ParanetOnline
McAnally's (The Community Pub) => Author Craft => Topic started by: etoiline on February 21, 2007, 07:23:01 PM
-
Hi there.
So, being a girl, I have a fairly stereotypical weakness in that I can't seem to wrap my mind around 'playing war.' I have a battle scene that I need to write in my novel, and I know some of the basics in it (like who's going to win, what the main character needs to do, etc) but it's very vague.
I have no concept of how big an army can be, like picturing a thousand men coming toward you.I mean, I know that's a large number, but I can't picture it. Jim (among other writers) has been helpful in this regard with Codex Alera, but I'm still stalling on writing the scene. Scenes, really. Trying to figure out how long that the soldiers would be at the front, troop movements, things like that...I obviously wouldn't make a very good general, but I suppose I have to be, to direct my characters.
So I'll learn, if you've got any ideas.
Oh, and how far could an army march in a day, over relatively flat terrain?
Thanks in advance,
~Cal
-
This is funny, because I can't write a sex scene.* My scenes tend to be a lead up to it, then I find some interesting way of distracting the reader (including "Well...this is none of your business.")
*Despite being "the most feminine straight guy" many of my female friends know.**
**Which is patently false, given some of our friends, but I take it as a compliment and go with it.
-
couple of questions to get a better understanding of what your are trying to do:
1) are you using military organizations similar to historic or modern military? or making up your own?
2) fantasy setting, using foot soldiers, calvary, archers (artillery)?
3) where do your characters fit into the organzations?
4) is this supposed to be an epic battle?
I tend to focus on the view and impressions of a few characters (so even large battles involve a lot of small unit or even single combat) And just give quick high-level descriptions of the overall battle. Your reader will care about the overall battle, but should care a lot more about your characters and what happens to them.
-paul
-
couple of questions to get a better understanding of what your are trying to do:
1) are you using military organizations similar to historic or modern military? or making up your own?
2) fantasy setting, using foot soldiers, calvary, archers (artillery)?
3) where do your characters fit into the organzations?
4) is this supposed to be an epic battle?
I tend to focus on the view and impressions of a few characters (so even large battles involve a lot of small unit or even single combat) And just give quick high-level descriptions of the overall battle. Your reader will care about the overall battle, but should care a lot more about your characters and what happens to them.
-paul
1) Most likely I will use conventional organization, but with changed names. My story is a quasi-medieval fantasy.
2) The enemy is big on ambushes. So most likely infantry. But my character is a hotshot with the bow, so probably archers somewhere...it's the first stages of a war, so only small groups are at the front now, perhaps no calvary...yet.
3) My MC is a scout, and he comes across a group much larger than his unit can handle. For a reason that I haven't figured out yet, though, they *have* to take on the enemy. I've got a spiffy way for them to do so, but that can't be the *only* fight. The MC has to be in some actions before this, so the commanding officer can trust him to do the spiffy thing...
4) it's not the battle of Helm's Deep or anything, but it's got to be good enough to wipe out the enemy and give the victors a little breathing space.
Thanks for your advice, Paul. And Mickey, we can be stereotypical together ;)
~Cal
-
Sounds like your MC is a scout.
What I would do is have him behind enemy lines, messing up supply.
That's an important job, and well suited. Scouts need to be fast, intelligent and tend to prefer distance weapons.
As to having to take on the enemy, it's best if you can set it up so that the good guys will get smashed, UNLESS the baddies are stopped then and there.
This lets your MC go to work without looking like a glory hound.
Does this help??
-
1) Most likely I will use conventional organization, but with changed names. My story is a quasi-medieval fantasy.
2) The enemy is big on ambushes. So most likely infantry. But my character is a hotshot with the bow, so probably archers somewhere...it's the first stages of a war, so only small groups are at the front now, perhaps no calvary...yet.
you could explain that for every platoon of infantry there is an archer or two. They would have to be multifunction (ie, more than just archers as they would be too vulnerable otherwise)
3) My MC is a scout, and he comes across a group much larger than his unit can handle. For a reason that I haven't figured out yet, though, they *have* to take on the enemy. I've got a spiffy way for them to do so, but that can't be the *only* fight. The MC has to be in some actions before this, so the commanding officer can trust him to do the spiffy thing...
So you could have your MC doing some scouting and discover a patrol that had been wiped out by an ambush and had to fight a pitched battle to report back (there by earning the trust of his commander) You might have him acting as a scout for patrol that is ambushed, the Lt (patrol leader) is killed and the MC takes over getting the patrol out, reports back, etc. Either of these would be a smaller unit battle (squad or platoon size ie, 16-40 people)
I hope this helps some. Remember when you are doing small unit or platoon battles, if you are in 1st person, then your MC may be too busy to see much of what is going on, but he will occassionally take stock of the over all situation he is in (especially if he is leading people). I tend to write the tight single combat, mix in occasional info about the immediate area, and even more rare info on the battle at large. (if the MC is in the thick of things. if not, then having him observe larger action and updates to commanding officers is a good way of passing on info.)
I also should note that I tend to write in the 1st person.
-paul
-
I think a use of 'overhead' shots (overall views of the battle) and close-in shots are the best way to capture the full scale of a battle. Short views of a group of men fighting vainly, trying not to be overrun, possibly seen by the MC, or anything of that sort are good, in my opinion.
Also, the smells, sounds, and feelings are just as important as what is actually happening. The slightly metalic tang of blood in the air, the sweat lathering the flanks of horses, and soaking the undershirts of men, and the screams of triumph and agony are all key to make the reader feel as if they're standing in the center of battle, watching the carnage unfold.
And, battle is crazy. The close-combat might be incredibly unorganized with large groups (or small, who knows) as everyone fights to control their bubble of space. Step into the bubble, get stabbed. But, it's always moving, always shifting.
Hope I'm gettin' this right, and that this helps.
Velkyn
-
Well....
First thing to do is decide what each army has. You need to take in account the type of land the battle is going to be on. Open plains, rolling hills, and other wide open spaces plays into the hands of Calvery and archers. On the other hand, mountain passes and other confined spaces are more for massed infantry.
Now, there are different types of Infantry and Calvery. Basiclly, you have Light, medium and Heavy units. Light units are scouts, harassing the enemy and slowing him up. They cannot stand up to an all out attack by heavier units. They can move fast and can bed all overt the battlefield. Your scouts are light infantry.
Medium units are a combination of speed and firepower. Slower the light units, they have hevier armor and weapons then light units. Heavy units are usually the elite, the career soldiers or nobility. They are slower then the other units, but they can ground up the others.
There is a series of PC games called Total War. Right now, there is TW: Shogun, TW Midive, and TW: Rome. The key part of the game is the battles, as you army goes up against other armies. You have to chose what type of units to put in your army (Depending on your location and tech level).
Go to this web site: http://www.totalwar.org/strategy/twug/index.html (http://www.totalwar.org/strategy/twug/index.html) And it has a description of all the different military units in the different games. It'll give you an idea of the different units you can incorprate into your story.
Craig
-
Well....
First thing to do is decide what each army has. You need to take in account the type of land the battle is going to be on. Open plains, rolling hills, and other wide open spaces plays into the hands of Calvery and archers. On the other hand, mountain passes and other confined spaces are more for massed infantry.
Now, there are different types of Infantry and Calvery. Basiclly, you have Light, medium and Heavy units. Light units are scouts, harassing the enemy and slowing him up. They cannot stand up to an all out attack by heavier units. They can move fast and can bed all overt the battlefield. Your scouts are light infantry.
Medium units are a combination of speed and firepower. Slower the light units, they have hevier armor and weapons then light units. Heavy units are usually the elite, the career soldiers or nobility. They are slower then the other units, but they can ground up the others.
There is a series of PC games called Total War. Right now, there is TW: Shogun, TW Midive, and TW: Rome. The key part of the game is the battles, as you army goes up against other armies. You have to chose what type of units to put in your army (Depending on your location and tech level).
Go to this web site: http://www.totalwar.org/strategy/twug/index.html (http://www.totalwar.org/strategy/twug/index.html) And it has a description of all the different military units in the different games. It'll give you an idea of the different units you can incorprate into your story.
Craig
I'd actaully argue with a few of those.
You can have heavy infantry, which are more like your roman legions.
And light cavalry make excellent scouts.
I would argue very strongly against using a game like total war for your setting and units, because they gloss over a lot of important minutae.
-
Well....
First thing to do is decide what each army has. You need to take in account the type of land the battle is going to be on. Open plains, rolling hills, and other wide open spaces plays into the hands of Calvery and archers. On the other hand, mountain passes and other confined spaces are more for massed infantry.
Now, there are different types of Infantry and Calvery. Basiclly, you have Light, medium and Heavy units. Light units are scouts, harassing the enemy and slowing him up. They cannot stand up to an all out attack by heavier units. They can move fast and can bed all overt the battlefield. Your scouts are light infantry.
Medium units are a combination of speed and firepower. Slower the light units, they have hevier armor and weapons then light units. Heavy units are usually the elite, the career soldiers or nobility. They are slower then the other units, but they can ground up the others.
There is a series of PC games called Total War. Right now, there is TW: Shogun, TW Midive, and TW: Rome. The key part of the game is the battles, as you army goes up against other armies. You have to chose what type of units to put in your army (Depending on your location and tech level).
Go to this web site: http://www.totalwar.org/strategy/twug/index.html (http://www.totalwar.org/strategy/twug/index.html) And it has a description of all the different military units in the different games. It'll give you an idea of the different units you can incorprate into your story.
Craig
I'd actaully argue with a few of those.
You can have heavy infantry, which are more like your roman legions.
And light cavalry make excellent scouts.
I would argue very strongly against using a game like total war for your setting and units, because they gloss over a lot of important minutae.
Yes, but the game does give you an idea of the type of units you can have. I mean, disciplined Pikemen will stand up to a calvary charge while peasents will break and run if pressed by the same calvary. Archers can cut armored knights apart under the right circumstances (Angencourt comes to mind), but if the knights get in amoung the archers, well, the bowmen are toast.
The type of country affect the type of army it has. A nomad nation will not have pikemen, for example, because they are not liable to have the inferstructure or the need for them. Deciding what sort of an army a nation has is part of the world building every author needs to work out. History, the landscape, the type of goverenment, all have an influence on the military.
I suggested the game to get a quick and dirty overview of what sort of units an army could have. If you really weant to go deep, Osprey Publications is based on military history and military of all the ages. But unless you're deep into that sort of stuff, it's too much info......
Craig
-
Well....
First thing to do is decide what each army has. You need to take in account the type of land the battle is going to be on. Open plains, rolling hills, and other wide open spaces plays into the hands of Calvery and archers. On the other hand, mountain passes and other confined spaces are more for massed infantry.
Now, there are different types of Infantry and Calvery. Basiclly, you have Light, medium and Heavy units. Light units are scouts, harassing the enemy and slowing him up. They cannot stand up to an all out attack by heavier units. They can move fast and can bed all overt the battlefield. Your scouts are light infantry.
Medium units are a combination of speed and firepower. Slower the light units, they have hevier armor and weapons then light units. Heavy units are usually the elite, the career soldiers or nobility. They are slower then the other units, but they can ground up the others.
There is a series of PC games called Total War. Right now, there is TW: Shogun, TW Midive, and TW: Rome. The key part of the game is the battles, as you army goes up against other armies. You have to chose what type of units to put in your army (Depending on your location and tech level).
Go to this web site: http://www.totalwar.org/strategy/twug/index.html (http://www.totalwar.org/strategy/twug/index.html) And it has a description of all the different military units in the different games. It'll give you an idea of the different units you can incorprate into your story.
Craig
I'd actaully argue with a few of those.
You can have heavy infantry, which are more like your roman legions.
And light cavalry make excellent scouts.
I would argue very strongly against using a game like total war for your setting and units, because they gloss over a lot of important minutae.
Yes, but the game does give you an idea of the type of units you can have. I mean, disciplined Pikemen will stand up to a calvary charge while peasents will break and run if pressed by the same calvary. Archers can cut armored knights apart under the right circumstances (Angencourt comes to mind), but if the knights get in amoung the archers, well, the bowmen are toast.
The type of country affect the type of army it has. A nomad nation will not have pikemen, for example, because they are not liable to have the inferstructure or the need for them. Deciding what sort of an army a nation has is part of the world building every author needs to work out. History, the landscape, the type of goverenment, all have an influence on the military.
I suggested the game to get a quick and dirty overview of what sort of units an army could have. If you really weant to go deep, Osprey Publications is based on military history and military of all the ages. But unless you're deep into that sort of stuff, it's too much info......
Craig
I'd have to agree with LightSabre when it comes to using a video game as a reference for a story. I'm a big gamer in my free time, and games can be very unrealistic for the sake of ratings and coolness. I've never tried my hand at Total War, but I've played more than a few RTS games in my time and a lot of it is about upgrades and health points.
Plain archers don't have a chance against mounted, armored men. Arrows don't have to penetration speed to punch through armor. (yes, lucky shots in exposed areas are true, but not all archers are lucky all the time.) That's what crossbows are for, though they are slower to reload and have greatly reduced range. As Trboturtle said, though, once the cavalry get around the archers, they're toast.
Also, after taking a quick look at the Total War guide, it appears to have one thing most RTS games have, which is upgraded units, such as 'Mounted Sergeants'. Another thing that wouldn't happen in real life is people who can suddenly take a hit better than the guy next to him because of rank. Does that mean that if we send a 5 Star General into the battlefield that he can take an RPG in the chest, but his rank will save him? He may be covered in war medals and brass, but that won't help him.
Leaders are, of course, necessary, but remember they are normal people, too.
Will continue this later. Gotta go.
-
Hi there.
So, being a girl, I have a fairly stereotypical weakness in that I can't seem to wrap my mind around 'playing war.' I have a battle scene that I need to write in my novel, and I know some of the basics in it (like who's going to win, what the main character needs to do, etc) but it's very vague.
I have no concept of how big an army can be, like picturing a thousand men coming toward you.I mean, I know that's a large number, but I can't picture it. Jim (among other writers) has been helpful in this regard with Codex Alera, but I'm still stalling on writing the scene. Scenes, really. Trying to figure out how long that the soldiers would be at the front, troop movements, things like that...I obviously wouldn't make a very good general, but I suppose I have to be, to direct my characters.
So I'll learn, if you've got any ideas.
Oh, and how far could an army march in a day, over relatively flat terrain?
Thanks in advance,
~Cal
While this may not help as a writing technique, it may be of some use visualizing what sort of skirmish you're trying to write about...go to Wal-Mart, K Mart, dollar general, etc and buy a couple of bags of those plastic army guys *yes like the ones in Toy Story*. Arrange them the way you want to arrange the story and move them as you walk through the description (outline becomes detail as you get to the end you can trim out what isn't relevant to the MC or the reader).
-
Actually, that's not a bad idea. I have a set at home which I would lay a National Geographic atlas map on the floor and I place them according to the wars of the 19th century (no really, I'm alone and nerdy enough to do it). It helps me define the strategies used based on the weaponary at the time. I get most of my info from Wikipedia and other online stuff. Once I figured out how wars works back then, I'll move on to fighter jets and espionage. Must say that my fav would be the Crimean War of 1857 ;D.
-
I'm sure some of the older RPGers among us will remember Chainmail and miniature war gaming in general being one of the progenitors of RPGs. The whole idea comes from exactly what you're talking about...recreating battles/wars in a designated area *read: map*. To some extent battles from the US Civil War are worked through with actual people here in the 'States for reinactment purposes (although the outcomes are fixed and planned).
-
Well are you writing from third person or first person pov? If you're writing from first person especailly you only have to tell a part of it. For instance in Summer Knight Harry is in the middle of a full scale war between Fairie courts but we only see the bits and pieces he sees.
If you're writing in third person your scope may be a bit larger and harder to write.
From what I've read and seen on programs like Band of Brothers, and from listening to familly members and friends that served in the armed forces, battles are pure chaos. Ranks fall apart, soldiers get lost, all kinds of things can go wrong.
-
*gives a little laugh* Well, I have now purchased Midieval Total War II and played around with it a little, and I am willing to change my earlier position, if only slightly. As eviladam said, battle is total chaos,but some of the elements in MTW II could be used to set upa battle, though possibly not to actually fight it, due to the unpredictablility of the computer and the fact that it won't do as you please when it is fighting you.
But, if you like visual, then it might work for you for basic movements and such. I would not advise buying the game for that reason, but it could work if you have a friend who owns it or you have it already.
Though the army men idea that Soulcatcher78 proposed is a lot cheaper and you can move the units as you please, but it's all a matter of taste. (Thanks for the idea, I might give that a try.)
Taylor
-
*gives a little laugh* Well, I have now purchased Midieval Total War II and played around with it a little, and I am willing to change my earlier position, if only slightly. As eviladam said, battle is total chaos,but some of the elements in MTW II could be used to set upa battle, though possibly not to actually fight it, due to the unpredictablility of the computer and the fact that it won't do as you please when it is fighting you.
But, if you like visual, then it might work for you for basic movements and such. I would not advise buying the game for that reason, but it could work if you have a friend who owns it or you have it already.
Though the army men idea that Soulcatcher78 proposed is a lot cheaper and you can move the units as you please, but it's all a matter of taste. (Thanks for the idea, I might give that a try.)
Taylor
I think I wasn't clear earlier. MTW is good for getting an idea of what each area had for an army. And it's good for getting an idea of tactics and things not to do (Calvery vs well supported Pikeman, not a good idea.....) It can't replace plotting, but it's good for getting an idea of the types and effectness of the different units.
Craig
-
The absolute gold standard for this is pre-WWI training manuals, which are hard to find, but are very useful indeed for getting the numbers right on exactly how far you can expect a human to march in a day longterm and so on. I know the GURPS basic set is pretty solid on the primary sources it uses for this kind of thing.
Also, there's a book, I can't remember the title exactly but it has "Duffer's Drift" in it so google on that - it may even be online by now, it's cetainly way out of copyright - which is a brilliant small unit combat manual in the form of a nervous young officer having recurrent nightmares the day before the battle in question that illustrate all the ways real battles of that size go wrong.
-
The absolute gold standard for this is pre-WWI training manuals, which are hard to find, but are very useful indeed for getting the numbers right on exactly how far you can expect a human to march in a day longterm and so on. I know the GURPS basic set is pretty solid on the primary sources it uses for this kind of thing.
Also, there's a book, I can't remember the title exactly but it has "Duffer's Drift" in it so google on that - it may even be online by now, it's cetainly way out of copyright - which is a brilliant small unit combat manual in the form of a nervous young officer having recurrent nightmares the day before the battle in question that illustrate all the ways real battles of that size go wrong.
Which sounds alot like it was based on the Battle of Roark's Drift, during the Zulu War of 1878. In short, a small unit of British Soldiers (less then 200) werre attacked by 4000 Zulus at a station called Roak's Drift (Drift is a term used in South Africa to describe a river ford) In a day and night, the British soldiers managed to hold off the Zulu warriors. (Which was better then what happened the British column that had enter Zulu land earlier -- think the battle of Little Big Horn, with Zulu in the role of Indians....) The movie Zulu (one of Michel Cane's first starring roles) is a good place to start.
Craig
-
Probably one of the best examples of battle writing is in
Jeff Michael Shaara's The Killer Angels, which while is based upon the Battle of Gettysburg, should be considered for reading for those wishing to write large scale battles.
Steven Barnes' books Lion's Blood and Zulu Heart are also very good examples of battle scenes. (I also think that Barnes ranks alongside RAH and Louis L'Amour in his fight scenes, which, of course, are different than battle scenes.)
As others have written here, it depends upon which you prefer to focus on - the overall battle, or just what your main character(s) see and experience.
(post edited to correct author's name)
-
I think I wasn't clear earlier. MTW is good for getting an idea of what each area had for an army. And it's good for getting an idea of tactics and things not to do (Calvery vs well supported Pikeman, not a good idea.....) It can't replace plotting, but it's good for getting an idea of the types and effectness of the different units.
Craig
Ah, now I understand. Yes, *laughs* using cavalry against pikemen in the game (or in real life, of course) is an easy way to lose a battle.
Best of luck in planning your battle!
Taylor
-
Well, if you are writing in first person, then your MC could be leading his patrol, and they get spotted and their only chance of survivial is to attack the enemy RIGHT NOW!!!. Or if you are using magic in your book, the MC could notice some big wig Muckety Muck casting some sort of spell, or summoning a demon, or something that provides to great of an opportunity to pass on. Thus kablowie thus death.