Worlds of Design: Medieval Travel & Scale

We previously established the fundamentals of world-building; with a world’s basic rules down, it’s important to consider how you get around in that world. And travel was very different (read: slower) in a medieval setting.

We previously established the fundamentals of world-building; with a world’s basic rules down, it’s important to consider how you get around in that world. And travel was very different (read: slower) in a medieval setting.

canterbury-tales-1730722_960_720.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

It’s Not That Far…

As explained by Rick Stump in “Modern Minds and Medieval Distances,” there’s a psychological aspect to travel that should be considered when role-playing in a medieval world. There’s an old saying that 100 years is a long time to Americans but not to Europeans, while 100 miles is not far to an American but far for a European. The time or distance doesn’t change, of course, but the perception is quite different.

Maps can also be deceiving. Nowadays in Western countries there are usually paved roads from most anywhere to anywhere. So when you look at a map you think of distance as closely related to the number of inches between two points on the map. But this varies with terrain and especially with technology.

I’m in the early stages of designing a game about the American Civil War (ACW), and of course I knew that the war tended to be divided into eastern and western theaters. The reason is obvious on a certain kind of map, one that shows railroad lines or one that shows the Appalachian Mountains as a barrier, as they were in those days when the railroad lines didn’t go through the mountains. Railroads were the vital method of transportation for ACW armies.

Or look at a map of the Roman Empire. What’s not obvious is that water transportation was much quicker and much cheaper than land transportation, even with the fine Roman road network. So if you just look at the map you get a completely skewed idea of how transportation (and communication) worked.

I once found online an interactive map that showed the weeks of transportation from Rome (it's gone now, but Orbis is similar). You can easily see that it would be quicker to transport something from Rome to southern Spain than from Rome to northern Italy, especially because there are not big north-south running rivers in Italy sort of analogous to the Mississippi River in the United States. River transport was much cheaper than land.

Or is It?

The standard method of transportation in medieval times was walking. Even if you had a cart to carry goods you weren’t going to ride on that cart very much, nor would a cart with solid wooden wheels go very fast. At normal walking speed, which about 3 mph, it takes a heck of a long time to get most anywhere!

Yes, we have examples of forced marches by military units in times before mechanization that are sometimes mind-boggling, as much as 50 miles in 24 hours, though more commonly 20 miles in 24 hours. What you don’t hear about such events is that a lot of soldiers did not get to the end of the march, they dropped out for various reasons or struggled along far behind.

The U.S. Army 30 years ago would periodically send their troops on “12-mile road marches,” carrying about 80 pounds of equipment; that really wore out the guys I knew, who of course weren’t doing it every day, and did not look forward to it. I think the farthest I’ve ever walked in one day was 7 miles, without a backpack, and it sure ruined me for a while (thanks partly to flat feet).

Riding a horse would make this somewhat more comfortable but not much faster. Even when you ride a horse, for a significant part of a long journey you’re walking and leading the horse. Or you won’t end up with much of a horse.

You can see how much difference magical automobiles would make in a medieval world (provided roads are available . . .), let alone something like a magic carpet. We lose some of the sense of wonder such items would invoke in medieval inhabitants because we’re accustomed to modern technology. Even something as simple as a walkie-talkie with good range would be a great wonder in a medieval world, and very useful to military operations or dungeon and wilderness adventures. Splitting the party (which as we all know “you should never do”) would be much safer and more useful with a walkie-talkie set.

Yes, our fantasy characters are tougher than we are, and more inured to drudgery, but we should keep in mind the difference between a non-mechanized society and a modern highly mechanized society, both as players and as world builders.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio

Myth Master

Explorer
While I am not disputing that a horse cannot be ridden into the ground, I do dispute the notion that having a horse to ride will not improve the number of miles travelled per day especially in clear terrain or on a road/path. So sure a horse must be walked and rested but even given all of that they will net out better than mere foot travel.
Human average walking speed = 3mph.
Horse average walking speed = 4 mph.
That's a 25% advantage.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Emerikol

Adventurer
I think reasonable numbers for long term travel on road/track would be foot 24 miles/day, & horse 32 miles/day.
I would tend to put the horse at double the human movement UNLESS the human is in fantastic shape and highly motivated to get to their destination. So yeah that ratio seems right if you consider the human practically forced marching. So I'd put a human at 16 miles vs 32 for the horse.

We also have to consider health in a fantasy world vs a medieval one which I know is off track from the topic as the writer specifically said medieval. Still in a D&D game the characters will be far more healthy than any medieval person. At least a higher levels.
 

S'mon

Legend
I would tend to put the horse at double the human movement UNLESS the human is in fantastic shape and highly motivated to get to their destination. So yeah that ratio seems right if you consider the human practically forced marching. So I'd put a human at 16 miles vs 32 for the horse.
Napoleonic through WW2 sustained march rates on roads were expected to be 40 km/day, that's about 24 miles/day. I think that goes back to Frederick the Great of Prussia introducing the cadence step (but haven't googled). :) With rifle pack & kit.
I think a lot of sedentary folk underestimate what a normal fit human body is capable of. And most D&D adventurers are either normal-fit or elites.

Edit: 16 miles in the UK is more a long country stroll, though casual country walks are more typically in the 8-12 mile range, allowing for a leisurely start, train/car transport to and from start & end points, and a relaxed pub lunch in the middle. When I used to lead walks I had a rule of thumb that including breaks a walk always took 1 hour per 2 miles. I've only walked 24 miles once in a day AFAICR, leaving the house in the morning, walking 12 miles down the valley, then back. It took about 10 hours with breaks - I was on my own, light pack, on a track the whole time. It wasn't hard though, did not require any 'grit', and I wasn't particularly fit (indeed I have a pelvic disability & prob use more energy than most walking). Main thing I recall was getting hot, running out of water, and drinking from mountain streams - to the horror of my sister when I got back. :)
 
Last edited:

Myth Master

Explorer
I would tend to put the horse at double the human movement UNLESS the human is in fantastic shape and highly motivated to get to their destination. So yeah that ratio seems right if you consider the human practically forced marching. So I'd put a human at 16 miles vs 32 for the horse.

We also have to consider health in a fantasy world vs a medieval one which I know is off track from the topic as the writer specifically said medieval. Still in a D&D game the characters will be far more healthy than any medieval person. At least a higher levels.
I didn't pull those figures out of a hat. What’s the Average Walking Speed?
Why would you cut average walking speed in half for humans?

"... in a D&D game the characters will be far more healthy than any medieval person. At least at higher levels."
Why would they be any healthier than anyone else with the same CON score? Or healthier than members of the noble class, who had every advantage in that regard.
I think you severely underestimate the health of the average medieval peasant. Their nutritional needs were more than adequately met. "Farmer" and "corn-fed" are by-words for health and physical heartiness, then as now.
 

Emerikol

Adventurer
Napoleonic through WW2 sustained march rates on roads were expected to be 40 km/day, that's about 24 miles/day. I think that goes back to Frederick the Great of Prussia introducing the cadence step (but haven't googled). :) With rifle pack & kit.
I think a lot of sedentary folk underestimate what a normal fit human body is capable of. And most D&D adventurers are either normal-fit or elites.

Edit: 16 miles in the UK is more a long country stroll, though casual country walks are more typically in the 8-12 mile range, allowing for a leisurely start, train/car transport to and from start & end points, and a relaxed pub lunch in the middle. When I used to lead walks I had a rule of thumb that including breaks a walk always took 1 hour per 2 miles. I've only walked 24 miles once in a day AFAICR, leaving the house in the morning, walking 12 miles down the valley, then back. It took about 10 hours with breaks - I was on my own, light pack, on a track the whole time. It wasn't hard though, did not require any 'grit', and I wasn't particularly fit (indeed I have a pelvic disability & prob use more energy than most walking). Main thing I recall was getting hot, running out of water, and drinking from mountain streams - to the horror of my sister when I got back. :)
I'm not disputing if a human needs to get 24 miles in a day that they can't do it. I could do it myself thank you. I would not though consider that normal travel across country for days on end which is my point. So if you must be somewhere and it's really really important, you can easily do 24 miles. If you are traveling from London to Rome though I bet you end up far slower on average and that is given you are in shape.
 

S'mon

Legend
I'm not disputing if a human needs to get 24 miles in a day that they can't do it. I could do it myself thank you. I would not though consider that normal travel across country for days on end which is my point. So if you must be somewhere and it's really really important, you can easily do 24 miles. If you are traveling from London to Rome though I bet you end up far slower on average and that is given you are in shape.
Yes if you are calculating rates on foot for a months long journey then 10-12 miles/day is more realistic. IMCs I'm nearly always calculating by day.
 

Emerikol

Adventurer
Yes if you are calculating rates on foot for a months long journey then 10-12 miles/day is more realistic. IMCs I'm nearly always calculating by day.
Well even London to Edinburgh would apply but I get your point. I guess for me it falls somewhere in between and it depends on level. I'm not on the big hex map at all at lower levels. I'm on the six mile or less hex map. And sure for brief day journeys I'm with you. But once they get to higher levels and are going off to fight some distant threat a week long journey is pretty common.
 

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
So, the issue between dealing with the game world and the real world as far as travel rates go is logistics. People and horses usually go the same distance a day due to logistics. People can carry food that's sufficient for them along with, and eat fairly quickly (or on the trail, even). On the other hand, horses require significant grazing time or having sufficient fodder available to speed eating time. This usually averages out to a pretty similar daily distance for extended travel.

Heck, there's even a yearly endurance race between persons on foot and mounted that people have won (granted, only twice in the 20 or so years it's been going on). This is actually a timed raced over a long distance, and humans have beaten the horses! Now, normally, the horse does beat the human, but it's not a 25% margin or more when they do.

So, then, what's the advantage of a horse? So long as you're keeping to a walk, the horse can carry far more gear than a normal human could without tiring. And, the person riding the horse is a tad less fatigued at the end of the march than the person that just walked it (riding isn't exactly restful). And, when it gets to needing to be fast over the short haul, horses are great for quick mobility, and they're pretty massive, so they make great battering rams when ridden into enemy lines en masse.

But, all of the above is pretty boring to deal with in game, so it's fine if you have mounted travel be faster than on foot. It's fine if you ignore that temperature is a huge determinant for horses (they cannot dissipate heat anywhere near as efficiently as humans). It's fine if you ignore grazing or the need for fodder (carts are slow!). Even trying to simplify the issues with horse vs foot travel (as I've done here) are pretty fraught with exceptions and 'sure, buts.' Do what works for you -- I don't really get the need to make D&D model reality so closely that daily distance on horse is such a point of contention. I set them to the same for daily travel, which folds in all of the varied issues and averages out over various conditions. Horses still carry more without being encumbered and are faster tactically, which is, really, the exact reasons horses have been historically favored over foot, when they have been favored. If you have a different need/want, great! Go for it, it'll be fine!
 

MGibster

Legend
The U.S. Army 30 years ago would periodically send their troops on “12-mile road marches,” carrying about 80 pounds of equipment; that really wore out the guys I knew, who of course weren’t doing it every day, and did not look forward to it. I think the farthest I’ve ever walked in one day was 7 miles, without a backpack, and it sure ruined me for a while (thanks partly to flat feet).
In March 2020 I went into COVID prevention mod and started working from home and avoiding any unnecessary trips that would put me in contact with the general public. I started hearing about the COVID fifteen, the weight some people were putting on because they were overeating and not getting much exercise because they were stuck indoors, and I thought it would be neat if I returned to work with the opposite problem. So I started walking every single day.

At first it was slow. I walked for 15 minutes one direction and 15 minutes back to my house. But October I was walking 5-7 miles daily. I'd walk 2 miles at lunch and 5 miles in the evening. I'm not going at a blistering speed, about 3 miles per hour, and once you get used to walking it's not really all that bad. And I'm saying this as a fat guy in my 40s. (Not as fat. I've dropped 43 pounds since May.)

But, there is a big difference between me and a medieval traveler. I'm well fed with access to safe food and water, I'm resting comfortably each evening, I'm in good health, I have modern footwear, I'm walking on a paved road, and I don't have to carry anything.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top