've ever seen it. Can you give an example?

I know I've seen it more than once, but can only recall one reference. The Bride does it in Kill Bill vol. 1. in the fight against the Crazy 88's.

[Refplace]

Also seen it in a Chuck Norris Ninja movie and a few times with an older gentleman who was a big martial arts star in the 80s

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by munin

GURPS Martial Arts has cinematic technique and campaign options which can simulate this:

Thanks for the quotes. Yeah, we deliberately addressed this in GURPS Martial Arts.

[Kromm]

I would like to echo Peter's thanks.

And honestly, once the player has dished out the points for Combat Reflexes and Trained by a Master or Weapon Master, the true cost of the capability isn't just "1 point for the perk" (although a cynic might see things that way). The perk is mostly just a minor enhancement to existing abilities. Even if the whole campaign doesn't use this active defense option, allowing PCs with TbaM and WM access to individual chambara rules on a case-by-case basis for a point apiece seems balanced – after all, it's a valid campaign choice that TbaM and WM alone give all this stuff at no extra cost, even when PCs who lack TbaM or WM get none of this stuff at any cost.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Rigil_Kent

I was under the impression that if Mook began his action directly behind the Hero, the Hero couldn't defend, even though he was aware that the Mook was back there?

There has been some grumbling about this in my group. I've taken a semi-generous stance on it, based on interpreting the rule to be "cannot see the attacker" and the very reasonable argument that nearly every PC actually has a neck that's quite capable of movement, and not being required to pretend to be a statue between turns.

This has lead to the following clarification/house rule for my game:

If attacked from a position where you cannot see your attacker due to position rather than invisibility, darkness, or cover (eg, from behind) but you are not surprised and are aware of your attackers location, then you may still attempt to defend, as if being attacked by an invisible opponent. The usual Hearing-2 roll is required to try to defend (per Basic 549) at all; if successful the -4 to defenses for blindly defending applies.

However, visibility isn't the only problem when defending against attacks from behind. For "normal" humanoid characters, "behind" is one of the arcs where shield DB bonuses to defense do NOT apply and Block is forbidden - and Parry is at a further -2 penalty for being a very awkward location and angle to try to get your weapon into (total -6 to Parry, -4 to Dodge).

• Double Jointed characters may ignore the extra -2 to Parry attacks from behind, but still may not attempt to block and must still cope with visibility problems (total -4 to all defenses).
• Characters with Peripheral vision do not need to make a Hearing roll to defend against attacks from behind, and only suffer a -2 to "blind" defences instead of -4 against back attacks. They still have the position penalties (total -4 to Parry, -2 to Dodge).

So defending from a back attack isn't easy, and with many helmets inflicting Hard of Hearing it becomes even harder.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Bruno

This has lead to the following clarification/house rule for my game:



So defending from a back attack isn't easy, and with many helmets inflicting Hard of Hearing it becomes even harder.

I like that house rule.

[Gigermann]

The point is, though, that you can't see the attack coming, not that you don't know the attacker is there. That, and the "side hexes" are pretty generous.

[Kallatari]

Originally Posted by Bruno

This has lead to the following clarification/house rule for my game:


So defending from a back attack isn't easy, and with many helmets inflicting Hard of Hearing it becomes even harder.

That's interesting. I came up with pretty very nearly the same house rules.

You're entitled to a Sense roll, at a penalty, to detect an opponent behind you that is attacking, unless he was already in plain sight in front of you at the start of your turn and moved around, in which case detection is automatic (e.g., a runaround attack).

You get a -4 to defend against any attack from the rear, with an additional -2 to parry or block because of the awkward angle.

Unlike you, I allowed blocks with shields, although the DB didn't apply unless you were blocking with the shield. Instead, I limited both blocks and parries to only working against attacks from the equivalent rear side (e.g., if your sword is in your right hand, you can only parry attacks behind you that are from your rear right). If the attack was directly behind, I allowed the use of either hand to defend.

A final difference, drawing from the Situational Awareness rule in Tactical Shooting, I also added a final additional -2 penalty if you were not aware of the opponent at the start of your turn. The "Cool Under Fire" Perk allows you to ignore this penalty up to a certain range, as per Tactical Shooting (although I renamed this Perk to "Combat Awareness" so that it would be more generic and not only apply to firearm fights)

I did not consider the Double-Jointed in my rules to cancel the -2 for awkward parries, however. I like that and shall borrow that idea. Thanks.

[Gnome]

Clearly there's something right about these house rules, because mine is very similar. I allow a defense against an attack from the back as long as the PC is aware that the attacker is back there (saw him move back there earlier in the combat, beat his Stealth with Per, etc.) and makes a Hearing-2 roll to hear the attack swinging through the air. The defense is at -4 (defender cannot see attacker), and can only be a Dodge with no option for retreat (on the theory that you can't move your weapon/shield into position in time for a parry or block, and the footing/timing is too awkward for a retreat).