D&D General Travel In Medieval Europe

[Faolyn]

The response to my point about sea trade was that overland was significantly safer.

Since when does "significantly safer" mean "super safe"?

And it’s funny you would mention trade from Boston to New York when the vast majority of trade between those points would be by ship. Until you had trains, no one in their right mind would walk between those points. You certainly wouldn’t have significant movement of trade goods going overland between Bodtonand New York until after railroads.

I assume you meant to address this to @doctorbadwolf, but from what I can tell, horses were used a lot. Or if not horses, cattle.

I'm no expert on the history of ship building, but I'm going to guess that there's a bit of a difference between the ships of the 15-18th century and the ships of the vague medieval period that D&D is set in. Also, I'm pretty sure that Boston and New York are (a) on the ocean, (b) significantly closer to each other than Baldur's Gate and Waterdeep are, and (c) the Atlantic isn't ruled over by a chaotic evil god who loves sinking ships. Or, for that matter, filled with other monsters.

So you never actually answered my question. Ignore the monsters and Umberlee. How smooth sailing is the Sea of Swords? I'm sure you can find some source that describes it as being amenable to frequent ship travel.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Also…there have always been overland roadways that are used for trade, even when all the major settlements were coastal or riverside. Why the heck would you charter a ship from New York to Boston if you don’t already have a boat? You just send it down the road. It’s cheaper, and not actually that much slower, and can make stops along the way.

That’s the thing. Trade roads aren’t just A to B, they’re many-staged journeys with trade happening at every town and crossroad along the way. They serve different ends than trade via ship, and both are vital.

To expand on this with FR specifics, a boat isn’t stopping in Redlarch, or various other towns inland along the Sword Coast region. There are material advantages to passing through the Desserin Valley.

Since when does "significantly safer" mean "super safe"?


I assume you meant to address this to @doctorbadwolf, but from what I can tell, horses were used a lot. Or if not horses, cattle.

I'm no expert on the history of ship building, but I'm going to guess that there's a bit of a difference between the ships of the 15-18th century and the ships of the vague medieval period that D&D is set in. Also, I'm pretty sure that Boston and New York are (a) on the ocean, (b) significantly closer to each other than Baldur's Gate and Waterdeep are, and (c) the Atlantic isn't ruled over by a chaotic evil god who loves sinking ships. Or, for that matter, filled with other monsters.

So you never actually answered my question. Ignore the monsters and Umberlee. How smooth sailing is the Sea of Swords? I'm sure you can find some source that describes it as being amenable to frequent ship travel.

Yeah people absolutely have always taken goods by land between the two.

Just an odd claim to say that it wasn’t a thing “before trains”.

 

[Hussar]

Since when does "significantly safer" mean "super safe"?


I assume you meant to address this to @doctorbadwolf, but from what I can tell, horses were used a lot. Or if not horses, cattle.

I'm no expert on the history of ship building, but I'm going to guess that there's a bit of a difference between the ships of the 15-18th century and the ships of the vague medieval period that D&D is set in. Also, I'm pretty sure that Boston and New York are (a) on the ocean, (b) significantly closer to each other than Baldur's Gate and Waterdeep are, and (c) the Atlantic isn't ruled over by a chaotic evil god who loves sinking ships. Or, for that matter, filled with other monsters.

So you never actually answered my question. Ignore the monsters and Umberlee. How smooth sailing is the Sea of Swords? I'm sure you can find some source that describes it as being amenable to frequent ship travel.

So all those coastal cities aren’t major ports filled with ships bound for foreign parts?

Guess the setting guides lied to me.

 

[Hussar]

To expand on this with FR specifics, a boat isn’t stopping in Redlarch, or various other towns inland along the Sword Coast region. There are material advantages to passing through the Desserin Valley.

Yeah people absolutely have always taken goods by land between the two.

Just an odd claim to say that it wasn’t a thing “before trains”.

Google a map of say 1750 Eastern United States. Funny how those maps don’t show any major roads.

But hey you’re free to believe that the majority or even a significant minority of trade between New York and Boston went overland.

And, as far as ships go, Hansa Cogs are dead centre of DnD’s presumed tech level and the Futch sailed those to East Asia. Never minding the fact that Persian traders sailed to Korea before Persia even existed.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mod Note:

Not calling anyone out by name right now, but I noticed a few people in here kind of starting to lock horns and escalating the snarkiness of their rhetoric. Please, step back and try to de-escalate before things get too testy.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Google a map of say 1750 Eastern United States. Funny how those maps don’t show any major roads.

There are plenty of writings from the time, showing that there was overland trade all along the eastern coastline. Just like every other coastline with a lot of major cities and way more minor towns and farms and the like, throughout history.

But hey you’re free to believe that the majority or even a significant minority of trade between New York and Boston went overland.

And, as far as ships go, Hansa Cogs are dead centre of DnD’s presumed tech level and the Futch sailed those to East Asia. Never minding the fact that Persian traders sailed to Korea before Persia even existed.

Please keep me and other posters straight. I’m not responsible for someone else’s arguments.

If you can’t engage with me without the constant snark and hyperbole and such, please just stop engaging. Moderation has given the only warning we will receive.

 

[Composer99]

The response to my point about sea trade was that overland was significantly safer.

If you are referring to my post, that is simply not true. You come across as arguing against a position that wasn't taken.

Both overland and coastal freighting in the Forgotten Realms pose risks. In both cases, there are forces you can call upon to try and protect yourself from them, but you can't eliminate the risks, any more than real-life pre-modern mariners could eliminate the risks of coastal travel or limited open water travel, such as in the Mediterranean or North Sea or pre-modern overland haulers could eliminate the risks they faced.

The costs and benefits of Sword Coast coastal travel:

• Overseas travel is faster, therefore less expensive for daily crew expenses
• Overseas travel doesn't require pack animals, therefore less food requirements
• Pound-for-pound, you can haul more stuff on a ship than in overland caravans
• You have to reckon with Umberlee
• If something goes wrong, whether a natural event, piracy, monster attack, or divine wrath, you're more likely to lose an entire ship and everything on it

The costs and benefits of overland travel:

• Overland travel is slower, therefore more expensive for daily team expenses
• Overland travel requires pack animals, therefore more food requirements
• Pound-for-pound, you can haul less stuff compared to a river barge or coastal shipping
• You don't have to reckon with Umberlee
• If something goes wrong, whether a natural event, banditry, or monster attack, you're more likely to suffer attrition of teams, pack animals, and freight, with only divine wrath likely to result in total destruction of the caravan; a big enough armed complement might reduce attrition from banditry or smaller monsters to zero, or at least to some acceptable amount (where no armed complement can keep a ship safe from a monster capable of attacking from underwater)

These considerations, along with the existence of what you might call transnational entities interested and invested in maintaining trade routes by both land and sea (such as Waukeen and her faith), along with the incentive for regional powers to maintain the ability to deploy force by both land and sea (the Lord's Alliance probably wants to be able to reinforce one another as part of their mutual defence pact), means that there is a time and place for overseas trade and a time and place for overland trade. None of these factors necessarily lead to a concerted effort to maintain a continuous overland trade route stretching from Neverwinter to Calimport - instead, they will combine with the contiguity of short-haul roads connecting town to town to emergently create a continuous route allowing such overland travel.

Someone who wants to ship from Neverwinter to Baldur's Gate, much less Athkatla or Calimport, is reasonably going to ship by sea. But if you're making a short-haul trip, overland is going to be less risky - and at any rate there will be short-haul trade from any given town overland up to one (maybe two) days in any given direction when there isn't a watercourse or coast to follow. But there will also be medium-haul travel overland: do you imagine trade and travel between Beregost and Nashkel is going to be by sea?

---

Once again, it must be pointed out that the Forgotten Realms simply isn't meant to be a "realistic" simulation of how real-world trade networks develop or operate, just as equipment prices in the PHB simply aren't meant to be a "realistic" pricing system emulating late-medieval or early-modern economics. They're a backdrop for the fantastic adventures of D&D games. It just isn't a flaw or fault of the setting if it doesn't meet any given person's more stringent sensibilities for world-building or verisimilitude.

 

[Hussar]

Ok. I’m misunderstanding something.

Are you guys seriously arguing that overland trade is even comparable to over water trade? At any point in history including now?

Do you really think that an equal or even large minority of the trade between Boston and New York prior to the railroads went by land?

Or am I missing something?

 

[Hussar]

I/snip?

---

Once again, it must be pointed out that the Forgotten Realms simply isn't meant to be a "realistic" simulation of how real-world trade networks develop or operate, just as equipment prices in the PHB simply aren't meant to be a "realistic" pricing system emulating late-medieval or early-modern economics. They're a backdrop for the fantastic adventures of D&D games. It just isn't a flaw or fault of the setting if it doesn't meet any given person's more stringent sensibilities for world-building or verisimilitude.

Ah see this? This I 100% agree with. That’s the point I’ve been making all the way along. But many people keep telling me I’m wrong and that FR DOES meet more stringent sensibilities. After all, why keep pointing to the real worl of it’s not an attempt to show how realistic FR is?

If you guys are good with the Theme Park level of setting then we’re all agreeing. I have zero problem with theme park settings. Doesn’t phase me at all. But others have been pretty strident in arguing that it’s all very realistic and plausible.

 

[Faolyn]

So all those coastal cities aren’t major ports filled with ships bound for foreign parts?

Guess the setting guides lied to me.

Aaand you failed to address any of my points or answer my questions. Again.