# Which Mount is More Epic?



## Mindfire (Mar 26, 2013)

Originally I'd planned for a certain ethnic group to have horse-mounted archers as an integral part of its culture. But they had way too many similarities to the Dothraki, mostly due to my laziness (I'd pretty much copy-pasted the Mongols instead of putting in actual effort). Since then I've changed a lot about them to make them more unique, but I no longer want their culture to be horse related. For one thing, I already have a culture that takes pride in its horse breeders and for another, it's yet another Dothraki similarity I'd like to prune off. Plus, horses are just too mundane for these people. I want something more epic and slightly out of the ordinary. So with that in mind, which is more awesome:

Deer?








or Lion?








Of course, there's more than just awesomeness to be considered. There has to be a pretense of practicality. Both animals have advantages and disadvantages. 

Deer would obviously be easier to tame and easier to feed. The riders could just let their mounts graze rather than having to waste time and resources on getting them meat every day. Deer would also be more agile, a valuable trait in a mount. They have natural weapons in the form of antlers, and they are not likely to spook their master's herd of livestock. However, a deer is also more likely to want to flee from battle and it would take a lot to breed and train that response out of the animal, provided I don't just make the deer species incredibly brave to begin with. Deer also might not have the musculature to carry a heavy human being, although again this can be fixed with the rule of "because I say so." 

Lions also have advantages: stronger, fiercer, natural weapons in the form of claws and teeth, and with proper training they could make powerful combatants even independent of their riders. It would also speak volumes about the nature of the culture that they've managed to domesticate lions. But that's one of the disadvantages. Domesticated, ride-able lions strain SOD more so than deer. They would be far harder to tame, train, and cooperate with. They might also take more resources to feed. You would either have to give the lion meat from your own livestock (probably not the best arrangement) or let it out periodically to hunt for itself, which kinda defeats the purpose of domestication and seems counterproductive. Plus it would spook livestock constantly if not kill them. It just seems like it might be slightly more difficult to work with over all.

What do you all think?


----------



## Graylorne (Mar 26, 2013)

I would go for deer. Perhaps a reindeer, they are being ridden, after all. Besides it's a more natural thing to do, something that would evolve in a herder people.

A lion is in larger numbers untenable, I'd think. Besides they would never ever be trustworthy. I could see a special corps, a King's Guard or some such riding lions to impress, but as regular forces they seem more trouble than they'd be worth.

But logic doesn't really fit fantasy, so if you want lions, go ahead. Just make up a good story how it came about.


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 26, 2013)

To clarify, I'm thinking the deer might be something around the size of the giant "Irish Elk" in order to justify how they can carry human riders.

Also, it seems we have two late entries, the terror birds  phorusrhachos longissimus and kelenken guillermoi.

A size chart for comparison with an average human:







Could a large flightless bird offer a happy medium between the lion's strength and ferocity and the deer's agility and pliability?


----------



## Jabrosky (Mar 26, 2013)

^ Terror birds for the win, I say! They're almost like Velociraptors in a way!


----------



## Ophiucha (Mar 26, 2013)

Deer are, like, my favourite animal, so I am biased.

The way lions fight is also not overly compatible with having a human on their backs. Their torso is going to be twisting and turning, and even when they run it's going to be a heck of a bumpy ride compared to an animal like a deer (or a horse). I'm not sure I could avoid puking if I was on a large cat when it decide to leap twenty feet forward. At the very least you'd get whiplash. From an aesthetic perspective, there is also the fact that female lions are better hunters, and hence wouldn't have the pretty manes. And they are the sort of animals that can run really fast for like a minute instead of run moderately fast for like an hour, the latter of which is probably more useful for riding around.


----------



## Devor (Mar 26, 2013)

It's all been done before.

Lions and the other big cats are built for short boosts of speed, not galloping steadily for long distances.  I could see using them as shock troops to defend certain locations, but expecting them to meet the needs of an army strains believability, especially if your characters travel with them and you paint that picture in detail for the reader.


----------



## Ireth (Mar 26, 2013)

I vote for deer as well, especially that Irish elk Mindfire mentioned.


----------



## Ophiucha (Mar 26, 2013)

Since you specified the size of the deer, I'd also point out that your feet would probably touch the ground if you tried to ride around on an African lion. Go prehistoric for that one, too. And I'm pretty sure there are people in the world who ride ostriches, so I don't see anything wrong with having a bird mount. The fact that they could attack without you either falling off of their backs or being crushed underneath them is also beneficial.

Plus, I second Jabrosky's velociraptor comparison. Raptors are awesome.


----------



## Graylorne (Mar 26, 2013)

Mindfire said:


> To clarify, I'm thinking the deer might be something along the size of the giant "Irish Elk" in order to justify how they can carry human riders.
> 
> Also, it seems we have two late entries, the terror birds  phorusrhachos longissimus and kelenken guillermoi.
> 
> ...




If you have these beasties, you need more types for a viable biosphere. Is your society adapted to these beasts? If they're not there as a matter of course, it's getting rather, well, hard to explain.


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 26, 2013)

I would thank you all for your contribution, but apparently I'm at my daily rep limit. So consider this a thank you until my rep battery recharges.


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 26, 2013)

Graylorne said:


> If you have these beasties, you need more types for a viable biosphere. Is your society adapted to these beasts? If they're not there as a matter of course, it's getting rather, well, hard to explain.



Could you elaborate?


----------



## Devor (Mar 26, 2013)

Mindfire said:


> Could you elaborate?



I think he means, it's not enough to have one animal and just use it as a mount.  There's different subspecies of lion and other big cats, for instance, so if you included a big ostrich bird as a mount, you would need to include many versions of them in the wild, likely as distinct as a dog from a wolf or a pig from a boar.

That said . . . there are no wild horses.  Just a few populations descended from feral ones.  So, there's that.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Mar 26, 2013)

One thing I'd like to bring up... animal nature.  When the British colonized Africa, some nobles thought it would be spectacular to have zebras pull their coaches.  Know why it never caught on?  Because Zebras aren't tame horses.  They're wild asses and stubborn and uninterested in being harnessed.   they couldn't make them pull a coach.  SO after many failed attempts at domesticating the zebra into a pack animal, the British gave up and went back to the good old reliable horse.  

If I'm remembering correctly, Mongols rode Steppe Ponies, hardy, rugged animals that had amazing stamina.  When talking about horses, a horse is not just a horse.  Each breed has a specific purose it was designed for and they accomplish their jobs well, but you can't mix and match.  

Why don't we use thoroughbreds for mounted archery?  Think about it, fast long legs, sleek bodies.. they could certainly cover ground fast and haul the modest weight of a rider with light armor.  But have you ever seen a racehorse?  I've seen some really fast ones... that are absolutely psycho.  THey flinch at every noise, jump at every movement and are skittish creatures good for only one thing, racing.  I'd rather shoot off the back of a nice Belgian Draft Horse or Clydesdale.. Now that's a consistent plodder!

Okay now onto the other animals...

Deer re skittish.  They jump and flinch and twitch at every sound.  Why?  Because they're prey animals.  Everything in the world eats them.  Also, the smell of man is terror to a deer.  It's been bred into them to fear man because the ones who did lived and the ones who didn't were eaten long ago.  Sort of like the wolves who came too close to men and became domesticated dogs.  Wolves would also be a terrible mount, fundamentally.  

Deer, while having the stamina and body to be a good ride, might be too skittish.  If you were to make a sort of deer, I'd make a completely new kind, like the Irish Elk idea.

Lions... Lions don't have stamina.  They have strength.  While wolves are the best runners in the animal kingdom, often outrunning their prey until the moose just lays down from exhaustion and dies, lionesses lay in wait and pounce on their prey.  Cats are not made to run and don't have the skeletal structure to do it.  With the exception of the cheetah (which is only made for bursts of speed, not distance running) no cats outrun their prey, they ambush it.  I'd think the lion is a poor choice for so many reasons.  Also, where dogs are pack animals and social, therefore accepting a man as pack leader, a lion has no respect for anything that can't kill it.  Lions would be terribly dangerous to control and work closely with.  look at all the people who are killed by captive cats.  They're dangerous.  THeir entire demeanor is about self rather than pack.  

Okay, now let's look at the deer again.  The reason horses are so useful is that they've been bred for thousands of years to be what we want them to be.  If you did that with a lion, you'd get something still half-wild and probably mostly insane.  If you did it with the deer, you might get something pretty cool...

When Russian fur traders bred foxes for their fur, they thought, "Hang on a minute... People are getting bit by these vicious little beasties, why don't we breed only the foxes that are most tame?"  SO they did.  They selected only the friendliest foxes and began breeding them in hopes of coming up with a tame version of the fox that would be easier to handle and therefore make fur farming easier.  But within six or eight generations... something unusual happened.  

The foxes looked like pet dogs!!!  Yep.  After generations and generations of fur farming, with no hitches, their breeding program produced fox-dogs when they selected only pleasant, friendly, peopled individuals.  The foxes had floppy ears, spotted coats and began looking like domesticated dogs.  SO they gave them away as pets and abandoned the breeding program.  

Now, I'm not sure wht breeding deer for domesticability would lead to, but you might want to play with that a little.  Imagine if you bred deer for specific traits, like calm, bulk and intelligence.  You might get something really interesting.  Perhaps try making a sort of spotted deer, like an apaloosa horse.  That might be really neat.  Or maybe one with floppy ears or a long curly tail.  I'd just suggest making it look much less a white-tailed deer as an indicator these animals are removed from their wild cousins and somehow changed through selective breeding.  I think that would be the easiest way for you to make a convincing argument that the deer were domesticated over time and you can infuse any traits into them you want then.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Mar 26, 2013)

Another note about deer... I think they're bounders.  Not gallopers.  That might be a real big problem for a rider, especially one who is trying to shoot arrows.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Mar 26, 2013)

What about something like a wildabeest?  Make something elst liek that.  It's a galloper, has amazing stamina, eats the worst quality food and is very calm and steady.  That would be a good mount and have a very distinct look.


----------



## Graylorne (Mar 26, 2013)

Devor said:


> I think he means, it's not enough to have one animal and just use it as a mount.  There's different subspecies of lion and other big cats, for instance, so if you included a big ostrich bird as a mount, you would need to include many versions of them in the wild, likely as distinct as a dog from a wolf or a pig from a boar.
> 
> That said . . . there are no wild horses.  Just a few populations descended from feral ones.  So, there's that.



That's more or less what I meant. Must admit I was thinking more in the saurii line than ostriches, because I thought of something verocious. Ostriches don't affect your society, meat-eating raptors do.

I'm now remembering my years in World of Warcraft. No idea how exact they are, but I found the troll raptor mounts the most uncomfortable ride possible, with those bloodelf ostriches second, so I am biased!


----------



## Nihal (Mar 26, 2013)

I like deer. I'm using a variant of deer in my story. I'm going by what Caged Maiden advised, creating my own specie and breeding. They're bigger and heavier than common deer, but still slimmer than horses, having way less stamina. I'm also using mounted archers.

If I recall it correctly the Mongols timed their firing with the moment when the horse's hooves were on the ground. It's pure speculation, but for me in this case, it wouldn't be so different with deer. You would have to learn to take in account how the bounds would affect your aim. I'm sure it would be kinda annoying to mount a deer, have you ever mounted a horse that only trots? Probably the same thing, but in larger scale and slower motion.


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 26, 2013)

About bounding/galloping, I've just been watching some footage and it seems to me that smaller deer species like the white-tail do bound, while larger species, like caribou, elk, and moose, tend to gallop. Or at least do something similar to a gallop. And the issue with the wildebeest is that it's adapted to a warm climate. I'm looking for a cooler climate animal.


----------



## Saigonnus (Mar 26, 2013)

Why have a "real world" mount in a fantasy setting?... if you want them to ride a hippogriff or chimera, whose to say you cannot? If a real world creature just doesn't seem epic enough, make something up that would be more suitable for the tribe to use. Why not a mammoth? You want cold weather, fairly fast and strong creature, what better than something that size? Who needs speed when you could armor the heck out of it and be somewhat invulnerable to most attacks?


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 26, 2013)

Saigonnus said:


> Why have a "real world" mount in a fantasy setting?... if you want them to ride a hippogriff or chimera, whose to say you cannot? If a real world creature just doesn't seem epic enough, make something up that would be more suitable for the tribe to use. Why not a mammoth? You want cold weather, fairly fast and strong creature, what better than something that size? Who needs speed when you could armor the heck out of it and be somewhat invulnerable to most attacks?



I did consider mammoths, actually. I'm still considering them. But something about them doesn't quite "click" with my vision of this culture.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Mar 26, 2013)

True about white-tailed deer vs. elk, moose and reindeer which run more like horses.  The picture you posted was of a white-tailed deer, so I wanted to mention the difference in movement.  I think an elk variety would be a great mount.  However, how fast are they and what kind of stamina do they have?  Moose rarely out-run wolves, wading into water for escape to my knowledge.  Are elk better runners?  I'd still make them apaloosa or something to differentiate their breed as something special.  Also, elk are huge.  It's be akin to riding a clydesdale into battle.  I think you're on the right track, choosing something akin to what's on earth but changing it to fit your needs.  I only mentioned wildabeests because they're something other than a buffalo, horse, ass, etc.  They're related to buffalo but obviously are much different.  You could invent a close cousin for a colder climate, maybe cross it with a musk ox or something.  Depends how much reality you want in your fantasy or how much into the realm of fantasy you're willing to go.


----------



## Saigonnus (Mar 26, 2013)

Mindfire said:


> I did consider mammoths, actually. I'm still considering them. But something about them doesn't quite "click" with my vision of this culture.



They'd be good for more than just combat. They could be trained for heavy lifting or pulling wagons, just like a horse/horses with a higher amount of strength. Their fur could be used for thread (sewing) and should one die, the hide could made into leather and the flesh eaten, same as a horse or oxen. Since they are herbivores, the same fodder you'd have for a horse would probably be okay for a mammoth. Even though you would probably have fewer mammoths than horses or deer, each could potentially carry two riders, one covering each side.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Mar 26, 2013)

I guess the critical thing you need to think about before you decide is:  What is the function of said animal?  Is it to be fast?  Light on it's feet?  What is the terrain?  Is there a reason horses, deer, or maybe even a goat-like animal might be best?  I have a scene with a mountain pony having a terrible time in a swamp.  It has narrow feet for rocky terrain and a short, stocky body, the opposite of wetland horses like those of the Camarouge which have wide, flat hooves and light, lean bodies.  

Also, if you're writing a woodland race, deer make more sense because they eat fallen fruit, grass, even tree bark.   Horses require a lot of grass to eat, not a commodity found in a forest.  So diet is somethign to consider.  Also, whereas draft horses eat a lot of food for their weight, wild asses function better on poor quality food and require less.  Something to consider if your race is keeping large numbers of animals in a relatively small area (which is what it sounds like).  

Mounted archers require a lot of animals.  Someone has to raise all that food, tend all those hooves, make all those shoes or maybe leather boots if it's deer.  Also, with deer, you might want to see what effect a rider would have.  Some horses have a weight capacity or their feet suffer from the extra burden.  WHich is why horseshoes are a necessity, not a luxury.  An armored knight needed a special horse, not just a plow nag...

I read once about the number of pounds specific kinds of horses could carry for my novel.  You'd be surprised how many animals have a 200 pound capacity.  Think about that... it's an average-sized man without any armor.


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 26, 2013)

As for where these people live, a handy map: 








It's a fairly flat, cool grasslands region. Does the terrain inform your opinon, CM?


----------



## Jess A (Mar 26, 2013)

I just invented a goat-relative for my mounts for some cultures/areas, and designed it from there with practicality etc in mind. Horses are also used in my world, as they are more suited for flat terrain and other things. I would just go with what Nihal did - make a deer relative, make it suit your purposes for the story. 

Since you're using flat terrain, why not make a deer creature that is horse-like in many ways but has a tufted tail and antlers? And thrives on flat land? 

Also, on the fox breeding program - I saw a documentary on that once. Fascinating, how they developed the traits often found in domestic dogs.


----------



## Jabrosky (Mar 26, 2013)

I like the mammoth idea, though they would move very slowly. Mammoths are cool!


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 27, 2013)

I'm thinking about giving them some kind of deer species as their regular mount, but having shamans and rogues (ronin) ride terror birds to show their specialness. Also I might give mammoths to a rival civilization. Just one question: how would mammoths fare in hilly terrain?


----------



## Saigonnus (Mar 27, 2013)

Mindfire said:


> I'm thinking about giving them some kind of deer species as their regular mount, but having shamans and rogues (ronin) ride terror birds to show their specialness. Also I might give mammoths to a rival civilization. Just one question: how would mammoths fare in hilly terrain?



Probably fairly well if the real world is any judge since the asian elephants live in China, Nepal, India and southeast asia; which has lot of hills and mountains beside the jungles and flatlands. As long as there is fodder, they would go nearly anywhere to get it. The Indians (Mughals I believe) used elephants in battle all throughout India against Alexander the Great, so they must have traversed mountains and hills at some point during the campaign.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Mar 27, 2013)

@Jess... I loved the fox documentary.  It's really interesting how you can breed certain animals for agreeability and within a short time ( looking back, I think it was 16 generations, but still short in the scheme of evolution) you end up with something completely different.  Supposedly, the attitudes and friendliness of wild canines is linked to their dog-like traits.  Which then made them useless for the fur trade.  Who wants to wear a fox fur coat that looks like a dalmation?  haha.  

@ Mindfire, I think a grassland is ideal for any grazing animal.  Deer are woodland creatures, but thrive in the wetlands of Wisconsin and the plains of Colorado and Wyoming.  I was just pointing out that certain animals are not suited to woodlands because of the great amount of specific food they eat.  Horses are specifically not woodland animals and if you had a woodland race, I'd avoid horse-relatives entirely.  You could certainly raise huge herds of deer in a grassland.  But whereas deer can survive a winter woods, horses could not.  They won't eat tree bark to survive the scarce months.


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 27, 2013)

Thanks! I do have a wood-dwelling culture (different continent), but they tend to rely on their superhuman speed and strength rather than mounts, Tarzan-style.  The only forest-dwellers on this continent are the Inazuma of the mountain forests, and they usually get around via flash-stepping (lightning magic based teleportation) and ninja sneakiness.


----------



## ThinkerX (Mar 27, 2013)

Uhhh...being a fantasy world, why not just make up a suitably epic fantasy mount?  Step way outside the box.

Sticking with conventional steeds...this was one of the things that made me realize Feist was going downhill.  He had this impressive race of lizardman warriors...but instead of suitably saurian steeds, he had them ride normal, if overly large, horses.

In my world, there is a elephant sized creature called a 'droath': six legs, two trunks, and a smell that will make you want to puke at forty feet.  Not fast, but one droath can pretty much outpull ten horses.  Docile - except during mating season, then you just go away for a few weeks till thats over with.

If I need another horse equivilent for nomads, I'll just make one up.


----------



## mbartelsm (Mar 28, 2013)

I'll just drop this here:






Why not a rhino? rhinos are strong bulky and very dangerous, specially when charging, they have a natural armor thingy, the are herbivorous which means you don't have to worry about your livestock being killed for food, and as far as domesticability goes, I'd bet my ass they are easier to tame than a lion.
Plus the awesome factor, I'd be more scared of a rhino running at me than a lion.

Now the cons: 
They are slow, sure, they can sprint like crazy, but when it comes to actually travelling long distances they are probably much slower than a horse
They are very aggressive, maybe not as much as a lion, in the sense that eventually you could say that a rhino may be trustworthy, but getting one of them in the first place may be, well, complicated.
I don't know how to word this in english but here it goes: they do not reproduce much, which is part of the reason they are currently endangered.

Of course you can just handwave the cons just because you say so.


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 28, 2013)

Thanks for your input mbartelsm, but I already made a decision. Plus, I'm not sure rhinos would work since they're adapted to a much warmer climate. 

Oh, and that horn is obviously photoshopped.


----------



## mbartelsm (Mar 30, 2013)

It's ok, but I think I've convinced myself to use them

PS: Damn, you noticed


----------



## SeverinR (Apr 1, 2013)

Might want to consider travel cost,
Meat eaters will need to take time to hunt, carrying meat in that quantity would be cumbersome.  If you run out of meat, they might look to the weakest of the humanoids for a quick meal. I'm thinking a carnivoure that could carry a man would need to eat 1/2 a man in meat a day(75-125lbs), minimum.  Meat eaters are burst runners, they have great speed but little stamina to maintain it. They can out run their prey.  Mounts would need pack mentality(fight together to survive together), or else fighting between the mounts would occur.

Plant or omnivoures, they can eat alot of grass and get alittle grain to meet their requirements.  Run out of grain? They will survive on grazing for some time.  Grass eaters are distance runners, they can out distance a preditor. I think they can manuver better too. They would need herd mentality(work together to defend the herd from attackers), so they work together as a herd, rather then several individuals or fight against one another.

Not sure if large flightless birds have pack/herd mentality?


----------



## Mindfire (Apr 1, 2013)

SeverinR said:


> Might want to consider travel cost,
> Meat eaters will need to take time to hunt, carrying meat in that quantity would be cumbersome.  If you run out of meat, they might look to the weakest of the humanoids for a quick meal. I'm thinking a carnivoure that could carry a man would need to eat 1/2 a man in meat a day(75-125lbs), minimum.  Meat eaters are burst runners, they have great speed but little stamina to maintain it. They can out run their prey.  Mounts would need pack mentality(fight together to survive together), or else fighting between the mounts would occur.
> 
> Plant or omnivoures, they can eat alot of grass and get alittle grain to meet their requirements.  Run out of grain? They will survive on grazing for some time.  Grass eaters are distance runners, they can out distance a preditor. I think they can manuver better too. They would need herd mentality(work together to defend the herd from attackers), so they work together as a herd, rather then several individuals or fight against one another.
> ...



That confirms my decision then. Most of the Kudan will use war-deer as mounts. Loners like shamans or rogues (essentially ronin) will use terror-birds.


----------

