Tag Archives: writing reference

I have seven teenagers against five well-trained, enormous, agressive men that double their size. The teenagers are 14 years old and have a very basic training on self-defense. The men attempt to kidnap them. How should the kids proceed? What’s their best chance? They have 5 minutes until help comes. I guess there will be some broken bones, isn’t it?

Unfortunately for you, five minutes is more than enough time for five well-trained men to capture seven teenagers with rudimentary training, especially if they have them cornered with nowhere to run. Self-defense training is meant to prepare one to face untrained assailants, not professional kidnappers, soldiers, and ex-special forces washouts.

The problem is that if they are kidnappers, then they are likely professionals and that means they are looking to extort something from them or their parents. They’ll have already chosen their targets and it’s unlikely to be a random chance event, instead it’ll be a premeditated targeting. This drastically reduces the teens chances of escape. They definitely won’t be able to hold them off. The men will be better at incapacitating them than they will be at holding them off.

The kidnappers will probably be carrying tasers and cans of mace for the express purpose of capturing the teens as quickly and efficiently as possible. Because the men are trained, they will work together regardless of their personal feelings with a focus on their goal. You won’t be able to break them up the same way you can with amateurs. These are professionals, they’ll have a game plan and several backups before they attack. They will be quick and efficient. Their preference will probably be to keep the teens alive, but that can go downhill quickly if they face serious resistance.

Now, much of the sequence is going to depend on where they are and who the five men are after. Do they have a specific target among the seven teens? Are their faces visible (if they can be identified, it’s likely that none of the teens will survive if they are taken)? What do they plan to do with the teens once they have them? Are they taking all seven or are some expendable, if so, which ones? If the kids give them problems, they may have to make some very harsh choices about who lives and who dies, who is expendable and who is not. If they are being taken to extort the parents, then it’s likely they will be handled more gently. If they are being taken for the slave trade, then the early troublemakers will probably be killed.

Assuming they are willing to incapacitate all the children (instead of killing a few) and have a vehicle close by, it’s a question of who they decide to take with them.

Run and hide is the teens best chance, if they stand and fight they are doomed. There aren’t enough of them to take on all five, especially not if the five are working together with a goal to capture only one or two of them. If they are capable of thinking on their feet, grabbing some sort of makeshift weapon is a good idea. What that weapon is will depend on what’s available for them to grab. So, think through your setting.

A few might try to be brave, but it’s the well-trained part, beyond enormous and aggressive that’s going to get the teens in serious trouble. Well-trained will mean that the men are good at working together, it means that they will be able to dispatch or incapacitate most of the teens in less than a few minutes, if not in a few moves. Ironically, the ones who put up the most fight will be dealt with first and harshly to make an example to the others. Because they are pressed for time (they may not know how much time, but they’ll know the kids have to be taken quickly) this may lead to them being sloppy and more likely to remove the troublesome ones. After all, seven are nice, but you don’t need them all for a payday. It would be best if no one got hurt, but if the kids push, it’s likely that someone will.

How to Survive a Kidnapping: take a look at this article

A Look at Kidnapping through the Lens of Protective Intelligence

Man on Fire both the books and the movie with Denzel Washington are worth looking at for how kidnappers operate.

Taken: I don’t recommend this Liam Neeson movie for the combat (it’s not bad, just not right for his SAS background), but it’s a good look at how kidnappers operate especially in the sex trafficking trade.

I also recommend watching the Burn Notice episode, Hard Bargain. In the meantime, check out the IMDB quotes page for the episode though this one happens to be my favorite. Burn Notice has a few great episodes dealing with kidnappers. Here are a few good quotes:

Michael Westen: [voice-over] A kidnapping is a business deal. The bad guys have negotiating power since they’re selling the life of a loved one. But then again, they have a market of one, so they *have* to work with you.

Michael Westen: [voice-over] About forty percent of kidnapping victims are released safely. These statistics are affected by a number of factors, including the nationality of the kidnappers, the age of the victim, and whether a hostage negotiator is employed.

Nick Lam: I can’t do this, man! What’s the point? They want, like, five million bucks!

Michael Westen: [voice-over] The odds go down sharply if no one has any money to pay the ransom.

The downside for your characters is that these kidnappers have a market of seven, they can stand to lose a few.

The question is, what do you want out of this scene? I personally would play it as a chase scene, possibly one told from the perspectives of a few different teens as they try to run and hide from the men who are trying to take them. A few will probably escape, because there’s not enough time for a prolonged chase and the kidnappers won’t want to spend too much time trying to track them all down. They’ll cut their losses early. However, the ones who try to stay and fight will most assuredly be captured, some perhaps killed. You can however have a very tense sequence that tips the audience off to the characters having good survival instincts and show that they are capable of thinking on their feet.

The big money is on what their lives are worth. Not to you or the reader, but to their parents and guardians.

-Michi

You’ve talked a lot about how the height and weight differences between men and women don’t make much of a difference in actual combat, but what about the difference between and adult and a child? How might a kid take on an adult and still win?

Very cautiously and most likely using some sort of easily manageable weapon (knife or gun if available) to make up the difference in size, experience, bone density, and force generation.

Here’s the thing, as much as some societies have loved equating women with children (and, in some cases, animals) for a very long time, there are quite a few substantial differences between a child and an adult that hamper a child’s ability to fight (even when fighting other children).

Physical Maturity:

It’s not just that children are smaller than their adult counterparts, they aren’t physically mature. It’s not just that their legs are shorter, their bodies are smaller, and their hands are tiny. They’re still growing and any serious damage inflicted on them can significantly hamper that growth (both physically and emotionally).

For example: when I was twelve I broke my leg in a training accident. It was a spiral fracture to the tibia and required surgery to be fixed. The surgeon wanted to install a metal rod in the bone, which was standard procedure for adults at the time, however installing the rod would effectively end any further growth in that bone. While the rest of me would keep growing, that part of my leg would not. This would mean that when I finally achieved full size one of my legs would be several inches shorter than the other. This would have lead to a lifetime of significant difficulty. My parents insisted that wasn’t an option even though the second option required a longer recovery period and that’s why my legs are the same length today.

Softer bones lead to easier breaks. A child and even a young teen cannot generate the same level of muscle mass as an adult, even though their muscles have greater elasticity which means they can develop better flexibility. Serious physical injuries run a greater risk of being crippling or becoming so during the recovery process (because again, their bodies are growing and changing, you can’t rely on their bodies remaining static).

They are less capable of generating force both as children because they are very little (in a way that women are not), very light, and much less capable of making use of the body’s full rotation with hips and shoulders (though they can learn it).

They lack coordination. Children are inherently more physically awkward than adults. It takes them slightly longer to develop balance, coordination, and flexibility. While they do learn quickly, everything that you need to make a fighter happens more slowly. When you train them, what you’re doing is molding clay. Instead of thinking about a fighter who can fight right now, or within a few months of training, it’s important recognize that a child is a long term investment.

You’re building an exceptional fighter both in mind and body, but you won’t have one for ten years.

Emotional Maturity:

Children and even young teens (under eighteen with a lower limit of sixteen) lack the necessary emotional maturity to handle combat, especially against an adult. Even when a child can intellectually understand what it is they are doing, the emotional component to comprehend and deal with their experiences is still developing.

Violent action will shape their personality and too much, too fast can lead to long term psychological scarring.

A child cannot transition as quickly into the necessary mentality as an adult, though after years of training they will be capable of the snap shift. Once an adult attacks them, they will be at an extreme disadvantage both physically and emotionally. If they have more training than the attacking adult, this may help them some, but ultimately they will still run the risk of being physically and emotionally overpowered.

How to beat an adult:

Premeditation and planning. The child must intend to harm the adult in question, if they try to fight face to face, they will lose.

Strike in a moment of weakness. If the child’s abuser is a member of the family, the child will have other opportunities to attack their aggressor in a moment of weakness such as while they are sleeping or passed out.

A teen will have a better chance against an adult, but they are up against the adult’s experience and their authority. Both these things can be insurmountable if they try to face them in “honorable combat”. A child has to play to a child’s strengths, they can’t bean an adult on the adult’s terms.

Working together. Kids who have come out of paramilitary training regimens will exhibit a level of extreme discipline (as opposed to the adrenaline junkies the Dauntless breed in Divergent (they essentially make gangs) or the emotionally unstable/anger management plagued Careers from The Hunger Games), while they won’t have the level of emotional maturity to comprehend the effects, they will be more than capable of taking down an adult if they can get the drop on them first and if they are using superior force of arms.

Superior force of arms. Having a weapon like a knife, a gun, a baseball, bat, or a lead pipe will allow a child to take on an adult. So long as they can overcome the presence and authority an adult has over them and their mind.

Raising kids to combat:

It’s important to remember that, as I said above, training kids is an investment to the society’s (or corporations, or military’s) future and because they are, they get handled with a certain amount of care. Kids raised to combat such as the pages and squires who eventually become knights, or the kids who come out of many of the modern day paramilitary programs scattered around the country aren’t child soldiers.

They don’t behave like child soldiers and they don’t get treated like them. Child soldiers are a different psychological animal.

These kids have value. They are cared for. They are respected. They know and understand their place in society. They usually get trained with an insular mindset and are hardened against outsiders.

When you want to write kids who have been trained from birth for war or even just for the arena, you have to stop and consider what they are being trained for and why.

What makes a good soldier?

What makes a good warrior?

Why does this society need to train these kids young?

What is their value?

The more substantial the time investment, the more valuable the children are to the society or military they will be employed in. It’s important to understand that. Unlike child soldiers, kids that are raised for combat aren’t shock troopers. They are specialists and highly skilled operatives. This develops a very different kind of personality and society. And it’s hard to do well, especially if you start by looking at the wrong source material. (The Spartans only work if you look past the brutality and understand what they were trying to create and teach the kids.)

Experience matters:

This gets washed over in American society because of the focus on youth and youth being good (high school is the best years of your life bs). The truth is that experience is more valuable than youth, it trumps it. Unless the child starts training early (and even if they do), an adult will be one or two (or twenty) steps ahead of them. If they’ve been in more battles then they’ve seen more, they’ve grown more crafty, they’ve sharpened their cunning, and they’re no longer slaves to their hormones.

Fighting, for them, isn’t new anymore. This is the most important concept to really internalize when you’re writing characters who fight because the aged mentor figure is important and is, even when old and wizened, exceedingly dangerous.

Someone who has survived through enough combat to reach old age is someone who is very good at what they do.

Age and Treachery is a nasty combo, even against Youth and Skill.

-Michi

Q&A: Gun Disarms and Reasonable Force

How would my character disarm the girl who is aiming a handgun at him? She doesn’t intend to shoot (although he doesn’t know that), and he doesn’t want to hurt her, just get the gun away from her. It’s his way of proving to her who he is (because he has the ability to disarm her). Everything I’ve looked up online for it includes hurting the attacker as some kind of defense mechanism.

It’s not a defense mechanism, it’s necessity. This is a culmination of a couple issues that we haven’t really covered in detail.

The first is reasonable force; basically, this is the absolute minimum amount of harm you need to inflict in a given situation to ensure your safety and the safety of others, including the person trying to kill you. Make no mistake, if someone’s pointing a gun at you, they are trying to kill you. (I’ll come back to this in a minute.)

The more training your character has, then under the law, the less harm they’re allowed to legally inflict. This is because restraining your opponent without hurting them is a lot harder, and requires more skill, than simply killing them.

Reasonable force is a bit of a pain because it is very subjective in the moment. It scales upwards based on a lot of factors, including the nature of the threat. If someone is threatening to “beat the shit out of you,” responding by crippling or killing them is (usually) going to be considered excessive.

Guns take that and toss it all out the window. Pointing one at someone is always a threat of lethal force. It doesn’t matter what the person with the gun intends. It is the weapon not the person that escalates the threat.

The second major issue is that gun disarms are really hard, and really, really dangerous. Most martial artists that attempt to use them in actual situations get shot. It’s a ratio close to 9/10, that’s 9 get shot to every one that 1 succeeds. Often, even if the disarm is successful, they get shot anyway during the attempt. An attacker who is already jittery on adrenaline will take the fast movement of the disarm i.e. the person moving towards them as a threatening gesture. They may fire reflexively, even if they didn’t originally intend to. The response evokes “oh my god, they’re attacking me” and that instinctive response will be even stronger and more immediate in someone who is untrained. This may also force a switch over in the attacker themselves from “I don’t want to hurt you” to “I’m going to shoot you because now you’re threatening my life”. It may not seem logical when they’re already holding the gun, but within their mind it is. An attack/disarm will escalate the situation because it shows them that the person they’re pointing the gun at (whom they may trust) is willing to hurt them or even shoot them. The person who is attempting the disarm is taking their power away from them and that is threatening, especially to someone who doesn’t know what they are doing. If the gun is all they have to control the situation then they won’t let it go without a fight.

With most techniques, the consequences for not executing them perfectly are fairly limited, you might take a blow you didn’t want to, or strike with less force than you intended. But, for gun disarms, failing to execute the technique flawlessly can be fatal.

What this means is, when it comes to gun disarms, the priority has been to develop simple techniques that work, and screw everything else. Gun disarms are, as a general rule, easy to learn, but, they also come without any margin for error.

The result is, most gun disarms will wrench joints and break bones. Most disarms can escalate into kills, because they leave the martial artist with the gun in a ready to fire state. The martial artist themselves may accidentally shoot their attacker once they get the gun away from them because they are also jittery with adrenaline and they left their finger on the trigger. Disarms end with the gun pointed at the attacker. Once adrenaline gets factored in, it can be very difficult to not follow through with an execution shot. With the exception of outright shooting the gunman, this is all pretty solidly reasonable force. Many instructors suggest for students who are unused to guns to brace it on their hip, instead of holding it out in a ready to fire state, as this reduces the risk of them accidentally shooting the attacker or their attacker taking it back.

Finally, and this is a general threat assessment issue, but it does affect disarms. Untrained shooters are much more dangerous. Once the shooting starts, a trained shooter is going to be able to kill more efficiently, but an untrained shooter is more likely to shoot someone by accident.

If you have a character pointing a gun at someone they don’t want to hurt (outside of some edge, “I don’t want to hurt you; but, I will kill you,” cases), they’re not going to be trained in firearms safety.

What this means is, and I hate harp on this over and over, but, when you have a character pointing a gun at someone, they’re always threatening to kill the other person. Even if they gun isn’t loaded, even if they don’t want to hurt anyone, even if they just want attention. They’re still threatening to kill someone.

I’d actually argue that a trained shooter is safer to disarm, as well. Proper trigger discipline can work against getting a rapid shot off into the martial artist. Of course a “safer” version of an extremely lethal situation is still quite dangerous.

Now, non-harmful gun disarms do exist. But, they’re not a part of any martial art. Stage fighting includes a lot of techniques that can be practiced safely. The problem is, as a general rule, stage fighting is cooperative choreography between two performers. So the gun disarms you’ll see on TV that leave both combatants with all their fingers in the original sockets aren’t real combat techniques.

If you want to look at getting a gun away from someone safely, I’d recommend watching The Negotiator, it’s not about martial arts, but it is about talking people down.

-Starke

Fight Scene Strategies: The Individual versus Group

In this article, we’ll talk some about structuring and writing combat between an individual and a group. As the title suggests, this article will focus primarily on unarmed/hand to hand strategies for dealing with multiple opponents. We’re going to avoid weapons for the most part in this discussion because the strategies can change dramatically depending on what weapon it is that your character is using and this article is going to have a heavier focus on how different groups behave and the problems you have to watch out for in your story when working with them.

So, let’s start by tearing down a few myths.

The Group is the Most Dangerous Opponent Your Hero will Face

No, really.  A group of mooks together are going to be an all around tougher fight than the antagonist who waits at the end of the tunnel. Due to the rise of comics and Hollywood’s building up of the “One True Badass”, the difficulties an individual faces when fighting a large group are often overlooked. In real life, groups are much more dangerous to the lone combatant than single individuals and even the toughest fighter can be easily taken down by the untrained if he or she fails to control the situation. The reason it’s become commonplace on television for the roving badass to dispatch a group of random mooks with ease is because it is so difficult to do so in the land of reality.

This is important.

The truth is that even when you have years of training, something that seems as simple as a two on one bout can seriously screw someone over. The more people you add, the more difficult it gets. The maximum number a well-trained human being can take on at any one time is eight. The brain cannot handle tracking a number higher than that, but the truth is that even three or four is a difficult challenge.

Why is fighting groups so hard?

There are a higher number of limbs versus the singular defender

The part about there being more limbs is important. A person only has two arms and two legs (unless they are a mutant or an alien) with which to fight. Those two arms and two legs will have a difficult enough time fending off the attacks of one person, much less having to deal with four more coming in on vectors that your character can’t control. It doesn’t matter how many punches your character blocks, one will probably get through and that one can be the deal breaker. This is bad enough when the character’s opponents aren’t communicating. It gets much worse when they start, which they will because it’s a thing.

People work together

Yes, they do. Humans are social animals and they work well together in teams, very well in fact. You know the scenes you see in the movies where the stunt doubles will circle up and wait around the fighter (as seen on Buffy) for their turn to attack in a series of duels? They have a habit of coming in one by one. That doesn’t happen because it doesn’t play to the group’s strengths.  If your character lets them, a group will attack together. If they can, they’ll surround the character, dogpile, and knock them to the ground. Often in more sophisticated groups that are used to working together, one or two will distract the fighter from the front while others close in from behind and either hit them in the vulnerable places like the spine, the hamstrings, and the lower back or seize control of them via the hero’s neck or limbs.

All groups work together on some level, even the uncoordinated ones. The better trained and more used to working together the individual members of the group are such as gangs or professionals like soldiers, cops, and mercenaries, the harder the fight will be.

Yeah, even the untrained will naturally start flanking your hero. Sounds fun, doesn’t it?

The Hero expends energy faster

Fighting is high energy exertion, it’s like sprinting and thus, it doesn’t last long. So, the hero must take down all their opponents before they themselves can no longer fight. Thus, they walk a much tighter tightrope of how fast it will be before they’re done.  They have to track more variables, their opponents, their surroundings, potential weapons, escape routes, how much time they have to hold out or finish it up before they or their enemies receive reinforcements, etc. It’s tough, tiring work. They have to know and keep track of where everyone is, actively strategizing, and moving to outpace their internal body clock.

Professionally trained combatants will approach a group, any group with a certain level of caution. For the untrained or untried hero, fighting a group can be where they find themselves in over their heads. It’s common for us to focus overly on the dangers we understand and ignore the ones we’re unaware of. Martial training can breed a certain level of arrogance in the early parts of an individual’s career before the fighter learns that everyone has the potential to be dangerous to them. Yes, even the little kids and old ladies. Disregarding the dangers of a group of lesser fighters or random idiots on the street is in character for most heroes.

Punish them for their mistakes. It’s a good humbling experience.

Well, it is if they survive.

Strategies

So, how can a character deal with groups?

Run away

This sounds like the coward’s way out, but it’s not. There’s no shame in living to fight another day or retreating to find a different approach instead of wading in. Don’t think of running away as giving up, think of it instead as retreating to find a more advantageous position. When faced with superior force and superior numbers, it is important for characters to seek to fight on their terms if they have the option to do so and to try anyway, even when they are pressed for time.

Run Away With Purpose

I call this rabbiting. When dealing with two or more individuals running away is an acceptable option as a means of breaking up the group so that they become easier to manage. You see this happen more commonly in action movies with stars that already know how to fight. (Example: Jackie Chan’s Rumble in the Bronx) By chasing the character, the more athletically adept will pull ahead and the less will fall behind. Characters with a firm grasp of their surrounding area can lose members of the group in the terrain. The character can then turn the situation around to their advantage and fight the smaller groups or individuals on their own terms.

This is only an effective strategy for characters that have good stamina, understand their area, and excel at thinking on their feet. It can go wrong for characters up against groups who can communicate over long distances and who are trained to outmaneuver that tactic. This includes the police (Example: Southland), the military, former military professionals, mercenaries, characters who possess some sort of telepathy, and characters who draw from a Pack mindset (werewolves, animalistic characters, etc).

Keep the opponent in front of you and protect the back

If a character cannot run or doesn’t have the option, then they might have to stand and fight. This can be difficult, given the tendency of a group to circle around and dog team (one distracts from the front, while another shoots in from the back or the side to tag the fighter before shooting off again, as the fighter attempts to recover from the blow, another comes in, and then another, and then another until they’re done) their opponents. A character fighting a group needs to keep the group in front of them. It can be difficult to defend from behind and while there are techniques (such as elbows and kicks) that allow characters to defend against individuals coming in behind them but they are limited. Characters fighting groups will want to keep moving, forcing their opponents to stay in front of them to limit their avenues and vectors of attack. By constantly moving, the character forces their opponents into each other as they attempt to attack and attack their enemies one at a time.

You can only attack one opponent at a time, so don’t waste movements

A character may switch between enemies, but they can only attack one enemy at a time. All their enemies may attack them and they don’t have to take turns. At best, they can block two, if they are really, really Jackie Chan fight scene choreography good then maybe three. But it’s best to have them focus on one at a time as they attempt to lock up the others. A fighter only has time for six to eight movements per fight, so they have to be dispatching each of their opponents in two or three blows depending on the numbers. Even the gentlest character may be forced to become ruthless.

All fights end on the ground, the character should make sure they don’t go down first

Suggestions on Writing:

This sort of chase scene or group fight can be tense an exhilarating and is helpful for establishing the nature of the fighter, especially if the audience is aware that they are up against a greater force. It can be a better reveal for who they are and what they’re willing to do when they are forced to be on their A game. However, as the writer, you need to be on the ball. Each of the characters in the group need to be clearly identified to the reader so they can track what is happening. Writing combat against a group is actually very difficult, because it is very messy and confusing. The sequence must be carefully choreographed in order to keep the tension kept high.

Graph out the setting area where the scene takes place, much like mapping an environment, writing and creating becomes easier when we know the pieces and materials that are at our disposal. A fight scene needs it’s the environment to be an active part of the scene because it changes the nature of the fight. A character running into the woods to escape a group hunting them will have different tools available than someone starting a chase in an urban environment. A character fighting in a bar may have nowhere to run but more objects at their disposal to throw and use in their own defense (beer bottles, chairs, tables, glasses, etc).

If you’re writing your character is going up against a group, then their understanding of their environment may be key to their success. Fights with groups are tense and require more than just skill for survival, creativity is also important. So, get your set pieces in place and see what happens.

Clearly identify each member of the group. Give them names based on distinguishing traits that a character observes about them, such as Number One and Number Two, The Brown Haired Guy, Blue Eyes, Buck Teeth, etc.

It’s important not to humanize the group members too much unless you want the audience to feel sorry for them, they shouldn’t be clearly evil, but they need to remain menacing. Knowing a character’s name humanizes them, so it’s not just a question of description, it’s a question of how much. Writing violence requires walking a careful line with the audience between just enough and too much.  Managing the emotions that your story evokes is important; too much makes it difficult to sympathize with the hero.

Examples:

Garvey came at Kel from the right, punching at her head. She slid away from his punch, grabbed his arm, pushed her right foot forward, and twisted to the left. Garey went over her hip into Vinson, who’d attacked on her left. Joren, at the center, came in fast as his friends hit the wall. Kel blocked Joren’s punch to her middle, but his blow was a feint; his left fist caught her right eye squarely. Kel scissored a leg up and out, slamming her right foot into Joren’s knee. Joren hissed and grabbed her hair. Someone else—Vinson—tackled her. Kel let his force throw her into Joren. Down the three of them went in a tumble. Joren let go of her hair, fighting to get out from under her and Vinson. Kel elbowed him in the belly and turned to thrust her other hand into Vinson’s face, encouraging him to get off her by pressing his closed eyes with her fingers.

Page by Tamora Pierce

This sequence by Tamora Pierce is compact, but it shows the sort of attention to detail you need when writing an individual versus a group. It’s not the only way to do it and whatever we suggest here, there are always many more strategies for you to uncover and develop in your own work.

We hope this has been helpful!

-Michi

Advice/Resources: Winged Armor and General Armor

Advice/Resources: Winged Armor and General Armor

do you have any tips on playing a vampire?

thetrolliestcritic:

If you’re in a group, they should have guidelines to playing their vampire species that discuss strengths & weaknesses, abilities, etc. I’d stick to that. But if not, here’s my two cents on playing/creating a Vampire, as a person with intimate and extensive history with this species.

PICK YOUR VAMPIRE TYPE

There are different types of Vampires out there, and even more that you could add on to or change somehow to reinvent them. There are sparkly Vampires, Buffy The Vampire Slayer I-have-a-very-strange-angry-face-effect-when-I-turn-on-my-Vampyric-powers Vampires, categories of Vampires, IRL Vampires, more stuff on IRL Vampires, ‘The Four Types of Vampires’ Vampires, ‘Vampire The Masquerade’ Vampires — literally shit tons of different ones out there to choose from or take inspiration from. 

Dive in and explore your options to figure out what kind of Vampire you want to use or base your Vampire off of. Typing in ‘types of vampires’ into Google is a+ helpful. 

CREATE THE MYTHOLOGY

I do not exactly recommend using outdated, overused, old ideas from other mythology to base your Vampires off of. Instead, I’d suggest you invent them all your own using what you know of Vampires already and building off of that.

Things to consider when creating Vampire mythology

  • Do they use clans? If so, how do clans function? How to Vampires outside of clans work? Are Vampires capable of being happy or fulfilled outside of these clans? Are clans a traditional thing that’s outdated in your society, or are they still present? How do other Vampires join these clans, if they can at all? 
  • Is there more than one kind of Vampire? Is there a hierarchy among different types of Vampires, such as ‘this one is deemed lesser than the others’? If so, what is this hierarchy based off of?
  • What do they eat? Human blood only, or animal blood too? How does blood effect Vampires in general, and how could different bloods effect them individually? Can they drink and eat human food, or will it makes them fall ill? Can they eat other supernatural creatures?
  • Do your Vampires follow any kind of religious views that are strictly of the Vampyric realm itself, or are they allowed to believe whatever? Do they believe in anything at all? Are their beliefs dependent on what clan they belong to?
  • How does turning work? How long does it take? Can Vampires turn humans and other species all they want? Are their progeny(s) seen as sacred children of theirs or just another Vampire? 
  • Can they mate to produce more children? Will their children be Vampires too? What about hybrids?
  • Do they hide from the world, or are out in plain sight? Or, do they reign over a selected piece of land?
  • Are people afraid of them? Are they part of the society’s folk lore?
  • How do they act? Does being a Vampire effect their personality? Does being in a clan effect their personality? Is there anything considered ‘bad Vampire behavior’?
  • What is their history throughout the centuries? Where did they come from / begin? How did they migrate? Do they shape-shift at all?
  • What are their fangs like? Rounded? Straight? Do they extend? Where are they located? 

PICK YOUR VAMPIRE ABILITIES, & MORE

Some Vampires smell as well as dogs, or hear as well as bats. Some Vampires are capable of sensing emotions that help them realize what a person is feeling even if they try to lie about it. Others can see visions while they sleep. Again, I don’t recommend using the same old boring folklore throughout history to rip your Vampires’ abilities off of. Get creative. 

I do, however, suggest you keep the whole ‘can’t be in the sun’ thing, since that’s a distinguishing Vampire-mainly type weakness. Their strengths and weaknesses are ultimately yours to play with, so have a bit of fun and think outside the box. 

Things to consider

  • Does Vampyric age effect how strong or weak a Vampire’s abilities are? 
  • What is your Vampire’s individual abilities? Meaning, out of all their abilities, what is their most honed or least good with?
  • How do Vampires die? 

I normally just play/create my Vampires based off everything above or take these things into consideration when developing my Vampires, and they seem to spring to life rather well. Hope this helps you out a bit, anon!

This is really great. I’d also add, don’t forget about vampire variations beyond the Western. These myths are world wide and you can take a lot of inspiration from the different varieties. Africa and Asia both have very interesting myths dealing with these undead.

Wikipedia: Vampire Folklore by Region is a good jumping off point to see the wide variation (and how old) vampire folklore really is and how far back beyond Dracula it goes. Vampires have been an important part of cultural myths all over the world and there are a bevy of interesting stories to draw inspiration from.

Jiangshi: The Jiangshi are a variant of vampire that feeds directly on a person’s energy or life force.

Kindred of the East was White Wolf’s foray into Asian vampire counterparts that that they called the Queijin (specifically Chinese and Japanese, and more specifically “chi eaters”). It’s a wothwhile starting point for research, but take it with copious amounts of salt. White Wolf can be spotty when dealing with other cultures, though their research is usually good. Either way, it’s a nice starting point and may give a few ideas especially if you’re looking to go in a different direction. The powerlist and descriptions in the sourcebook is very helpful.

Wikipedia: Asanbosam from West Africa.

Wikipedia: The Adze

The Kindred of the Ebony Kingdom: this was a secondary sourcebook dealing with the “Laibon” which were the vampire bloodlines out of Africa and based in the continent’s myriad of mythological traditions in the White Wolf’s World of Darkness setting. Again, some interesting stuff that already gears itself towards character building, storytelling, and society crafting.

White Wolf ran historical versions of Vampire in Vampire: The Dark Ages and Victorian Vampire.

The GURPS Vampire Companion, Blood Types, Creatures of the Night, and Undead are excellent investments for the collection of research material that is easy to flip through and are all a treasure trove of ideas. They’re also pretty cheap to order used from Amazon.

However, always be aware of the perils of Exotification and Orientalism in  the works listed, in any you uncover, and in your own work. Always do research on the societies the myths are based in so you can grasp some of the themes these societies valued and feared.

-Michi

Hello! I’ve got a question: for a character, she’s got some serious claws to use in attack. And a big, heavy tail. But when I try to look up things on how to have her fight, I’m at a loss! Everyone just talks about punching. How on earth does someone with claws attack close-ranged without straight-out punching?

Well, raking is a good choice for a character with long claws. Much like many different wild animals, they’ll come at their opponent open handed and drag their claws down across the face, use them to slash at the exposed throat.

Here’s something to think about when working with a character who uses claws. Punching isn’t  really going to be feasible for characters with non-retractable claws. If they are long and sharp, then when the fingers curl into a fist, the nails may puncture the flesh inside their palms. Depending on how long and sharp the claws are, making a fist may not even be possible because they may not even be able to safely make a fist without harming themselves.

Take a look at styles that focus on open hand attacks instead of fists, joint locking disciplines like aikido, jiujutsu, and the variations of chin na that apply to different kung fu styles (shaolin/tai chi chuan) as a different way the character may fight.

Fight Write: A Basic Upper Body Primer

Michael Janich’s “Junkyard Aikido”

I’d also suggest taking a look at nature documentaries, particularly for lizards and big cats. When looking into lizards, especially large lizards, focus on tail-whipping. Many lizards will use their tail as a weapon when they feel threatened. I’d check that out.

References and Reading:

Highlander (The Series): While I can’t really recommend the sword combat (at least in the early seasons), Adrian Paul has the distinction of being skilled in aikido and his martial arts during the series is very good.

White Wolf’s Changing Breeds, Nagah, and Mokole: These changing breed supplements to Werewolf: The Apocalypse are interesting because they focus on weresnakes and werecrocodiles. They might give you some ideas. They aren’t common, so they may be difficult to find.

Nature Documentaries and books. Pick an animal, or even a few different animals to build the character’s combat style around. Get to know the animal, check out books about them from your local library, study how they hunt and how they behave. It might give you some ideas.

-Michi

I’m writing about a community (actually multiple communities) that have separated themselves from society because they have animalistic traits (sharpened senses, retractible claws–otherwise human). The communities are like military bases, and they train their members to fight from a young age. About what age would a person become an accomplished fighter, and are there any basic moves/styles that you could illustrate for me that someone in this position might practice regularly? Thanks much!

Well, as for the styles that they’d practice regularly, that will heavily depend on what their members knew or were trained in before they wandered off from society at large. So, what styles they’d have and what they’d know, that will be up to you to figure out. But, I can point you in the general direction.

If members of the society had a connection to the military (I’m assuming U.S. Military, if you want another country of origin then you have to look up their standard style) which is going to be some variant of C.Q.B (close quarters battle), this style can range from the Marine variety of M.A.P. to the styles practiced by the C.I.A., special forces, and other government agents. It’s cousin is C.Q.C. (Close Quarters Combat) which is the non-lethal/subdual based hand to hand style practiced by the Police and the FBI. Both styles are designed to be very easy to learn and to pick up in a matter of months, if not weeks. While the style is not designed to produce warriors, it does produce very effective combatants.

The civilian variants of Krav Maga and Muay Thai are both brutal and acceptable alternatives if the characters lack military roots.

You’ll have to modify the style and their variation of combat based on their powers, which will mean coupling it with your animal of choice. I suggest looking taking a look at various pack animals such as wolves and lions to get an idea of how these characters might naturally work together as a unit, this will lend the alien/predatory sense to them that you’re going to need. Otherwise, they’ll just come across as human and there will be some question to the point of the powers relating to animals at all. Any general nature documentary from Animal Planet, National Geographic, or the Discovery Channel (or corresponding channels in your country) will work as a jump off point for your research.

If you’re wondering why I suggest pack animals, the reason is this: they live in a community that is isolated from the outside world and they are highly militarized. Militarized communities breed a certain perspective on how they view the outside world and how they raise the members of their society. The kids will be taught to work together from a young age, their combat and survival training will likely be Pack oriented, with a firm untrustworthy gaze (if not open hostility) directed at the outside world. Communities that just want to be left alone don’t militarize, even if they do maintain a militia force. The society you’re suggesting is one with a very complete martial focus and that doesn’t inspire warm fluffy bunny feelings for strangers. For these guys anything that is not them is Other and because the indoctrination starts when they are infants it will be almost impossible to break and I mean that, a quick jaunt into the outside world or even an extended stay isn’t likely to shake their loyalty to their community and is likely to only really inspire a general disgust.

 Every military force needs an enemy, even if that enemy is just out of reach. Training soldiers for no reason other than to train soldiers, in a culture that is full of soldiers, who have been raised to be soldiers from birth need to fight. They have to, if they don’t have that outlet, they will turn on the community itself and do battle within it. They are going to need to focus that aggression somewhere and on someone, because they have qualities that differentiate them from humans and some elements of their society may even have embraced the concept that they are no longer human, it makes human society at large an easy target to transform into the necessary evil Other. Eventually, they will become an expansionist entity.

Because the society will have limited members and has a military focus, they will trend towards gender equal out of necessity.

They will also need to be focused on the Good of the Whole as opposed to Individual Gain to keep them in the society and from the society having to promise them (like land) to get them to stay. Even when faced with a hostile outside world, there will be those who want to leave unless measures are taken to coerce them into staying. This can be done by starting young and focusing them on the collective’s needs instead of their own.

On Training:

Training for these characters will involve a focus on unit cohesion, team building, and creating a sense of brotherhood within the members of the community. It should also engender (if they are actually skilled combatants that don’t rely on berserking) a sense of discipline. This is why I suggested the military and military training as the basis for your study. Because the society is small, retaining the loyalty of their members will be paramount to their survival. Their training from early childhood on will revolve around building that sense of dedication. The children will probably be taken from their parents early, perhaps as young as four, put into the care of an older mentor figure, and mixed into a unit of their fellows. The collective itself will become their parent figure instead of any one individual caretaker.

The training will begin at five and will remain light. Though they’ll learn techniques, attention will be placed primarily on developing the necessary skill sets that they’ll need to serve the community later in life. This will mostly take place in the form of “games” like Hide and Seek (hunt and stalk your prey), Tag (one player acts as a rabbit while the others hunt them down) and so on. When they get a little older (say nine or ten) they may even be allowed out on “field trips” to practice their skills as a test (though in a controlled environment under the close eye of the adults).

If their training goes as planned, then they’ll be accomplished fighters (though not practical, experienced combatants) by the time they are fifteen. They’ll be ready to release into the regular force by the time they are eighteen. (This will have more to do with their emotional and psychological maturity as opposed to their skill level.)

The kids won’t openly spar with each other (in an uncontrolled, non-padded environment) until they are at the end of their training.

Remember, the goal of the training is going to be to develop unity as opposed to individualism. Rivalries will be tolerated until they affect the training and the unit, then they will be mercilessly quashed by the instructor in charge. The kids will always be under fairly close scrutiny, even when they don’t realize that they are, and rivalries will be something that their instructors and handlers will be specifically on the lookout for either to use or suppress. The two rivals, regardless of their skill level, may be allowed to continue their rivalry by their instructors to show the other students the faults of individualism and the virtues of cohesion.

By the time their training is complete, they will be firmly entrenched in the tenants of their society and the concepts of Not So Different will matter very little to them. It will also be fairly difficult to get one alone and away from their fellows without extreme duress. If any more than one is captured (even if they are or were previously rivals) forget about them turning against each other or their culture. Loyalty to their society will win out over any personal desires.

Good Examples:

The Psi Corps from Babylon 5

The Jem’Hadar from DS9

The Space Marines (and other subsequent groups) from Warhammer 40k

Survivalist Groups/Cults (With a focus on the sociological and psychological aspects if you can stomach researching them.)

The Marines (with subsequent focus on training and instilling the concept of the enemy Other into the soldiers)

Bad Examples:

The Spartans (Their training focused on individualism and is outdated in concept when set against any generation of a trained, standing military force. When the Spartans existed there wasn’t really any such thing as trained military combatants. Times have changed, in today’s world, the results of that training would be subpar.)

Stay away from Special Forces, Special Forces are elite but also limited. They do not an Army or Militarized Society make. Go with the lower tiers of military first before looking at these guys and their training methods. Remember, Special Forces training builds off what the soldier learned in basic and the field, while their training can be extreme, it can’t be done with fresh clay. It’s the finishing glaze to a piece of pottery that’s already been through the kiln. Don’t mistake one for the other. (If you must have them, then for psychology’s sake, these will be characters taken in for extra training in their mid-twenties. If you’re writing a YA novel, they are outside your reach, though they will work for antagonists.)

Stay away from any material that proposes starting training with an uncontrolled bout. Anyone trying to turn out a genuine military force isn’t going to force two people into an arena and say fight unless they are a sadist and don’t care about the development of the fighters. The students are only going to hurt themselves and they won’t actually learn anything from the experience (other than bad habits that will be difficult to break later). Many students train for years before they are allowed to fight with no pads and by then they know they’re doing (usually they’ll have progressed to the point of being ready to be teachers themselves).

Psychological Aspects:

I stuck this in at the end because while it’s important, it’s also sensitive. We do have an article on child soldiers, but this is different. This is covering training in violence and experiencing violence at a young age. There’s a difference in kids and adults who began training young versus  those who begin training when they’re older. The difference isn’t just that they’re better, it produces some interesting psychological and emotional differences that will impact the characters you’re working with.

The Individual is the Violence

For a kid who has been raised in combat, the combat (beyond the violence) becomes an intrinsic part of who they are. This means, ultimately, that fighting will be their natural state and where they feel the most comfortable. Their combat style and training won’t be an aspect tacked on to a ready made individual (like you get with adults), it will be the individual.

It will come to the point that while the individual is able to contemplate and understand the cause and effects of their violent actions outside of the fighting, it’s a disconnect that won’t occur to them when they are in the moment. It works like this: though the character may choose their techniques based on who they are fighting, they may perform those techniques with the same speed and efficiency that they were taught regardless of who they are fighting because the style itself has become a molded extension of themselves.

It’s not a question of right or wrong. It is part of them and will remain part of them long into adulthood. If you’re going to write kids who fight, you’re going to have to start viewing violence (even if you don’t believe or don’t like it) as a normative state.

Lack of Empathy is Key

They don’t empathize with others in the same way, they’ll connect with their group or pack just fine. Strangers, however, are a different story. They will be innately suspicious and wary of strangers. They may understand (but not really) why other people are put off by violence or the injuries they inflict. (Why are you crying? It’s just a gut wound. Get back up.)

And the reason for the lack of empathy?

Violence is Normal

It’s always been this way. Are you telling them that their whole life is wrong? How would you react if someone told you that everything you believed in and everyone you trusted and loved was wrong and evil? (Starke Note: How would you react if someone told you: No, puppies are for eating.)

There’s probably some other stuff in there, but that’s the general gist. To everything, there is a trade off. The younger a kid is and the more skilled they are, the more their personality must be molded around that core skill. To the uninitiated outside observer this blase approach to violence may come off as a wee bit psychopathic, but it’s important to remember that these kids aren’t psychopaths. They come from a society that has a very different standard of normal. Much like the average middle class San Franciscan’s instinctive gut reaction to a picture of a North Dakotan seven year old girl in a princess dress wielding an AK47.

Different strokes.

-Michi

(One important trait that I forgot to add: The Confidence Is Not False. They are that damn good and they know it. Whatever crippling insecurities the characters may have in terms of social interaction or in other aspects of their life, when they’re good at something, they know it and they will look down on others for not knowing and being bad at what is normal to them. See: Altair from the first Assassin’s Creed and his general lack of human empathy. The assassins in the first game and their gleeful poking of Altair while at the same time helping him is a good example of the ways you can play the “family” loyalty. Desmond’s personality, sadly, is not spot on.)