Shield Wall Fighting - how would you model it?

[Yorunkun]

Imagine a typical Dark Ages battle between two groups of a few dozen sword- and spearmen each. The defenders line up in a shield wall, the attackers try to break it. How would you model this situation in GURPS, using the advanced combat system (and martial arts, if you like), aiming for realism?

Specifically, ...

- what (dis)advantages does being in a shield wall bestow?
- what actions would the defenders typically take?
- how would you have a group of attackers try to break the shield wall?
- how would you model massed slams (a wedge of attackers shoving into a group of defenders) ?

Also, would you recommend running a fight like this, considering the high number of combatants?

Thanks!

[DanHoward]

There are four main ways to gain an advantage over a shield wall:

Break up the formation with missile weapons.
Give the men in your shield wall spears that are longer than theirs.
Outflank them
Attack them with something so scary that some in the line will turn and flee (heavy cavalry, scythed chariots, elephants, etc)

[Polydamas]

There are some traits (the Teamwork and Shield Wall Training perks) in Gurps Martial Arts for fighting in a shield wall. It also has rules for an overhand grip on spears (important if the fight is squeezed to Close Combat range and you don't have time to draw a short weapon). They even have a style for Vikings! Edit: And rules for hooking shields with an axe, or striking a shield deliberately to break it, come to think of it.

In a realistic campaign, most of the fighters in front will spend most of their time using Defensive Attack, All-Out Defense, Wait ("come into reach and I'll stab you!") or Do Nothing ("<pant pant> ok, we've driven them back a few paces, I'll just rest a few moments before I attack again") maneuvers. But the GM might want to make them more aggressive to speed up the fight.

If some player characters where in a shield wall, only they, their immediate opponents, and any major NPCs would have to be played with the full combat rules. The rest of the fight can be handled by GM fiat ("this round you are forced into Close Combat" or "you start to hear cries of terror behind you, and the pressure on your back starts to give way") or by die rolls (roll 1d every 5 turns, on a 1 side A loses, on a 5-6 side B loses, on a 2-4 the fight goes on).

[jason taylor]

A shield wall sounds suspiciously like phalanx fighting at first glance. At first glance at least. Read VDH's descriptions; he has a romantic liking for hoplites.

The chief difference seems to be the presence of slashing weapons. These were so common in northern european tradition that I wonder what exactly a sheild wall was, and when the idea entered into descriptions of the time.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

There are four main ways to gain an advantage over a shield wall:

Break up the formation with missile weapons.
Give the men in your shield wall spears that are longer than theirs.
Outflank them
Attack them with something so scary that some in the line will turn and flee (heavy cavalry, scythed chariots, elephants, etc)

The problem is that in current GURPS rules, a shield wall grants no advantages at all. There's no need to break up the formation because there are no rules that make it better to be in formation.

The OP is looking for rules that do make a formation superior to not being in formation, probably preferably accompanied by rules which cover the limitations of being in formation. Rules covering shoving and the press of multiple men against each other would also be favourities.

None of these exist. The current GURPS Mass Combat rules abstract such concerns away and the rules in the Basic Set are meant for individual combat or small squads of irregular combatants (i.e. adventuring bands). Shield walls, phalanxes, pikes and suchlike may be mentioned, but there are no solid rules for how they affect combat. That will have to await a happy time when someone is willing to write a book on military matters, warfare or something similar.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Icelander

The problem is that in current GURPS rules, a shield wall grants no advantages at all. There's no need to break up the formation because there are no rules that make it better to be in formation.

The Teamwork and Shield Wall Training perks clearly make it better to be in formation than not - and making it a perk or SOMETHING vs something that happens automatically when you get some dudes standing in a line seems appropriate to me, because it does require training to create a shield wall (or a phalanx). It doesn't happen automatically by lining people up.

[Ulzgoroth]

One thing that seems to be missing is rules about using long weapons in confined spaces. My understanding is that long swords (that is, non-shortswords) pose problems in close-order fighting because you don't have clearance to use them properly. Not because the enemy is too close (though they might be) but because your friends are too close.

Is there anything for that? I imagine such rules would also work for dense woods and narrow passageways.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

One thing that seems to be missing is rules about using long weapons in confined spaces. My understanding is that long swords (that is, non-shortswords) pose problems in close-order fighting because you don't have clearance to use them properly. Not because the enemy is too close (though they might be) but because your friends are too close.

Is there anything for that? I imagine such rules would also work for dense woods and narrow passageways.

Having a buddy in your space counts as Close Combat, just as having a foe in your space does. There's the same number of limbs and same amount of bodies in the way, and while your buddy doesn't want to mess with your aim, you don't want to whack him in the nose either.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Icelander

The problem is that in current GURPS rules, a shield wall grants no advantages at all. There's no need to break up the formation because there are no rules that make it better to be in formation.

The OP is looking for rules that do make a formation superior to not being in formation, probably preferably accompanied by rules which cover the limitations of being in formation. Rules covering shoving and the press of multiple men against each other would also be favourities.

None of these exist. The current GURPS Mass Combat rules abstract such concerns away and the rules in the Basic Set are meant for individual combat or small squads of irregular combatants (i.e. adventuring bands). Shield walls, phalanxes, pikes and suchlike may be mentioned, but there are no solid rules for how they affect combat. That will have to await a happy time when someone is willing to write a book on military matters, warfare or something similar.

Just remember that the OP asked about fights with a few dozen people on each side. So formations will probably be fairly loose, and only two or three men deep. I think GURPS already has most of the rules for what he needs (eg. being in a shield wall means its hard for enemies to reach your rear where you have defense penalties, and makes it hard for several enemies to gang up on you). I wonder if GURPS Tactical Shooting will have rules for situational awareness and tunnel vision which could be adapted to a gritty game?

Rules for individuals in mass combat would make an interesting PDF.

[Phoenix_Dragon]

The perks for Teamwork and Shieldwall Training gives fairly significant advantages for fighting in formation.

My current fantasy campaign, at its peak, had the PC party making a formation with just five people (Well, four actually in a Teamwork formation, and one supporting outsider). So long as they could keep formation, it was devastating. The melee fighters had massive defenses and protected the mage, who used simple magic to control the battlefield terrain more than directly attacking the enemy, and occasionally would all-out stab someone past his buddies. Enemies that used formation fighting and other methods of teamwork have proven to be much more dangerous, as well.

As for specific questions:
Disadvantages of a shield wall? Limited mobility, for one. It's too packed to do any retreating defense, obviously. Unless the formation is moving straight forward, it's ponderously slow. Turning means moving at the pace of the outermost people, which in a wide formation can mean many seconds to turn just 90 degrees. The faster you move, the more spread out the formation gets. In general, the whole shield wall formation will move at no more than a slow walking pace, to make sure people can keep in place or hurry to catch up. The need to keep in formation means less adapting to irregularities in the enemy formation. Individuals can not rush out from the shield wall to attack people just a yard or two out of reach, or they risk causing a complete breakdown of the shield wall and a penetration of their formation. So in RPG terms, the inability to make a full attack each turn is likely to be considered a very real disadvantage (Few PCs seem willing to wait just a couple seconds). While the actual mechanical disadvantages to a single individual is relatively slight, there's some pretty good disadvantages in restrictions as to what you can do if you're wanting to maintain the shield wall. A large part of the drilling for such a formation is simply in keeping that formation during a fight.

For actions, the front line in the fight is likely to be doing defensive attacks, giving the defense bonus to their shield, and either attacking with their weapon or shoving with their shield, or All-Out Defense (Plus to block) if they're concerned about defense. Ranks behind them usually would be doing All-Out Attack with long weapons, and being ready to file forward to replace fallen first-rank soldiers. While advancing, the first row is likely to move in a slow AoD, one yard a second. A "turtle" formation would probably be all ranks moving AoD, resulting in a very slow approach, but the best defense against arrows plunging into their formation. Then there's the charge. A full-on charge is likely to be the entire front row using Move-and-Attack to shield-rush the enemy formation, gaining the teamwork bonus for slam damage. This is very risky against another shield wall, as Move-and-Attack means they get turn when they can't use their shield defense, and has the front lines pressed into close combat. If the ranks further back are unable to inflict enough casualties on the enemy with the charge (And the Move and Attack penalties mean there's likely a good number of defenders up), it's likely to turn into some nasty carnage on both sides. It's risky, but it can work. The safer way would be to simply advance into contact, maintaining improved defenses the whole way.

For fighting against a shield wall, DanHoward already covered it quite well. It's a slow, tightly-packed formation, so missile weapons are certain to find a target, and while their defenses are likely to be high, no defense is perfect. With their slow movement, they're attractive archery targets, giving you plenty of time to fire into them and whittle down their numbers. Or you could go the roman way, and have your formation throw missiles into the enemy shortly before making contact. Injuries and deaths may disrupt the formation, especially in a poorly-drilled force, and that destroys the advantage of the shield wall. That's pretty much the main point to fighting them, disrupt the formation, and take advantage of its reduced mobility. From my understanding of it (Which is not perfect, for sure), a big reason for the dying out of the classic phalanx formation during the medieval era was the severe lack of mobility compared to looser formations and, especially, the rise of heavy cavalry. Though I suspect that the general reduction in army quality and training (Going from professional armies to mainly conscripted levies backed by a much smaller "elite" professional force) also made phalanx-style fighting less attractive.

And massed slams are covered by the Teamwork perk, which any soldiery-style that fights in a close formation should include in its perk list. Teamworked allies get to add a portion of their ST or HP to resist knockback, resists a slam (And I would certainly allow it for initiating one, as well), or executes a shove.