Anemic Horses

[darkadelphia]

My players ambushed a column of mounted soldiers escorting an evil noblewomen through the woods in our last session. The encounter turned out being very easy due to the PCs riding out ahead and using their skills to find the perfect ambush point and rigging the bridge to give way beneath the noblewoman's wagon. It's an embarrassing way to go.

Regardless, after most of the encounter had been defeated, the noblewoman had managed to work her way up out of the ravine and wanted to have the leader of her guards carry her away on horseback. I was shocked to discover that riding horses have only a capacity of 237 lbs and warhorses only 262 lbs before they are slowed. That's pretty lousy for those 220-320 lb Dragonborn and means that most medium sized fighters can't even pick up their halfling buddy and race off to save the day.

I know that 4e's design philosophy tries to prevent getting something for nothing/little (backgrounds notwithstanding), and, as such, horses already give PCs a big speed boost and perhaps shouldn't dramatically increase their carrying capacity, but the fact that many characters are slower when mounted seems pointless and perhaps unintended.

 

[darkadelphia]

This seems kind of extreme, but it seems to me that any character should be able to carry their max load and jump on a horse anytime during heroic tier and not have to worry about it. That means a riding horse would have to be able to carry 550 lbs unencumbered (max weight dragonborn plus 220 lbs of gear for max strength at level 10).

 

[Keenath]

In real life, a good rule of thumb is that a horse can safely carry between one-fifth and one-sixth of its weight for competitive or hard riding, and up to about 30% for light duty or travel. Obviously this varies pretty widely depending on the specific breed and the horse's condition, but it's a good starting point.

Given that, a normal riding horse that weighs between 1000 and 1200 pounds can only carry maybe 200 to 250 pounds in combat situations. A warhorse could probably carry more than that, but I still wouldn't expect to see it carrying more than 300 pounds outside of light travel.

 

[Old Gumphrey]

I noticed this right away, and it's very dumb. Easily fixed, though: give quadrupeds back their x4 carrying capacity. Then, a warhorse isn't slowed until 720 lbs. Sounds about right to me.

 

[Syrsuro]

It's not an anemic horse, it's a massive (dragonborn) character.


1) A light load for a heavy warhorse in 3.5 was 300# (and only 150# for a light riding horse). And a light load for a lightwarhorse was 230#. Thus, a 3.5 warhorse might well also be slowed trying to carry your Dragonborn. The 4E warhorse (262#) is right in between the light and heavy warhorse from 3.5. The 4E riding horse can actually carry MORE than the 3.5 light riding horse. Your Dragonborn wouldn't have been able to ride a 3.5 warhorse either. (And I don't know where that 720# number came from).

2) The average human fighter weighs less than 200 pounds. That allows him to ride a horse in full gear with no problem. If you are already large, grabbing your halfling buddy ought to slow the horse. (That said, I would probably allow for a range of horses, some of which are slower but can carry more. But then again, I don't let the fact that there is only one 'warhorse' limit me and I find such a ruling better than giving the horses ludicrous carry weights.

3) Dragonborn don't ride horses. Dragonborn ride Rage Drakes.
I can't find a carry weight for a Rage Drake, but I'd have no problem raising their weight capacity by 100# over a horse to allow them to carry a dragonborn.

Carl

 

[Old Gumphrey]

It's not an anemic horse, it's a massive (dragonborn) character.


1) A light load for a heavy warhorse in 3.5 was 300# (and only 150# for a light riding horse). And a light load for a lightwarhorse was 230#. Thus, a 3.5 warhorse might well also be slowed trying to carry your Dragonborn. The 4E warhorse (262#) is right in between the light and heavy warhorse from 3.5. The 4E riding horse can actually carry MORE than the 3.5 light riding horse. Your Dragonborn wouldn't have been able to ride a 3.5 warhorse either. (And I don't know where that 720# number came from).

2) The average human fighter weighs less than 200 pounds. That allows him to ride a horse in full gear with no problem. If you are already large, grabbing your halfling buddy ought to slow the horse. (That said, I would probably allow for a range of horses, some of which are slower but can carry more. But then again, I don't let the fact that there is only one 'warhorse' limit me and I find such a ruling better than giving the horses ludicrous carry weights.

3) Dragonborn don't ride horses. Dragonborn ride Rage Drakes.
I can't find a carry weight for a Rage Drake, but I'd have no problem raising their weight capacity by 100# over a horse to allow them to carry a dragonborn.

Carl

You do realize "slowed" means your speed gets cut down to 2 squares? IE you're carrying something so heavy that you're moving less than half your normal speed?

1) "That number" came from a 4e warhorse's load figure (18 x 10) which was multiplied by 4 to produce 720. I suggested this because it was done in 3rd edition, and in 3rd edition horses didn't get slowed to less than half speed because a big dude jumped on top.

2) Says who? I'm a weightlifter. I weigh 185 lbs. I've calculated my 3rd edition Str score at 14, but 4e is much harder to gauge with "real life" so I honestly don't know; we'll just say it's 14 for argument's sake. So it stands to reason that a guy with 16 strength (your average human fighter) is going to weigh at least 200 lbs, if not more.

Also, dragonborn are not large.

3) This point invalidated the rest of your post entirely. If you're going to just slap on an extra hundred pounds of carrying capacity "just because" then why are you even arguing about it? That's silly.

 

[Syrsuro]

You do realize "slowed" means your speed gets cut down to 2 squares? IE you're carrying something so heavy that you're moving less than half your normal speed?

Yes.

1) "That number" came from a 4e warhorse's load figure (18 x 10) which was multiplied by 4 to produce 720. I suggested this because it was done in 3rd edition, and in 3rd edition horses didn't get slowed to less than half speed because a big dude jumped on top.

Actually, in 3.5 the proper multiplier for a Large creature is 3x, not 4x.

And the strength of a warhorse in 4E is 21, not 18 (and a riding horse is 19).

And you can't compare the normal load of 4E to the light load of 3.5. 4E has simplified loads down to normal, heavy and drag and gotten rid of the medium and stagger weights. Based on the numbers, the normal load is heavier than the light load and lighter than the medium load.

Thus, the 4E normal load of a horse is 210 pounds while the 3.5 light load is 153 pounds and the medium load is 306 pounds. So to apply the 3.5 formula to the 4E numbers, you need to take roughly 3/4 of the normal load and multiply that by 3 - or, essentially, double (or, to be more precise, take 2.25x) the normal load to get a 3.5 quadrupeds normal load (and double that again for their heavy load).

This gives you around 450 pounds for the 3.5 'heavy load' of a 4E heavy warhorse.

And, of course, it is a fallacy to use the 3.5 multiplier with the 4E Str because they most likely increased the strengths of the quadropeds to get them to the final carry weight they wanted using the 4E formula (aside: quadruped carry weights are increased 25% in 4E). If you use the 3.5 str (which is 18) and do the same process you get a carry weight of 405#.

Thus I can see a lot of numbers being possible, but none of them are 720.

But of course, that is all based on the questionable assumption that horses can carry three times as much as a human of the same strength and it requires ignoring the fact that they most likely choose the strength value of a horse to end up at exactly the carry value they wanted in the first place (in both systems).

But the bottom line really is: Is the weight limit they put in place logical considering real world limits? (Yes) Does it make sense as a game restriction (Yes). Does it fit with the genre and its expectations (Yes). Does it impose restrictions on the character that make the game more fun(Yes). Was it silly for a 3.5 horse to be only slightly slowed carrying 900# (Absolutely)

2) Says who? I'm a weightlifter. I weigh 185 lbs. I've calculated my 3rd edition Str score at 14, but 4e is much harder to gauge with "real life" so I honestly don't know; we'll just say it's 14 for argument's sake. So it stands to reason that a guy with 16 strength (your average human fighter) is going to weigh at least 200 lbs, if not more.

Also, dragonborn are not large.

Your weight logic isn't. But I don't argue that a human can easily be over 200#. Heck, I'm over 200#.

And the lightest adult dragonborn weighs in at 220 (as per the DMG) and their weights go up to 320. They may not be 'large' as a specific game term. But they average 100# heavier than a human.


Just out of curiosity, how fast do you move carrying 140 pounds?

3) This point invalidated the rest of your post entirely. If you're going to just slap on an extra hundred pounds of carrying capacity "just because" then why are you even arguing about it? That's silly.

I'm not 'slapping on an extra hundred pounds of carrying capacity. I'm making a ruling on a fact that is not in the books, based on given information in order to create a ruling that is consistant with the rules as they exist (including the fact that Rage Drakes appear in the Dragonborn encounter and are mounts according to the MM and the fact that horses are not appropriate mounts for dragonborn - as already noted in this thread).

If I need a justification it would be that their different body shape (more squat, lower to the ground and - very importantly - massive legs compared to the legs of a horse) enable them to carry far more weight. (Horses have very thin legs for their size which is why they are so susceptible to leg injuries such as befell Eight Belles.)

"Slapping on extra carrying capacity" is what you proposed.

I hope you can see the difference.

Carl

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I want to say something...first let me explain I am a BIG guy...over 400lbs, and my dad is bigger then me. He raises horses down in GA. He can't ride the horses he raises though...he is too big. When I was younger (and smaller) I learned to ride myself, and to this day I know how, but it would take a big old clydesdale to hold me. So those numbers might be pretty close to right...although I do feel they are atleast a little low.

 

[Syrsuro]

Relevant Web Site: http://www.frontrangefrenzy.com/ridinghorses/how-much-can-a-horse-carry.html

Or this: http://www.horsesring.com/forums/ge...-much-weight-can-your-horse-safely-carry.html

From the latter source:

"If you take a 220-pound person, add in a Western saddle, plus everything else you carry, then head out for a whole day on the trails, you could be stressing that horse quite a lot."

....
seven Arabian geldings and mares were trained to walk and trot along a level fence line in response to voice commands. They were timed as they walked and trotted the distance unburdened as well as with a saddle weighted with lead shot. The saddle and lead together weighed 85 kilograms (about 187 pounds), which amounted to about 19 percent of the horses' body weights. Not surprisingly, the additional weight caused horses to move more slowly, reducing speed from about 7.4 mph to about 7 mph.

...
In short, explains Wickler, carrying a load causes a horse to shorten his stride, leave his feet on the ground longer and increase the distance his body travels (the "step length") with each stride. All of these gait adjustments work together to reduce the forces placed on the legs with each step. "Forces are damaging," says Wickler, "so keeping the foot on the ground reduces peak forces and reduces that potential for injury."

...
In the absence of scientific research, the next source of information on maximum weight loads for horses comes from historical sources--the result of centuries of horsemanship experience, not all of which developed with the well-being of the horse as the highest priority. "U.S. Army specifications for pack mules state that 'American mules can carry up to 20 percent of their body weight (150 to 300 pounds) for 15 to 20 miles per day in mountains,'" Wickler says. "There are some anecdotal reports of 350 to 400 pounds and even an 1867 reference to 600 to 800 pounds for mules."

India's Prevention of Cruelty to Draught and Pack Animals Rules, 1965, says the maximum for mules is 200 kilograms (about 440 pounds) and for ponies the maximum is 70 kilograms (154 pounds).

"Packers generally try to keep packs to 150 to 200 pounds in their animals, who must carry the dunnage on a daily basis for the entire season," says Wickler, "so 20 percent of the animal's body weight seems to be reasonable. However, these suggestions are for walking. If you go faster, that means more forces on the limbs and more metabolism is needed." Today, many dude ranches and public stables post weight limits for riders, usually around 200 pounds or less; the National Park Service, for example, does not allow riders who weigh more than 200 pounds to participate in its mule trips into the Grand Canyon.

Moving on, and applying the numbers from the above:


Some have said that the typical heavy war horse was a Percheron: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percheron , although many more sites say that most destriers were not that large. So lets say that a heavy war horse is a Percheron while smaller warhorses are a slightly smaller (although still very large) breed. (And since 4E doesn't have a 'heavy' warhorse who is to say that we shouldn't be doing all these comparisons to the 3.5 light warhorse.)


The average Percheron weighs around 1,900#s. So lets say 2000. .That would give them a carry weight (by the above web sites) of around 400# (assuming the formula is linear).

But a horse more the size of a Friesian horse is probably more correct. An average Friesian horse weighs considerably less (1300 - 1600#) and would have a carry weight (by the above formula) of less than 300#.

Another interesting relevant quote: http://www.bfi.org/?q=node/410 by Buckminster Fuller (of all people).

Millennia after the first club-swinging Oriental horseman claimed land ownership, the man on the horse westbound from the Orient to Europe became helmeted and armored in metal. Due to the horses' weight-carrying limit and the penalty of weight on the horses' speed, the most effective of the horse and armored riders was, like the present-day jockey, the wiry, strong, little man. Inspection of the European museums' armor discloses the diminutive size of the most successful knights.

Note that the weight of a single rider is causing a noticeable loss of mobility. Nevermind what would happen if you put three-four people (720!?) on the back.

Or this from Elements of Military Art and Science (H. Wagner Halleck, 1862, p. 149)

The modern cavalry is much lighter, and, by dispensing with armor, shields, etc., it can move with much greater rapidity. A modern cavalry horse carries a weight of from two hundred and fifty to three hundred pounds. [A table follows which breaks this down into rider weight, arms and equipment weight, horse equipment and two days rations.]

The point here being that we again see the idea that weight beyond 250-300#s will significantly decrease its speed. Not too far off from the 262# number for the 4E horse.



But to suggest that a horse can routinely carry 720# is, imho, incomprehensible. Even in a fantasy game.

(And the irony of this is that I am a gamist and generally ignore appeals to 'reality'. But in this case, I think it is patently obvious that the 'right answer' is that a horse can carry the weight of its typical intended rider, plus his gear. And that Dragonborn are not the intended riders of horses - they are too big).

Bottom Line (as I see it): The weights in the book are logical and consistant and they work just fine. And they represent the average warhorse. If the player needs a larger horse (lets say a Percheron rather than a Friesian horse) he can buy it, it would just cost a bit extra.

But the odds are that a typically sized dragonborn would still be too large for a horse. Dragonborn don't ride horses (imho, of course), just as humans don't usually ride ponies.

Besides: A dragonborn on a drake is just cooler anyway.

Carl

 

[Klaus]

My players ambushed a column of mounted soldiers escorting an evil noblewomen through the woods in our last session. The encounter turned out being very easy due to the PCs riding out ahead and using their skills to find the perfect ambush point and rigging the bridge to give way beneath the noblewoman's wagon. It's an embarrassing way to go.

Regardless, after most of the encounter had been defeated, the noblewoman had managed to work her way up out of the ravine and wanted to have the leader of her guards carry her away on horseback. I was shocked to discover that riding horses have only a capacity of 237 lbs and warhorses only 262 lbs before they are slowed. That's pretty lousy for those 220-320 lb Dragonborn and means that most medium sized fighters can't even pick up their halfling buddy and race off to save the day.

I know that 4e's design philosophy tries to prevent getting something for nothing/little (backgrounds notwithstanding), and, as such, horses already give PCs a big speed boost and perhaps shouldn't dramatically increase their carrying capacity, but the fact that many characters are slower when mounted seems pointless and perhaps unintended.

Dragonborn are heavy characters, specially when coupled with armor and weapons. For them, it's warhorses, rage drakes or walking.