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.

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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio

log in or register to remove this ad

aramis erak

Legend
You're presuming that Mr. Merchant is literate, which, well, isn't a given. Like I said, when there's only one route (you changed the example by providing a multiple route path), it's very likely that Mr. Merchant doesn't really need a map.
One doesn't need to be literate to use a map. Literacy helps, but it's not essential.

Heck, one doesn't need to be literate to make a map, either. Just need to be able to make meaningful marks illustrating nature and relationships between things of interest. One does need to be able to use a writing implement, but many illiterate artists have existed over the centuries.
 

S'mon

Legend
Medieval daily walk distances for typical not very fit people tended to be in the 10-12 miles range - perhaps more than many modern sedentary Americans would be comfortable with, but you see similar rates today in non-industrialised societies. Market towns tend to have a ca 6 mile hinterland of villages where people can walk their goods to market. That said, giving PCs a daily hiking rate of around double that, as per most D&D editions, isn't implausible either. The article correctly notes that long term mounted travel is at a similar rate to fit infantry travel; OTOH in the short term horses can go much much faster, and a frequent change of horses can get messengers over 100 miles/day.
 

S'mon

Legend
I see the inverse of this in new GMs making their first maps.*

Invariably, they make the continents huuuuuuge, thinking they need all that distance of untamed terrain so locations are suitable marching (and random encounter) distances away from each other. Years of rpg books that made the same assumptions not only in their maps but also their estimate of travel times as if forests where just slower roads. (And why I preferred hex maps where the general size of the hex was the slowest land speed a party could travel.)

As a side note: Educating said new GMs on this is tough and many of them aren't a fan of the news.

*One newbie wanted to run a West March, but give each participating GM a couple of continents to work with. I could already see how much potential content was never going to see the light of day (or the table.)

Those oversized maps are a bete noire of mine, too. I've come to like 2 miles/hex scale for sandboxing:

Hommlet-Gurzun%2527s%2Bannotated.jpg


I get to have more or less plausible distances between borderlands settlements and adventure sites. Although 1 mile/hex works well for settled areas where you might get a village every 2-4 miles.
 

aramis erak

Legend
Medieval daily walk distances for typical not very fit people tended to be in the 10-12 miles range - perhaps more than many modern sedentary Americans would be comfortable with, but you see similar rates today in non-industrialised societies. Market towns tend to have a ca 6 mile hinterland of villages where people can walk their goods to market. That said, giving PCs a daily hiking rate of around double that, as per most D&D editions, isn't implausible either. The article correctly notes that long term mounted travel is at a similar rate to fit infantry travel; OTOH in the short term horses can go much much faster, and a frequent change of horses can get messengers over 100 miles/day.
It's been said that a horse is good for 25 miles a day... and it can do that in 2 hours or 10 hours... but if you want to use it tomorrow, keep the time over 6 hours...

It's also worth noting that a horse walk is just a bit faster (4mph) than modern US March pace (3.4 mph).
 

Hussar

Legend
Heh, @S'mon - great minds. I'm currently redoing the 4e Chaos Scar adventures for 5e with my group. And, yup, settled on a 1 mile/square scale. Works so much better.

One thing I've noticed about a lot of published campaign settings is that they are WAYYYY too big. Far bigger than they need to be. Which means you get all sorts of really high altitude details but virtually nothing in the way of the day to day details that are far more difficult to write. I'd much rather see a campaign setting that gets detailed out to 2 mile hexes and covers maybe 2 weeks (if that ) ride in any direction. It's why I love things like Ptolus . Far more useful to the DM than some 30 page setting guide that's covering an area the size of the continental US.
 

Dioltach

Legend
I've been spending some time planning a hiking trip for this autumn, and it's brought home again just how vast the world is when you're travelling on foot. I'm planning to do a few days on the GR5 (the long-distance trail that goes from Hook of Holland to the Mediterranean), and even allowing for fairly long daily walks the distance I'll be covering in 3-4 days' hiking is tiny when I look at it on a large-scale map. But the country along the way is packed full: villages, woods, streams, rivers, and all kinds of places of interest. A while back my group played a published adventure set in the Dalelands in FR, and we had to travel about 60 miles just to get to the adventure site, with almost nothing in between.

One thing I've noticed about hiking is how it really focuses the mind on the here and now. Anything that's more than half an hour in the past - if you missed a turn, if you left your cap behind - is gone, or requires a whole new plan to recover. Anything that's more than half an hour in the future - the precise address of that day's hotel, or an alternative route further down the road - is just too far ahead to contemplate.
 

aramis erak

Legend
One thing I've noticed about hiking is how it really focuses the mind on the here and now. Anything that's more than half an hour in the past - if you missed a turn, if you left your cap behind - is gone, or requires a whole new plan to recover. Anything that's more than half an hour in the future - the precise address of that day's hotel, or an alternative route further down the road - is just too far ahead to contemplate.
Funnily enough, I get the exact opposite effect when hiking... not that I have done much recently... my mind is so numbed that I think about everything but the hiking. My feet will plod along on the path, and minimal brainpower is dedicated to the acts comprising the hiking itself... as my mind ponders deep questions... provided I'm not too sore. Too much pain and my thoughts shift from deeper thoughts to how to work around the pain, but again, the mind isn't on the hike.

Then again, the most concentrated hiking I've ever done was in Basic Training, and the mind is not on the act of the march, but on what nastiness the DI's have come up with today... and, worse than normal hiking, one cannot even verbalize the racing mind.

Now, I'm aware I'm neuro-atypical (bipolar), but many of my friends likewise talk incessantly when hiking for travel purposes rather than for recreation, but even then, one friend and I used to go for short walks (0.5 to 2 hours) in various places up to an hours drive away, and talk anything but the hike... so, while I'm neuro-atypical, I'm not too neuro-atypical.
 

Hussar

Legend
But the country along the way is packed full: villages, woods, streams, rivers, and all kinds of places of interest. A while back my group played a published adventure set in the Dalelands in FR, and we had to travel about 60 miles just to get to the adventure site, with almost nothing in between.

To be fair though, considering the populations of D&D worlds, there should be pretty large areas of not a heck of a lot. We tend to forget just how packed with people our world is. Lose, what, 90% of the world's population and now things change rather a lot.
 

Derren

Hero
To be fair though, considering the populations of D&D worlds, there should be pretty large areas of not a heck of a lot. We tend to forget just how packed with people our world is. Lose, what, 90% of the world's population and now things change rather a lot.
On the other hand farming was a lot more inefficient and required more space. And population density was also a lot lower than today. The area around cities was, if I am not mistaken, hardly wilderness but farms whereever you go. Only in areas with no cities were close to being wilderness.
 

Remove ads

Latest threads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top