Back-Attacks - historical reality or gamer trope?
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 04. 2017
- Free trial of The Great Courses Plus: ow.ly/BmWK308CLzH
If you try to break off from a close fight, will you always get hit in the back as you run away?
Support me on Patreon: / lindybeige
Subscribe to my channel: czcams.com/users/lindybei...
More weapons and armour videos here: • Weapons and armour
In most role play games and skirmish wargame rules on the market today, if one man involved in a close fight decides to run for it, he is invariably victim of the 'back-attack' rule, which says that his opponent gets one very high chance to land a lethal blow on him before he can get away. It seems that in the mind of games designers, the correct thing is that everyone should stand and slog it out on the spot to the death, and that to get away, a man has to turn on the spot, exposing his back to a blow from a man within reach of him, before moving away. I have never seen this happen in a mock fight, so why should it happen in a real one? Not only does it not seem to reflect reality, but it makes the games worse at the same time.
Disclaimer: "The Great Courses Plus is currently available to watch through a web browser to almost anyone in the world and optimized for the US market. The Great Courses Plus is currently working to both optimize the product globally and accept credit card payments globally."
Buy the music - the music played at the end of my videos is now available here: lindybeige.bandcamp.com/track...
Lindybeige: a channel of archaeology, ancient and medieval warfare, rants, swing dance, travelogues, evolution, and whatever else occurs to me to make.
▼ Follow me...
Twitter: / lindybeige I may have some drivel to contribute to the Twittersphere, plus you get notice of uploads.
Facebook: / lindybeige (it's a 'page' and now seems to be working).
Google+: "google.com/+lindybeige"
website: www.LloydianAspects.co.uk
/ user "Lindybeige"
It's a well known fact that stabbing someone in the back with a dagger does 16 times the damage stabbing someone in the front with a dagger does, provided the dagger user has a high enough sneak skill and the necessary perk.
muss man wissen!
skyrim logic=best logic
A sneak dagger attack is not a "back-attack" though.
Pretty sure a back-attack is when you kill someone with your back, more like a reverse Body Slam.
and the gloves of a madman
ARR0WMANC3R Actually, stabbing someone in the back with the hornet ring causes 4 times damage.
When I think of back attacks I think of a sneaky assassin kill. Not a mid battle senario
i think of two dark souls players circling around each other until one is eventually within range to trigger the backstab animation to stun and kill his opponent
excluding when one formation breaks and runs, which is when most casualties from ancient and medieval battles happen.
A sneaky assassin doesn't sneak around, because then everyone would know he's an assassin. Wearing black pajamas would make you stand out even more, and wearing hoods would just limit your peripheral vision. Real assassins dressed like every other common people, took a job as a gardener, cook, or any household servant, and then patiently waited for an occasion to be alone with the target. And even then you don't target the back, as you might fail penetrating the ribs. Just go for the neck or the stomach, from the front, while the target is at ease and doesn't expect an attack.
liver,kidneys and spine are pretty vulnerable if unarmored , but throat is probably is best.
Balint Szabo you can very easily slit someone throat from behind, and they wouldn't be able to react.
"This is the distance I would fight a microfone at" - Lindybeige 2k17
Microphone
@@dirtybongwater5751 phicroMone
Oh you were first :D
@@strellettes8511 picromhone
Love this
Should be called "how many British stereotypes can lindybeige fit in one video" :)
Te
Back Attacks is a bad title for this. He is talking about attacks of opportunity when you withdraw. For me 'Back Attacks' are associated with backstabbing, which are attacks on an unaware enemy.
Yeah in games...
@@factbeaglesarebest yeah because backstabbing was never a word that was used before video games
I've never heard the term 'back attack' before this. I've heard either 'sneak attack' or 'backstab'.
But if we're mixing and matching, I would prefer to go with 'sneakstab'.
@@bookim40 I think he's probably reacting to more like execution animations and such
Today I saw a poor kid getting beaten up by 4 gang members so I decided to help out he was no match against the 5 of us.
Oddish Yup
Good man.
A ha!
cyka
Slow clap, building, well, slowly, into a rising crescendo of applause. Bravo! Well done, my good sir!
If I ever get into a swordfight, I'll have to remember to begin with a rousing "AH-HAH!"
I would venture that the reason British blunders feature heavily in such a compilation is chiefly because we went to war with everybody ever about a million times
Nice punch, that mic never saw it coming.
It was probably made in France
Nah it would've surrendered
but only after Lindy had snuck round a Belgian microphone and made the French mic's pop filter look totally useless.
:D
And since he is faster Lindy could have backstabbled the mike!
Et tu Brute?
"This is the distance I would fight a microphone at"
Is that a common occurrence Lindy?
Rampage Chozers Is it not for you?
A microphone raped my sister.
Tom Magennis I have a personal grudge against cameras myself.
I talk to my mic all the time, it was a nice voice. Don't you talk to your mic at times?
Some "make love to the microphone".
Lindy prefers to fight it.
I never really thought it was a turn an run thing, more a sneaky attack on an unsuspecting enemy.
Having been in many fights as a young man (usually 2 v 1 or many vs 2), I can absolutely guarantee that there is always some people that want to get around behind you for a cheap shot or to hold you so his buddy can more easily assail you. In a big melee, after lines are broken, there would probably be many people, having bettered an enemy looking for the closest open back to capitalize upon. After all, why would one put themselves in danger by attacking a completely aware opponent when they could more easily take down an opponent already distracted by your buddy.
Artistic, written and archaeological evidence of that is extensive for real warfare to this day. The Towton mass grave you had men with few defensive wounds but massive head wounds from multiple dagger blows. The consensus is the grave is likely men caught in the Lancastrian rout and were captured, had one or two dudes hold them while another dispatched them with a dagger. Mobbing people is a useful tactic. From stone age war bands with clubs and spears to Sherman tanks against Tigers in WWII.
"People are not complete idiots"
I wouldn't be so sure about that, Lloyd.
I prefer the term incomplete idiot.
Once I pass my finals in Blithering 101, I'll be a full-fledged idiot!
Nerd!
I'm a geek, not a nerd Don't know about all the others, but I certainly am one.
@michael wittmann... the fuck?
*looks at thumbnail*
Trust nobody, not even yourself.
RMCovers if you trust yourself you'll end up thrusting yourself
You deserve an oscar for that one :D
I clicked on this video to say exactly that.
Reminds me of an article the Cracked Magazine writer Daniel wrote about. He said that if you meet your doppelganger, clone, double, etc that theres only 2 meaningful things you can do: fight or fuck. He argues that you either fight them because its the ideal fight since they're your exact equal, while fucking also works since they know you, your every kink, and stuff like that so they're your ideal partner.
Live Action Roleplay, or LARP, is able to teach us 3 things about fantasy medieval combat:
1. cod pieces
2. chafing
3. breast armor
I mis-read the title as "Bear Attacks" at first, and was wondering both why they would be historically controversial, and apparently so common in war games (???)
Been watching too many Boreal forest Bushcraft videos...
2. amendment: The right to arm bears and bear arms.
Me too
@@oz_jones and bear bears bearing arms!
It is an undisputed historical fact that back-stabs always stun-lock your opponent.
and deal a crit hit
Well if you get a hammer to the back of your head because you're running away and me and my sixty buddies chase after then you do tend to get pretty stun-locked.
if I reach your back, you have to stand still and let me whirl up a huge swing
it does knock you out of stealth though, which means someone could easily set a bear trap under your feet since they know where you'd be at.
A. Dimchev Well earlier in the days fighting was more telepathic teleportation battles no mere person could comprehend such as a man running and being put back 40 feet and being stabbed with a golden thingy
ask julius caesar
Connor O'Brien Yes, ask him *smirk
Marcus Tullius Cicero hello brother
Marcus Cicero IMPOSTER!
Quid enim mihi venit in mundum?
But he was stabbed in the front...
The Bayeux ‘Tapestry’ has a scene showing how Earl Gyrth died: a sword plunged into his back when he was distracted.
Zoe Porphyrogenita one could say he felt the sword’s quite girth on his back
Holy shit that tapestry is MASSIVE
D&D is based is based on wargaming. In ancient and medieval warfare when an enemy force was demoralized enough they would rout. When they routed the opposing force would run them down from behind as they fled and was often the most devastating part of any battle. That is the origin of that mechanic of a free attack when an enemy flees.
*teleports behind you*
Heh, nothing personel kid.
Lunchguy *personnel*
Have fun inside that wall
It's deliberately wrong. That's how the meme is.
Darkwraith lol
"This is the distance I would fight a microphone at."
Marvelous.
A true Englishman takes no gaff from Frenchmen or microphones alike.
The microphone demands satisfaction upon the field of honour, sir.
"At least a microphone I feared would fight back"
Stupendous!
I just love how historians and history inthusiasts can talk about something and then then explain something completely different but related just to be sure everyone knows what you are talking about
I am a history teacher in South Africa and I do exactly the same in my classes, I love your content man it's so good
This is more talking about Attacks of Opportunity, when you take damage from trying to break away from an engagement, or moving too close to enemy units than a dark souls style back attack. When I think of a back attack I think of dodging or maneuvering somehow to end up behind your opponent, who is not fleeing. Then you have an open target.
"he says "aghaha" for he probably doesn't speak the local laungague the other fellow says "aghaha" for it's only polite" that makes me giggle XD
SirDubberz Favorite moment
SirDubberz I read that while he said it accidentally. it was amazing!
Sputnik lol
Agha is international language for I am going to kick your ass , hopefully , if everything goes smoothly !!
That's cute.
Methinks you got confused. A backstab, or a sneak attack, is a move commonly done by stealthy people, like assassins. Or traitors. Which is why backstabbing is synonymous with betrayal.
Matthew Tolentino maybe you're the one confused because he's talking about back attacks, without the stealth.
Bassmint you mean attacks of oppurtunity?
Yea, Lindy mixed up game terms. He's referring to Attack of Opportunity which happen when one tries to move away, not Back Attacks/ Backstab/ Sneak attack. I thought this video was going to be about in battles how people got would get ganged up on and not all 1v1 historically, which he did mentioned briefly.
This whole video is, of course, ignoring every tabletop RPG I've played had a way to move away without granting an AoO to the enemy via forgoing your attack/main action to move away very carefully. You could essentially "trade" your main action for another move action, so you then (depending on edition of D&D) use one to take a "5 foot step" aka "shift" to step just outside the enemy strike range carefully, then the next one to move full speed away, or in 5e use one to take the "disengage action" which merely makes it so you don't incur AoO's when you move away from the opponents you are currently next to.
RuneQuest rules are quite interesting in this regard, you can technically disengage freely as long as you're not engaged in a fight within weapon's reach of your opponent. Of course as you back up your opponent can react, preventing you from disengaging by keeping you within his reach. You need to outmanouver them or the best tactic is actually to fight 2v1 which can be quite a disaster for the lone guy.
Good explanation. I was confused and had no idea what "trope" he was talking about.
The only time I’ve heard “Back Attack” used in a game is in an ambush type situation where someone is caught unaware and awarded basically a free hit on an opponent. The only other times something like that might happen are in a stealth situation or maybe if someone manages to flank you while you’re occupied with an opponent.
Well- while the term itself may not be used, many video game RPGs have a random chance of you taking a hit when trying to flee an encounter. I'm thinking particularly of the JRPG genre, but many western RPGs also require you to leave a map to get away, exposing yourself to ranged fire in the process. Yes- ranged fire is a different thing, but always starting an encounter at such a close distance is artificial to begin with.
Lindy's ramblings are great... I could honestly listen to em for hours. Always funny how he slides in sponsorships in the middle of videos!
Great video.
One thing that has always bugged me about RPG combat is how the enemies are almost always fearless and fight to the death. I guess that is largely a GM problem. If our party is attacked by highwaymen while we are journeying across the countryside and our party kills half of them without taking any casualties ourselves, then the remaining highwaymen are going to run for their lives. They aren't there to fight to the death, they just want some money, and once they realize that the chances of death are reasonably good, they'll run.
Now, I admit that certain enemies may fight to the death, but they're rare, though it seems like in an RPG enemies almost always fight to the last man.
That is basically irrelevant to the point about back-attacks (or attacks of opportunity in D&D-speak). But you are absolutely right, enemies fighting to the death is kind of ridiculous in most cases. Even animals aren't going to stick around until they die, although particularly aggressive ones or ones that are too powerful to have ever needed to run away may realize their predicament far too late.
The only reasonable exception I can think of are mindless undead since in most systems, they just blindly follow a specific set of commands they have been given. Or maybe entities for which dying is not a big deal. Or maybe the obligatory crazy cult.
yeah i have DMed a lot and almost nothing fights to the death evem when monsters drop below 10% HP i have them make a wisdom save to see if they surrender, or run. the only exceptions are are mindless things and extreamly powerful things the latter usually trying to negociate its way oit of the conflict ( e.g. Red dragon is almost dead it tells the party they can have the thing they want plus two more magic items of thier choice and 5k gold if they leave.)
The newer World Of Darkness games (Chronicles of Darkness I think?) have rules to help bring battles to more logical conclusions than just everybody on one side dies.
Vidya games solved this problem for you guys. Darkest Dungeon is a dungeon crawler that has fear as a game mechanic.
to develop your point, one thing that always bugged me when i played D&D in high school was that we never got to know the villains's side of the story: since we never really encounterd the gbad guys until the end of the scenario, and that it fought to the death, it wasn't like we could interrogate them to understand there motives.
Easily solved with a few Dming tricks, but frustrating nonetheless if you're in it for the story.
I actually thought this video would be about attacking with your back.
I am really disappointed.
The Good
Aye
The Good Git gud.
The Good
Hey Blondie.
"You usually don't want to charge in with the butt"
- Matt Easton 2017
Unless you are the Spleen.
*The Spy wants to know your location*
he could be any one of us
@@terner1234 it could be even me!
@@avwitzke767 *head explodes*
It was obvious, he’s the red spy. watch, he’ll turn red any second now.
Any second now...
"This is the distance I would fight a microphone at"
Lloyd, your teachings never disappoint.
"This is the distance I'd fight a microphone at"
Thanks for the handy tips m8, I've been struggling with the local Mic gangs as of late.
They say to hit the obnoxiously loud one first.
😫Well looky who we have here!
Hello again Joey...It's been 3 years, but Big Mic and the gang haven't forgotten that little debt of yours...Big Mic says that if you don't pay up, we break ya knee caps...
This sounds like sth monty python would write
A stealth spear. That's brilliant. "Hey, get close to those guys. They're not armed. -- OH! They've got STEALTH SPEARS! Run Away! Run Away!"
Going to put an entire battalion of troops armed with invisible spears in my next D&D game.
"This is the distance I'll fight a microphone at"
Amazing
I've found the 5e D&D ruleset covers this quite nicely. If an enemy is fully engaged with you, you have to invest an action in ''disengaging', allowing you to escape with no penalty. If you decide you want to get another attack (or some other action) in first, before running, then obviously your escape is somewhat slower or clumsier and the enemy gets a chance to hit you. And if your enemy is engaged with an ally, then his focus is not on you at all, and you can just run away no problem. (and then there are various feats and abilities that play with these rules, but generally it all seems to make sense to me).
is the bit about ally engagement in the phb? i've had quite a few disputes with my dm about that especially when the ally was attacked last, he conceded to my circling around because i never moved away.
Attack of opportunity is the bane of my existence in the video game form dnd, I have been killed by weak enemies because they got 20 attacks of opportunity in 1 second from lag
@@bellmaster4088 What D&D videogame was this?
Also, i agree that it is kind of absurd for one individual to deliver several Opportunity Attacks in one round, which is only supposed to be several seconds.
(ie: One player/enemy that has other units moving by them all in the same round.)
At best, i’d say 2 Opportunity Attacks per round makes sense (and even that is kind of risky). I would certainly not try an opp. atk while facing another foe, just bc someone passed by me. Each of my opportunity attacks would leave me open to an opportunity attack myself.
@@holyordersol2668 Neverwinter nights Enhanced Edition, the server would lag and the enemy would get 12 attacks of opportunity
Back stabbing is not a real technique since ancient time real warriors did not give chase to fleeing enemy, but they did end them rightly with a good pommel throw.
seb9995 Question: do you really still find this joke funny?
Aedalor
There is no way to end it rightly, not even by use of a spandau
Cease! Twas merely a jest!
Aedalor It seems like someone was ended rightly in his past lives.
Being pommeled in the back is a death sentence, everyone knew dat.
This was well illustrated in The Princess Bride. When the six-fingered man legs it, Inigo is a little bit confused before chasing him.
Tim Elliott ii
I suppose cavalry could perform “back attacks” against fleeing opponents on foot.
At one time that wasn't done, much. Then Phillip the Barbarian, AKA the guy that kicked Athenian ass, had his cavalry run down and kill opponents that scarpered off so they could NOT fight again another day. War got a little bit serious then.
Back attacks being "a thing" or "not a thing" seems like a really vague thing to discuss. Maybe some clearer preliminary explanation of what being "a thing" or not means might have been helpful.
"9 out of 23 military blunders are British - "
Lindy: REEEEEEEE
Srithor what Rubbish, the Anglo American empire is in full swing..
absolute rubbish,all owned by the same central banks
Srithor You guess wrong,the banks are in many Countries
Srithor You are, You don't know That all Presidents and prime ministers swear allegiance to secret societies, such as skull and Bones
Srithor You are, You don't know That all Presidents and prime ministers swear allegiance to secret societies, such as skull and Bones
"People aren't idiots." Lindybeige 2017
Kyle Netherwood the only incorrect thing he said in this vid XD
Kyle Netherwood "this is the distance I would fight a microphone at." also Lindybeige 2017
Well, the one trade humans are exceptionally good at is war.
Also literally every other trade.
Also literally Americans
When I think of "back attack", I think of 2 scenarios.
1. Sneaking up and stabbing someone in the back who is unaware.
2. Doing some grappling or some other type of move that puts the opponent's back to you leaving them open for some kind of attack, in the back.
"Why is everyone stabbing me in the back?!" "Becuase its easy. And does alot of damage.."
you know what bugs me?
the slightly tilted youtube playbutton in the background...
Right?!
You know what bugs me?
Your comment that pointed out the slightly tilted youtube playbutton in the background that is now bugging me.
That is actually being really buggy now thx for the info :(
And here was i pondering over the birdsnest that seems to have fallen onto this poor mans head.
OH MY GOD CANNOT UNSEE YOU ARE LITERALLY HITLER.
A few points i think you missed why it is something made up.
1. Hitting something moving away from you will lessen the power of the blow.
2. Peoples backs are less susceptible to injury compared to their fronts.
3. Armor on peoples backs is normally has less gaps in it since your limbs don't have much range of motion backwards.
Even if you land a blow as they flee it is not likely to hit them with much force or in a vulnerable spot.
I have 2 things to say to that- well more than two, but this are pretty distinct examples going against what You and Lindybeige said: Tannenberg(Grunwald) 1410, and Kircholm 1605. Both battles were won in such a way, that in general fight itself not so many people died, but when one side started to run away, other(Poles and Lithuanians in case of both battles) started to chop them to pieces. About Grunwald i am not sure about exact numbers, as there is some debate, but i know that during rout about 800 knights and men at arms of Teutonic Order drowned in marsh- clearly they just blindly tried to get away. About Kircholm i know bit more- in 20- 30 minutes charge of hussars about 3000-4000 of Swedes died(9000- 11000 strong army), then they started to run away, and then Commonwealth calvary just went after them. About 500 of Swedes managed to reach thier ships, anchored 5 km away from the battlefield. Rest was butchered in the rout. Yet they should know that no matter how quick you run, you won`t be able to outrun a horse
Person who says "people aren`t idiots, they won`t just run away" clearly never was in really hairy situation. During fight brain does not work like it would normally, when calm and logical. I once, well not very proud of that now, beat up a taekwondo user(back then i didn`t practise officialy, got just some boxing down, and not very good at that). He thought, he was better, because of high kicks and nice guard. What he didn`t practise in his sparrings is opponent just rushing in, grabbing him by the throat and pulling and pushing, to throw him out of balance with one hand while other punches him all over the body. I just saw his brain shut down completly, trying to cope with the fact that i didn`t just attacked with one big punch that he had trained to block, and instead just went a machinegun on him, When in danger brain does not work the same way, often we just run away
Armor maybe does cover your back, but your hands do not bend in such a way, that your capable of defending yourself easily, and even if you turn to block attack, direction in which we travel, momentum and so forth are to my advantage- you can`t block as effective as it would happen, if this was a proper fight. What`s more, i can use it to my advantage, you halfway turn, during rout to hit me back, so you just slowed down a little, yet some inertia still carries your body forward... And don`t oversimplify- i can just jump at you, use my weight to pin you, and then kill you, i don`t have to swing my weapons, while running, bashing it`s edge on your plate. Even if i have a longsword or warsword, and you are in full plate, running away, i can just put my blade between your leg, make you trip and then kill you, aiming carefully. There is so much "ifs", and "buts" here that i really can`t agree with Lindibeige, despite the fact i am entertained by his ideas
My dog was being attached by a wild animal and I reacted by defending my dog, but when my stick broke over his head to no effect I blacked out coming to at full stride at least 200 yards away! Which is a great story till I tell you that the animal was a Sasquatch and that my 150 lb Great Pyrenees actually handled him without a scratch...But that's the truth.
I was thinking this as well. There is strong historical proof that people in route were stabbed and killed in a "back" attack. One argument I was told by an officer in the Marines was that there is a disconnect between killing a person facing you vs running. We all play tag as kids and it's a game of chase, same applies with combat. You also don't see a running enemies face which could contribute to an individuals ability to make deadly blows.
+
That is what I love about Lindy. You can tell he has put a lot of thought into these subjects. Like torches in D&D. We all assume that when you go into a cave, a torch is lighting your way. Not very practical. Same with the subject of dice, arrows, etc. He is the best
In dark souls you can get lagstabbed from the front
Attacking from behind works best with the sun behind you because 18 to 35% of the enemies will sneeze as they turn around.
Paul Paulson Is that why we praise?
Paul Paulson someone's been watching veritasium
Paul Paulson Veritasium?
The Pep Channel You are right! Btw, i'm a sun sneezer, too! Have to take my sunglasses to battle 😎
>Get attacked by muggers.
>Turn around and walk away slowly.
>Hear them about to hit you.
>"Turn around and shout "Don't you know back attacks are just something _gamers_ invented?!"
>Turn around smugly once more.
>Get home safely.
>living in a place where people use swords
Questions are warranted robbo
Well, the most effective weapon for back-stabs is a knife. So that seems fairly realistic.
His point is that back attacks didn't happen because warriors and soldiers aren't, generally, complete idiots.
+MWSin1 you don't need to be an idiot to be back stabbed, you just need to be unaware and that's always when people back stab you, think of spy, assassin or infiltration team, they will back stab people that are unaware of them and fight them if they get caught
blackgrayden
it's not back stabs though, he means stuff like attack of opportunity in dnd 3.5
Subscribed two days ago, still watching today ! Literally fall asleep listening to these videos, great channel and really interesting topics. A pod cast would be amazing !
I always enjoy your videos. Always on topic small to almost no ramblings. Good job man.
Who wants to bet he lost horribly to a back attack, and decided to rant about it
100%
I mean, he's not WRONG...but yeah, I could see it :P
It must've been that microphone that back attacked him
The microphones are either at your throat or at your feet.
I would love to know what the fuck did he play, because i can't find a game with rules he described.
It's more of a game design choice, rather than a realistic idea. These sort of things are in games to discourage fleeing from fights, or to reward players for more strategic planning/positioning. Pretty sure no one thinks critical attacks for 2x damage exist in real life. I've been surprised before, however.
DrAldix More specifically, Dark Souls. Git gud.
Run away, live to fight another day. I would say fleeing is a tactically sound idea if the alternative is losing. If fleeing results in almost certain death nobody would try to preserve their forces and it just becomes a numbers game of whittling down your enemy. This does not only include strategy games on a larger scale but in a first person fighting game like Chivalry: Medieval Warfare you gain a sprint boost whenever you're aiming at an enemy's back who's turning away so you can strike them in the back no matter if you're a heavier class than the enemy or you got less stamina. This game design is completely idiotic and punishes players who have a sense of self preservation.
Critical attacks aren't supposed to be like, you literally do twice as much damage. It's more like you thrust your sword at just the right angle to slip through their armor and hit something more important than just a light hit. It's a lucky hit, and so it does more "damage" by literally hitting something more important. The biggest thing people seem to overlook in pen and paper games is that hp isn't necessarily representative of how many hits you can take. It's rather a reflection of not just how tough your character is, but how experienced they are at deflecting attacks or avoiding them all together. When your hp increases, I would say it would be more accurate to say that it reflects an increase in skill, and that you can turn an attack that would have injured you more severely before into a less dangerous one, i.e. a shallow slash to the arm rather than a deep one.
well not exactly 2x dmg...
BUT things like sneak attack, "critical hits" and the like WOULD likely hit in an area that is more vulnerable (for example the throught)
also having played a game where you can move past enemys without problem... its REALY annoying especially for warriro type chars since kiting them is SUPER easy...
"Critical attacks aren't supposed to be like, you literally do twice as much damage." "well not exactly 2x dmg..." I agree, this is literally my point. Don't know why people are telling me what I just said.
I was always under the impression that the "back attack" was more of a sneak attack kind of trope
My life flashed before eyes, when lloyd swung at the camera.
Caesar says it's reality.
They can indeed become a reality if the retreating guys are being slowed down by their own mates standing behind them. Or of the runners are more tired or less physically fit than the pursuers. And then there's cavalry, which was specifically invented for the purpose of delivering back attacks to fleeing opponents. Like you, I'm gonna trust Caesar on this matter.
SHIIIIZAAAAA!!!!!!!
Caesar didn't want his men running. Last to blink often wins.
wow a stealth-spear
Where can I buy that?
A weapon to surpass metal gear
The weapon of the future! The stealth spear! Batteries sold separately
if there's a lindybeige "out of context" montage, this one must be in it
I think the back attack is usually mentioned as a form of sneak attack where the enemy is unaware of you.
You have the classiest and most persuasive sponsor mentions. Good show sir!
I think he is talking about d&d attacks of opportunity
These are referred to in D&D as 'Attacks of Opportunity'.
Backattacs or backstabs are constructions by games to make sneaky characters viable, but you cant deny that it would still be a hard time defending against a stab from behind without warning
I think it’s fair enough to say that in an organised battle where both sides face off let’s say in a field then yeah back attacks are probably not going to happen but in a siege or a urban area where flanking around buildings and such is possible then I think back attacks would happen.
Also I think back attacks would be more common in a skirmish where let’s say an enemy patrol gets ambushed and you overwhelm them with arrows and a charge of similar numbers then 1v1 and 2v2 fights etc start to brake out because it’s not an organised line going up against an organised line then people would definitely be going behind others to stab them in the back.
Did Lindybeige just hit me? D:
0:30
Mount and Blade Warband Napoleonic Wars Deathmatch traitors...?
anyone?
Deathmatch traitors... lol
Omg yes
I have seen some illustrations in historical manuals where one fighter has gotten to the other’s back. Usually from what I’ve read of those techniques they’re initiated at grappling distance and usually involve shoving the other guy so that they’re turned and off-balance.
Example: I and my opponent are dueling with swords. Opponent throws a strike at me and I beat it clear with intent to counter. I step in, but they do as well and now we’re much too close for this to be an easy cut. So I grab a forearm and throw him to the side. Now I can attack from behind him.
Great one! Personally during re-enactments (especially larger ones) I never had the space nor speed to turn around. Too many people crunching in from the back. Spears, other sharp things. However when the formations breakdown it’s usually jab, jab, slide backwards. Jab, slice, jab etc space is key. Rare in the crunch.
ah. I was wondering what you meant by back-attack. So you mean an attack of opportunity. Back-attack is a silly name for an attack of opportunity.
Also, depending on the game, you have an actual option to retreat or flee which avoids attacks of opportunity, presumably through aforementioned tactics. Attacks of opportunity generally happen when you're within striking distance of one enemy and charge or otherwise move to attack another.
Which, as he pointed out, actually reduce the chances for a 'back attack' since you would expose yourself to a bunch of opportunity attacks from the front line(s) if you pursue someone retreating to the rear of their allies.
a back attack is when someone fucks you in the ass in yoga class when you're doing the downward dog
Yeah the rule for disengaging to avoid opportunity attacks, prevents one from just charging past the front line. It also stops every battle from ending with the losing side always running away unable to be caught by the winner unless cornered or shot with a ranged attack, or somehow catching up without an action.
I think back attacks in video games are mostly there to reward good positioning/dodging. Enemies (in the games I play, at least) don't tend to run away. And then you have sneak attacks, which aren't something you do in the middle of a fight.
CerpinTxt87 like in dark souls.
CerpinTxt87 like bloodborne
I think hes talking about pen and paper games.
I probably should've known that, given his numerous videos on PnP games.
in modern tabletop vernacular its called an attack of oportunity, you attack when the opponent in front of you turns to run, its not necesarrily a back attack its when they run away and abandon defense or ignore you to move away
From the thumbnail, I'd thought that this would be talking about Sneak attacks by another name. I'd never heard Back-Attack used before.
Backstab fisher need to git gud
seb9995 lol pleb you don't have darkwood grain ring
seb9995 Dlc weapons are op.
Git gud and learn how to parry
git gut and zwihander, dummy
Real men play Demon's Souls, in a land before the lagstab existed.
your miss understand what a "back-stab" is, its when some one sneaks up on some one else, and during their unaware state they are unable to defend themselves. Its not something that really occurs during, or just after, a toe to toe fight. At least that's my take on it.
Edit: I think it might be a Cinematic invention, that and the dreaded "spinning attack", you know when you spin in a circle before you attack, which is absolutely stupid. Your just leaving yourself open to attack for about a second with no way to even see the attack coming.
Prudent Paratrooper You've clearly never played dark souls.
I haven't I mostly play MMORGS
Prudent Paratrooper Well, in dark souls, there is a game mechanic in which you stab people in the back if you hit them with their back turned, which causes extra damage that they can't counter. Whether in the middle of combat, or while they are running away to get a chug of estus.
But he's not talking about backstabbing, he's talking about attacks of opportunity and the like.
taking that into account, he mentions that retreat is often preceded with a feint or similar maneuver, which would be the equivalent of taking the Disengage action (if we're talking current D&D rules edition). In that case, the retreating person would in fact not be subject to an attack. At any rate, his videos are always thought-provoking and entertaining, so no fault on the fellow whatsoever.
greco roman wrestling has something called belly to back supplex. when a taller opponent lunges you shoot under- around - hook the waist with both arms - flip them over you backwards and drive their head into the ground.( being carfeull not to drive your own head into the ground by absorbing the impact with your shoulders and their head instead) at that point if you have a knife you could easily stab them in the back while they're rolling over trying to get up. or if you have sturdy boots you can kick them in the taint and they squeel like a pig at slaughter. can easily result in a knock out concussion, broken neck, broken skull and potentially kill them so use at extreme legal peril in a street fight.
Lindy: "This is the distance I'd fight a microphone at."
Wife: What the hell are you watching?
Me: Uuuuh... it's educational.
Wife haver
Actually it's been quite a while since D&D (3.5, IIRC) and Pathfinder seem to have realised this and allowed you to commit your full turn into a disengaging maneuvre, which can only be consistently interrupted through certain feats, etc. It actually makes sense since, as yout pointed out, it's not just a matter of turning around and legging it, but a transition between defending yourself and getting far away enough so you don't need to... allowing you to fully focus on legging it.
I just wanted to point that as a proud Pathfinder player. Otherwise, great vid.
P.S. What about showing us a bit of footage of you sparring with your mic?
People are thinking of backstabs that's not what he is talking about at all. He is talking about attacks of opportunity and disengage penalties on tactic games and table top RPGs.
Free attack if the enemy moves out of melee range king of thing.
Not sneaking behind someone and killing them without them noticing you. ;)
Ah, that makes sense. :)
Though in reality, one would normally retreat walking backwards until they were out of melee range!
Yes and that's one of the first things he talks about in the video ;)
what system gives you an attack of opportunity when directly disengaging? I've played dozens and maybe the first DnD had this mechanic, but no one really plays first dnd, even when it was brand new people thought most rules were dumb.
Oh stop it. The point he was trying to make is that he doesn't like those types of attacks. If he was mistaken in saying they were in a game they were not that's it a small mistake. He made his point.
Stop being so pedantic...
Back attacks are common in turn based games but on real time simulations its a rare thing unless your army are disasvantaged but has high morale then they would become berserkers
Two tanks approach each other and say "Aha!" Survivor of a drone attack says: "The last thing I heard, the done spoke to me, saying "AHA!"
A man walks into a pub and looks at the menu: Cheeseburger - $4.00
Fries - $1.50
Handjob - $10.00
There are three beautiful women working the counter.
The prettiest of the three asks the man
"Can I help you?" And winks.
He answers: "Are you the one who does the handjobs?"
"Yes," she replied and winked again.
"Great wash your hands and I'll take two cheeseburgers," he said.
Hehe
It's old but still funny
Cheeky man
Amadeus, get off the internet and start composing shit again.
so i guess this was the first comment?
Hehe indeed
I won a national championship in foil with a stab to the back when my opponent threw a hissy fit for the third time and turned his back to me storming off because things weren't going his way. I vaguely recalled being taught about a move by my geriatric Italian coach called 'the scorpion', where one changes their handhold of their weapon in one fluid motion turning their sword into a dagger like strike and stabs. In that split second I found the sword the wrong way around in my hand and I had covered the piste pursuing him without even thinking or realizing I was doing it and I thought "Fuck it." and stuck him hard enough to break my favorite most worn in blade. I was annoyed yet pleased simultaneously. It was the oldest blade I had too with the best developed curvature to it. :(
BaSH PROMPT unlikely as in my experience of modern fencing turning your back can result in a card, and hitting someone with their back turned can get you disqualified.
BaSH PROMPT fleche is still allowed but that's not strictly speaking a stab to the back as described by the op
+Blasphemous Presupposition in HEMA though you are allowed to run around to your opponents back and hit him 😊
So, you're saying, in a moment of blind rage, you charged and stabbed a fleeing opponent in the back, hard enough to snap the blade. Luckily these things are done with a safer alternative to a real blade. Murder would be a bad way to win a contest.
So you had already won?
A bit unnecesary to break your blade on a back attack if your opponent is already walking away in a hissy fit isn't it?
The scene I remember is the guy running and the other guy throwing a dagger hitting the running man square in his back.
Staying at a safe range is how you can tell if someone has experience in fighting. With many modern fights / brawls people who have been in fights or know how to will stay at that safe distance where an inexperienced fighter will rush in or start it close to the other guys face trying to have a tough guy bravado and more often than not are the one who ends up on the ground unless they instantly go for a takedown(but again an inexperienced fighter probably wouldnt instantly go for one). I generally find even now that what you say is true in regards to keeping a bit of a gap between fighters and if one runs the other generally wont follow.
backstab
ive never heard of a back attack
What if its a back slash?
What if you have a blunt weapon? Or even a slashing one?
You don't see it much in video games, but in Wargames, Tabletop RPG systems will often have something called "Attack of opportunity" which is quite exactly this scenario.
Baker's Bread what if I poke you with a spear , is that a stab?(real question, I don't really know what that's called)
It is like a reverse Body Slam. Think Snorlax.
The back attack on a fleeing unit is a holdover from war games like Chainmail. It's meant to show what happens to a unit in combat that panics and runs, rather than executing a fighting withdrawal, which Lindy describes here.
The problem with Lindy's thesis is that he assumes a person backpedaling away from hand-to-hand combat is somehow going to outrun an opponent who is moving forward. This is nonsense. Look at any NFL quarterback. No matter how fast they might be at backpedaling (Dan Fouts was famous for taking 5 steps back faster than most QBs could take 3), an opponent lunging forward will easily catch up with them unless someone stands in their way (like those huge guys on the offensive line).
Backpedaling is only to open up enough space so that the opponent can't attack you in the moment it takes to turn into a full retreat. Unless a) the opponent is already charging you, b) the opponent is aware you're about to start backpedaling, c) you've got to keep your body pointing forward, or d) turning and running is not an option, backpedaling is perfectly sufficient. QBs suffer (a), (c), and (d).
Even slow and dumb opponents would notice when you start to backpedal -and will close the gap unless there's some obstacle. Backpedaling is almost always going to be slower than moving forward. That split-second head start you might have won't make up for the difference in speed.
It's not really even backpedaling the way I think you might be imagining it. If you're already at a distance where a lunging attack will just hit, even a single step backwards would likely be plenty of space, especially if you then turn in such a way to keep defending yourself with shield and/or threat of counterattack as long as possible.
Another thing about football is that linebackers generally don't have to worry about the QB stabbing them with a spear.
why would anyone backpedal out of a fight, instead of doing the instinctual: doing a 180° and run away, i don't get your comment.
Because turning your back on an enemy who is close enough for hand-to-hand combat:
(a) takes time to turn around -while you're turning, he can lunge and attack
(b) leaves you unable to defend yourself -you can't parry or block with your shield when being hit from behind
A "fighting withdrawal" (walking or backpedaling without turning your back on the enemy) allows you to defend yourself, but has the disadvantage of being too slow to pull away from the enemy, unless he decides not to follow for whatever reason.
Excellent Video! I dislike "attacks of opportunity" for many of the reasons you stated - the most coherent one being that if a combatant is already dealing with a threat, he would not be able to ignore it in order take a "free strike" at you as you disengage, or move past him.
The only options I usually allow for "free strikes" is if the opponent is disengaging, and then runs away and you have your ranged weapon handy, or can run fast enough to catch him and force him to re-engage....
I got to agree... the only time you'd get a back attack is with a range weapon, a surprise ambush, or a with cavalry chasing after infantry. I had a bit of a laugh when you talked about holding the line because in so many films the commander yells out hold the line, and in the next scene everyone is fighting individually all over the place, no line to be seen. Another myth you might want to address is how on movies in the middle of battle they always spin around while in combat. It looks silly to me, but always seems to be an effective move in movies.
I love how genuinely bothered by "other people" Lindybeige feels at 4:40
Yeah its greate!
8:02 "People don't when they're running away expose themselves anyway"
I beg to differ sir, that is the best time to expose oneself. It would be silly to stand still while i expose myself.
I understand what you mean, but the only instance of a “back attack” in a video game I can relate this to is Dark Souls, where yes, it is ridiculously easy and useful to circle around an opponent and land a critical strike to the back. Which doesn’t happen in real life and I certainly wouldn’t have thought was a legitimate battle tactic.
First, lock on your enemy, raise your shield and wait for an attack. When he did, quickly go behind him low your shield and perform a bud stab.
It will cause more than 3 times the damage to your enemy. Even more if you are wearing the Hornet Ring.
"people are not complete idiots" xD lindy just take a look around you, anywhere
there goes my 500 hour's of Skyrim experience
Only 500? My 1000 hours isn't much either, but you'll get there.
In D&D (3rd edition at least), you have the disengage action. If you do nothing but move that turn, you can get away without an attack of opportunity, as long as you don't try to run past an enemy. On the down side, if you don't run around a corner or some cover, the other will have a change to charge you on his turn. But as you said, if it's in a line of battle, he won't want to do that.
do you know if Great Courses Plus have a tutorial for importing a greyscale heightmap
for the overworld into a game engine like UnrealEngine4, or Blender, or Creation Engine?
You know, I usually skip the in video ads but I just feel bad skipping Lindy's.
Someone can't just flee from a battle when his own army is around. You usually flee when the battle is almost lost. In ancient times when someone wanted to flee he threw his shield to run faster. If that happens the best way to kill him is to throw a spear at him or shoot an arrow (not really a backstab).
When the victors are pursuing their running enemies some of the pursuers are going to sprint, and some are going to run slower.
If the pursued are running slower, they will most likely be caught by the sprinters. If they sprint, they will tire quickly and most likely be caught by the slower pursuers. Both can be caught by enemy cavalry.
Sure some will escape, and some will be caught, but Lindy is wrong when he says back wounds are not historical.
In D&D fifth edition, what you are describing as a back attack is a "attack of opportunity". If it's your turn and you decide you are not going to attempt to hit your opponent, you can use your action to "disengage". That is exactly what you describe; backing away whilst keeping your defense intact. If however you decide to smack your opponent and THEN run away, your opponent get's an attack of opportunity. This is because you have closed that distance to attack and are now in range of his weapon and his defensive movements, called a "reaction", can possibly hit you. However he is limited to one reaction until his next turn, so he can't react to your ally who also hits then runs away.
I think this is a great improvement over older systems.
I've never heard of this in video games but maybe just happen to avoid them by chance but it does sound like D&D attack of opportunity where leaving a threat radius opens a free attack but this can be denied with a full retreat option which denies you an action that turn and only movement