(Psi)SeveredHead
Adventurer
So I was thinking about horse-mounted travel. Horses are faster than humans, so wouldn't you expect that riding horses makes you faster?
But I'm not sure. I did a bit of research on the internet, which we all know isn't entirely accurate. A typical fit person walks 3-5 miles per hour. A horse typically walks ... 3-5 miles per hour. I'm not sure if that's for a horse laden with a rider and a modicum of gear. (I read a horse can easily carry 30% of its weight. Surprisingly, a mule can only carry 20%.)
A horse can run much faster than a human of course. A horse's place in combat is pretty obvious. But a horse can't run for long. In fact, I'm not sure a horse can walk for long. Humans have incredible walking endurance (while we gave up our ability to climb trees easily and run fast, we can outwalk pretty much anything). Horses still get tired, and more so if they're carrying weight. Furthermore, managing horse morale isn't much like managing human morale. People will endure a lot of pain and exhaustion if it means rescuing their hometown, stopping an invasion, or maybe just the chance to loot someone you don't like. (Giving the typical horse the Endurance feat in 3e or the Endurance skill in 4e might not make much sense.)
Let's suppose a horse can walk 4 miles per hour while laden, and a human can walk 4 miles per hour while unladen. At first glance, it seems like riding horses makes sense. The horse can effectively travel faster than laden soldiers, and soldiers shouldn't go around with armor and weapons. But the horse will tire out before laden walking humans would. Assuming the humans rode, afterward the relatively-rested humans could get off their horses and ... well, no not really, not unless you've some sort of efficient horse trading system. (That kind of thing certainly existed for messengers, but not armies, or more to the point, small bands of adventurers.)
In any event, most versions of D&D give horses a higher base speed (rather than a similar speed and much higher charge and running speed) and I presume most other RPGs do something similar. In 4e, a horse can move twice as fast as a laden human, and in 3e I think even faster. If horses instead had an "overland" speed at the same rate as an unladen human, and had less endurance, there wouldn't be a point of riding a horse unless you were carrying a lot of cargo.
Since people did in fact use relatively fast cavalry forces, there's something wrong with my logic train. Someone want to give it a checkup? If horses can't walk faster than (unladen) humans and get tired faster, what non-combat advantage do they give?
But I'm not sure. I did a bit of research on the internet, which we all know isn't entirely accurate. A typical fit person walks 3-5 miles per hour. A horse typically walks ... 3-5 miles per hour. I'm not sure if that's for a horse laden with a rider and a modicum of gear. (I read a horse can easily carry 30% of its weight. Surprisingly, a mule can only carry 20%.)
A horse can run much faster than a human of course. A horse's place in combat is pretty obvious. But a horse can't run for long. In fact, I'm not sure a horse can walk for long. Humans have incredible walking endurance (while we gave up our ability to climb trees easily and run fast, we can outwalk pretty much anything). Horses still get tired, and more so if they're carrying weight. Furthermore, managing horse morale isn't much like managing human morale. People will endure a lot of pain and exhaustion if it means rescuing their hometown, stopping an invasion, or maybe just the chance to loot someone you don't like. (Giving the typical horse the Endurance feat in 3e or the Endurance skill in 4e might not make much sense.)
Let's suppose a horse can walk 4 miles per hour while laden, and a human can walk 4 miles per hour while unladen. At first glance, it seems like riding horses makes sense. The horse can effectively travel faster than laden soldiers, and soldiers shouldn't go around with armor and weapons. But the horse will tire out before laden walking humans would. Assuming the humans rode, afterward the relatively-rested humans could get off their horses and ... well, no not really, not unless you've some sort of efficient horse trading system. (That kind of thing certainly existed for messengers, but not armies, or more to the point, small bands of adventurers.)
In any event, most versions of D&D give horses a higher base speed (rather than a similar speed and much higher charge and running speed) and I presume most other RPGs do something similar. In 4e, a horse can move twice as fast as a laden human, and in 3e I think even faster. If horses instead had an "overland" speed at the same rate as an unladen human, and had less endurance, there wouldn't be a point of riding a horse unless you were carrying a lot of cargo.
Since people did in fact use relatively fast cavalry forces, there's something wrong with my logic train. Someone want to give it a checkup? If horses can't walk faster than (unladen) humans and get tired faster, what non-combat advantage do they give?
