What would a world with Dragon Riders Look like?

[ThePoarter]

Say humanity managed to start domesticating dragons in 1 AD and that we could use them for warfare.d

A dragon in this case is the size of a house and can breathe fire. They take about four years before being "battle ready" and another four before they are fully grown. Dragon's are omnivores in thus universe although they require significant portions of meat to function.

It is possible to breed a dragon to travel for twelve hours a day for a day at 64 kph but then they need a day or rest to recover. They have a top speed of 256 kph.

To support even one dragon rider and their steed requires at least 10,000 people with medieval levels of technology.

So bearing this in mind what would such a world look like?

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

Say humanity managed to start domesticating dragons in 1 AD and that we could use them for warfare.d

A dragon in this case is the size of a house and can breathe fire. They take about four years before being "battle ready" and another four before they are fully grown. Dragon's are omnivores in thus universe although they require significant portions of meat to function.

It is possible to breed a dragon to travel for twelve hours a day for a day at 64 kph but then they need a day or rest to recover. They have a top speed of 256 kph.

To support even one dragon rider and their steed requires at least 10,000 people with medieval levels of technology.

So bearing this in mind what would such a world look like?

Click to shrink...

If it takes that many it would never have happened to begin with. If they consume that much, either we'd have wiped them out or been wiped out before we could domesticate them. Even d&d dragons which are larger and more powerful don't have food requirements like that.

 

[ThePoarter]

What would be the location of dragon riders on the social pyramid?

 

[Roadie]

What would be the location of dragon riders on the social pyramid?

Click to shrink...

Well, in the European Middle Ages, I would expect a dragon-rider to be a duke or duke-equivalent, in the same way that stereotypical knights were often baron-equivalent in formal rank and personal power without having the corresponding administrative power. The position would be basically the same as a knight, but bigger: personal loyalty sworn to a king (rather than a duke or count/earl) and acting as a centerpiece of that king's army, with personal subjects who supply secondary troops trained to support the dragon-rider in combat, as well as who supply the resources needed to keep the dragon in good health.

I would expect that most kings would encourage their dragon-riders to have only minimal trained troops (just enough to secure their own lands) and focus primarily on the economic side of things, both to ease the king's burden of supporting the tremendous cost of the beasts, and to discourage dragon-rider rebellions (hard to do that well if all the combined-arms support is supplied by the king himself rather than being under the control of the rider).

One big piece of societal impact here is that small independent fiefs with no dragon-riders at all would be in a much harder position, since dragons are much, much harder to fight without dragons than horse-riding knights are to fight without knights. You might see much "blobbier" European maps as a result, with, for example, the billion-and-one independent princes of the Holy Roman Empire never actually becoming so independent.

 

[Vindictus]

Tactically, a dragon would take the role of an aircraft, possibly a bomber of some kind, I think?

Which would certainly change military doctrine significantly early on.

You would see more bunker-like structures, for example, rather than castles with heavy walls and basically open interiors.

 

[Sword of Mars]

Fortifications would be decentralized and likely mound-like.

Also, that speed is absolutely crazy for Medieval civilizations. The existence of dragons completely ruins every boarder we know of today, and every trade route that can be reasonably thought of.

Shipping is almost impossible, with fire breathing monsters able to rip your fleet apart in seconds, unless gunpowder is revolutionized way earlier.

China likely dominates the land due to how fucking FAST dragons can go, the absurd amount they could potentially field over everyone else, depending on whether or not China ever unities and continues a strong dynasty like the Han.

 

[ThePoarter]

Fortifications would be decentralized and likely mound-like.

Also, that speed is absolutely crazy for Medieval civilizations. The existence of dragons completely ruins every boarder we know of today, and every trade route that can be reasonably thought of.

Shipping is almost impossible, with fire breathing monsters able to rip your fleet apart in seconds, unless gunpowder is revolutionized way earlier.

China likely dominates the land due to how fucking FAST dragons can go, the absurd amount they could potentially field over everyone else, depending on whether or not China ever unities and continues a strong dynasty like the Han.

Click to shrink...

Unless said riders are in charge of guarding trade and maritime routes. Dragons in this case can reach distances four times greater than horses in the same period of time. Not to mention that they breath a 1000 degrees Celsius flame 25 meters away.

 

[ThePoarter]

No one? I mean I would really want to consider how Dragons would change the world especially if they choose their riders in a proto civil service sort of way.
Also what would the marriage rites be like for a dragon rider and how would said brides feel when marrying one? ( especially if they're girls from a lower class family).

 

[Axiomatic]

If 10000 people need to work to produce food to feed a single dragon, I wonder how many dragons could even survive in the wild. A single dragon would need a hunting territory the size of Brazil.

I wonder if Kings like to fuck each other over by giving the gift of an albino dragon hatchling, a gift of incredible prestige that invariably bankrupts the recipient.

 

[Pidl]

There's a fic which explores the ramifications of 'How to train your dragon':

https://www.fanfiction.net/s/12639117/1/A-Thing-Of-Vikings

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

If 10000 people need to work to produce food to feed a single dragon, I wonder how many dragons could even survive in the wild. A single dragon would need a hunting territory the size of Brazil.

I wonder if Kings like to fuck each other over by giving the gift of an albino dragon hatchling, a gift of incredible prestige that invariably bankrupts the recipient.

Click to shrink...

I brought that up earlier. The OP's numbers just don't work.

 

[ThePoarter]

If 10000 people need to work to produce food to feed a single dragon, I wonder how many dragons could even survive in the wild. A single dragon would need a hunting territory the size of Brazil.

I wonder if Kings like to fuck each other over by giving the gift of an albino dragon hatchling, a gift of incredible prestige that invariably bankrupts the recipient.

Click to shrink...

I used the medieval calculator for this. nothing else. It doesncost 10,000 people to support it. Just the necessary amount OT people for one to exist.

 

[Entropy Judge]

I used the medieval calculator for this. nothing else. It doesncost 10,000 people to support it. Just the necessary amount OT people for one to exist.

Click to shrink...

What 'medieval calculator'? And that aside, the issue is that if you need 'ten thousand' medieval-era people to support one dragon, how are you supporting dragons before that time period? How are you supporting dragons in the wild?

Interesting as the scenario can be, the numbers make me wonder if humanity is going to be anywhere near its historical levels at 1 AD. I mean, depending on dragon distribution, there may not be a China, because wild dragons are sitting in the actual livable area. Rome never developed because a wild dragon decided to chow down on half the city in 250 BC. I mean, you're talking about house-sized masses of fire-breathing, armor-plated, very hungry lizard, so short of a very lucky siege weapon shot I don't think anything ancient humanity has is going to stop them. There are just so many times and places that a single dragon going on a feeding frenzy would completely change history that you can't just fiat that 'they exist' and that they're tamed/domesticated at a given point. And that's not even going into the side-effects of dragons existing - how they would radically alter their environments and the local wildlife. All that is going to significantly alter the way humanity develops, and could well break certain parts of humanity, because a dragon early enough, disrupting enough of the local food supply, can pretty much end a proto-civilization even if it doesn't attack humans directly.


Of course, that doesn't mean that the abstract of dragons existing can't be discussed. For example, steelmaking - you state that dragons can breathe flames of ~1000°C, which should be enough to make steel ... depending, of course, on how much fire dragons can breathe (and how they do it), whether it's actually efficient compared to creating and supplying a hot-enough bloomer/blast furnace, and, you know, feeding and housing the dragon.

The nature and abundance of fortifications is going to change drastically as well - a lot of castles and fortresses used significant amounts of wood, and it's hard to defend against an aerial attack, so fortresses are either going to have their own dragons 'assigned' to them, be created by people not expecting a dragon attack, or be in such a location that it needs to be defended against things other than dragons regardless of the danger.

Of course, strong and powerful as they are, dragons are (presumably) not invincible, and the loss - or possibly worse, crippling - of one would be a major blow to a given state's balance of power. You would probably get confederations, where one or two members maintain dragons as part of their defensive arrangements while others have more traditional troops ... likely including the dragon-owners' main guards, so any attempt at consolidating the power via sudden case of dragon doesn't get very far.


A lot more information is also needed on the dragons themselves in order to actually talk about them. 'House-sized' doesn't exactly tell us anything particularly useful, since a 'house' can be a 10'x10'x10' single-room residence or something like the Biltmore Estate. Their rate of growth is fairly insane, regardless of which extreme they're closer to - elephants take 15-20 years to reach their full growth, and the African bush elephant is "only" 3-4 meters tall and 6-10 metric tons. So if the 'ten thousand people to feed' is just to maintain a dragon, you're probably talking about some extreme measures being required to fuel their ridiculous early-year growth spurts. How old dragons get is another important piece of information to determining how much of an effect on society they can have, as is general intelligence and reproductive rate - if a dragon becomes 'battle-ready' at 4, but only lives for 20-25 years and is only sexually mature after 15, that's going to have a much different societal impact than a dragon that lives for centuries and pops out an egg every decade.

And probably a lot more information that I'm blanking on at the moment, because adding in a whole new species (or several, considering that geographic separation alone is going to create differences, never mind some dragons deciding to become fish-eaters and/or amphibious or aquatic ....) is kind of a big deal.

 

[ThePoarter]

What 'medieval calculator'? And that aside, the issue is that if you need 'ten thousand' medieval-era people to support one dragon, how are you supporting dragons before that time period? How are you supporting dragons in the wild?

Interesting as the scenario can be, the numbers make me wonder if humanity is going to be anywhere near its historical levels at 1 AD. I mean, depending on dragon distribution, there may not be a China, because wild dragons are sitting in the actual livable area. Rome never developed because a wild dragon decided to chow down on half the city in 250 BC. I mean, you're talking about house-sized masses of fire-breathing, armor-plated, very hungry lizard, so short of a very lucky siege weapon shot I don't think anything ancient humanity has is going to stop them. There are just so many times and places that a single dragon going on a feeding frenzy would completely change history that you can't just fiat that 'they exist' and that they're tamed/domesticated at a given point. And that's not even going into the side-effects of dragons existing - how they would radically alter their environments and the local wildlife. All that is going to significantly alter the way humanity develops, and could well break certain parts of humanity, because a dragon early enough, disrupting enough of the local food supply, can pretty much end a proto-civilization even if it doesn't attack humans directly.


Of course, that doesn't mean that the abstract of dragons existing can't be discussed. For example, steelmaking - you state that dragons can breathe flames of ~1000°C, which should be enough to make steel ... depending, of course, on how much fire dragons can breathe (and how they do it), whether it's actually efficient compared to creating and supplying a hot-enough bloomer/blast furnace, and, you know, feeding and housing the dragon.

The nature and abundance of fortifications is going to change drastically as well - a lot of castles and fortresses used significant amounts of wood, and it's hard to defend against an aerial attack, so fortresses are either going to have their own dragons 'assigned' to them, be created by people not expecting a dragon attack, or be in such a location that it needs to be defended against things other than dragons regardless of the danger.

Of course, strong and powerful as they are, dragons are (presumably) not invincible, and the loss - or possibly worse, crippling - of one would be a major blow to a given state's balance of power. You would probably get confederations, where one or two members maintain dragons as part of their defensive arrangements while others have more traditional troops ... likely including the dragon-owners' main guards, so any attempt at consolidating the power via sudden case of dragon doesn't get very far.


A lot more information is also needed on the dragons themselves in order to actually talk about them. 'House-sized' doesn't exactly tell us anything particularly useful, since a 'house' can be a 10'x10'x10' single-room residence or something like the Biltmore Estate. Their rate of growth is fairly insane, regardless of which extreme they're closer to - elephants take 15-20 years to reach their full growth, and the African bush elephant is "only" 3-4 meters tall and 6-10 metric tons. So if the 'ten thousand people to feed' is just to maintain a dragon, you're probably talking about some extreme measures being required to fuel their ridiculous early-year growth spurts. How old dragons get is another important piece of information to determining how much of an effect on society they can have, as is general intelligence and reproductive rate - if a dragon becomes 'battle-ready' at 4, but only lives for 20-25 years and is only sexually mature after 15, that's going to have a much different societal impact than a dragon that lives for centuries and pops out an egg every decade.

And probably a lot more information that I'm blanking on at the moment, because adding in a whole new species (or several, considering that geographic separation alone is going to create differences, never mind some dragons deciding to become fish-eaters and/or amphibious or aquatic ....) is kind of a big deal.

Click to shrink...

Okay for your benefit here are the size of Dragons:



Their life cycle is similar to this:

1. Sexually mature at around four to six years of age
2. Can live for 80-100 years although 120 years of age isn't unheard of. Most dragons die before their 30th birthday though because of the extremely violent nature of their lifestyles.
3. They are able to reproduce after they reach maturity until their deaths although eggs produced by older dragons tend to be of lower quality.
4. Female Dragons can either be twice as large or small as their male counterparts depending on the breed
5. Egg Clutch sizes generally range from six to twelve eggs produced at a given time although eight is the median amount of eggs.
6. Dragons only lay their eggs once a year and do not give birth to new young until their last clutch are either all dead or somewhat mature at the age of "four".
7. Dragons do not mate for life but they do have a strong preference for earlier viable partners
8. After leaving their eggs, after one year, most dragons weight about 10-20 kilograms but they soon reach half their adult size at around four years of age (i.e. 2 tons and old enough to ride).

I also used this as a reference: The Domesday Book - Medieval Demographics Made Easy Where it says it takes the presence of 1500 people to justify the presence of a blacksmith in a city and increased it to 10,000 for a rider. It doesn't take 10,000 people to support a dragon rider unilaterally but it does take at least 10,000 people to justify ones presence.

 

[ThePoarter]

What about religion in this world? Assuming that we have our current world religions how would they have to change when dealing with dragons?for that

Matter what other religions would probably spring up. Assume that dragon's are as smart as Dolphins in this world.

 

[Entropy Judge]

It doesn't take 10,000 people to support a dragon rider unilaterally but it does take at least 10,000 people to justify ones presence.

Click to shrink...

Alright, that's a significant and useful data point in terms of society - people aren't going to bother with a dragon 'on station' unless there are at least ten thousand people in the area, or unless the location is significant enough for other reasons (military, trade, or some resource). For reference's sake, first century AD Paris, recently established as a military base, had a population of 6-8000; actual cities would have had much more, going up to Rome with its 800k-1 million people. What this means is that pretty much any location of even moderate importance is almost certainly going to have at least one dragon present, if for no other reason than to establish that, yes, they are that important.

Given the approximate size of adult dragons, they are probably not actually nigh-unstoppable physical powerhouses; in fact, I rather suspect that they're actually relatively fragile (of course, I also suspect that the image isn't perfect, because I'm not sure that a dragon with that wingspan would be physically capable of flight). So their combat utility is less 'flying juggernaut' and more 'heavily-armed light cavalry and raiders'.


Now, the first thing that really comes out in my mind as a major turning point is that Viking raids are probably not going to be serious events in this world. You simply would not be able to take enough dragons along with you across the sea to your target to outweigh defending dragons. Invasions could get away with it, but raiders would be much less significant. (This also assumes that the Scandinavian climate supports dragons, and that dragons haven't prevented Scandinavian cultures from advancing.) Of secondary import is Constantinople's possible loss of local seafaring hegemony - flying, firebreathing dragons are a significant step up from Greek fire, and the Mediterranean, particularly around Constantinople itself, is enclosed enough that you don't really lack for resting areas.


As far as how society is changed ... assumption 1 is that dragons cooperating with humans is not an unforeseen event, and that what happens in approximately 1 AD is that some entity has managed to unleash an actual sizable army of loyal(ish) dragons. This state either sets up its territory and puts up a bunch of 'Keep Out' and 'Beware of Dragon' signs, or it goes on a conquering spree until it either decides to stop or runs out of expansion capability. The latter option would spread the secrets of 'dragon domestication'* over a wider area more quickly, but in any case, it would probably be no more than a few decades before it's relatively common knowledge, and depending on how it's accomplished, you could see dragon-backed rebellions and insurgencies as 'heroes' acquire their own companions and go freedom-fighting. Depending on where and when, exactly, this takes place opens up a great big can of timeline-splits - Ancient Rome, the Parthian Empire, China, Africa, the Sarmatians. Different cultures in these groups are going to treat domesticated dragons differently and are going to have them in quite different numbers; I would expect the Romans to actually have the fewest relative to their size and population, because wild dragons are not good things for a conquering empire to have to deal with, and the very fact that they've been conquering for a while means it's quite likely they had to deal with wild or tamed dragons previously, so apart from a few tamed dragons and hidden wild ones, it would be relatively clear of large, dangerous fauna.

So if, for example, the Sarmatians developed dragon-taming to a high art and smashed the Romans (or the Parthians) with an army of dragons, that would be a huge deal and a major departure from our own historic record, with attendant ripple effects.


Religion is ... :shrug: Maybe less 'demonization' of dragons in, eg, Christianity ... or maybe more? Depends on how dragons actually act and how people view them. You would probably need a much better grasp of historical religions and how they viewed the world than I do to say for certain, but I'm pretty sure that a fair few of them you really wouldn't see any major change.


As far as intelligence goes, I begin to suspect that 'domestication' isn't a particularly good word for what's going on. I mean, it's definitely a well-established trope that egg-laying dragons can be domesticated, but a lot of animals aren't domesticated - elephants, for example, haven't been; neither has the Cape buffalo (dolphins haven't either AFAIK). But with their physical abilities added to pretty high intelligence, domestication probably isn't really a good term, and pinning down exactly what is going on can change a lot of how things develop. Some form of partnership seems more likely, which means that you wouldn't necessarily see an army of dragon-riders in service to a state, but you probably would see smaller regions and states with dragons in mutually-beneficial defensive arrangements, where the dragons help protect against invaders in return for safe locations to rest, help with injuries, (more) guaranteed food, and so on.

 

[ThePoarter]

A really great analysis and I will answer it bit by bit now because you've taken the time out to explain it as well.

Alright, that's a significant and useful data point in terms of society - people aren't going to bother with a dragon 'on station' unless there are at least ten thousand people in the area, or unless the location is significant enough for other reasons (military, trade, or some resource). For reference's sake, first century AD Paris, recently established as a military base, had a population of 6-8000; actual cities would have had much more, going up to Rome with its 800k-1 million people. What this means is that pretty much any location of even moderate importance is almost certainly going to have at least one dragon present, if for no other reason than to establish that, yes, they are that important.

Click to shrink...

So basically if a Duke or King level leader wants to show their wealth they want to show that they have a certain number of Dragon Riders in their presence. I can also see the point of any outpost which is moderately important justifying the presence of a Rider and their dragon.

Given the approximate size of adult dragons, they are probably not actually nigh-unstoppable physical powerhouses; in fact, I rather suspect that they're actually relatively fragile (of course, I also suspect that the image isn't perfect, because I'm not sure that a dragon with that wingspan would be physically capable of flight). So their combat utility is less 'flying juggernaut' and more 'heavily-armed light cavalry and raiders'.

Click to shrink...

I'd have thought that something of that size would have been considered heavy cavalry or something of it's own weight class. What also makes you believe that the dragons would be relatively fragile. For reference I used Flemeth from Dragon Age as a reference because I believed her size would be a balance between realistic and majestic.

Now, the first thing that really comes out in my mind as a major turning point is that Viking raids are probably not going to be serious events in this world. You simply would not be able to take enough dragons along with you across the sea to your target to outweigh defending dragons. Invasions could get away with it, but raiders would be much less significant. (This also assumes that the Scandinavian climate supports dragons, and that dragons haven't prevented Scandinavian cultures from advancing.) Of secondary import is Constantinople's possible loss of local seafaring hegemony - flying, firebreathing dragons are a significant step up from Greek fire, and the Mediterranean, particularly around Constantinople itself, is enclosed enough that you don't really lack for resting areas.

Click to shrink...

At this moment I'm considering that dragons be warm-blooded reptiles which live in cold tundra or alpine climates. Thus they tend to be native to the following regions for now:





Although I would be interested in considering how much things change if Dragons were native to Mountain regions (1500+ meters ) instead. I'd also believe that Invasions would have Dragon Riders as a Herald or vanguard to an invasion. Dragons Riders would probably be Ambassadors as well given their maximum range.

As far as how society is changed ... assumption 1 is that dragons cooperating with humans is not an unforeseen event, and that what happens in approximately 1 AD is that some entity has managed to unleash an actual sizable army of loyal(ish) dragons. This state either sets up its territory and puts up a bunch of 'Keep Out' and 'Beware of Dragon' signs, or it goes on a conquering spree until it either decides to stop or runs out of expansion capability. The latter option would spread the secrets of 'dragon domestication'* over a wider area more quickly, but in any case, it would probably be no more than a few decades before it's relatively common knowledge, and depending on how it's accomplished, you could see dragon-backed rebellions and insurgencies as 'heroes' acquire their own companions and go freedom-fighting. Depending on where and when, exactly, this takes place opens up a great big can of timeline-splits - Ancient Rome, the Parthian Empire, China, Africa, the Sarmatians. Different cultures in these groups are going to treat domesticated dragons differently and are going to have them in quite different numbers; I would expect the Romans to actually have the fewest relative to their size and population, because wild dragons are not good things for a conquering empire to have to deal with, and the very fact that they've been conquering for a while means it's quite likely they had to deal with wild or tamed dragons previously, so apart from a few tamed dragons and hidden wild ones, it would be relatively clear of large, dangerous fauna.

Click to shrink...

Say it takes at least sixty years before the basics of Dragon Riding is fully understood. I said that 1 AD is when dragon riding is the diverging point but building a sizeable legion of riders would take a lot of time. Also yes they would go conquering although I don't know what else would occur to the greater world. Would the Hand Dynasty be overthrown by Dragon Riders? What about about the Roman Empire? There are two cases of which empires would fall or face dragon Riders.

1. Dragons Originate from Tundra and Sub-Arctic Regions: The Sarmatians, the Roman Empire and the Xiongu are the most likely to face them first.
2. Dragons Originate from Mountain Regions: Indo-Greek Kingdoms, Han Dynasty, Kushan and the rest of the Indian Subcontinent face them first.

Either really changes the way history goes. What would be the effects of either scenario?

So if, for example, the Sarmatians developed dragon-taming to a high art and smashed the Romans (or the Parthians) with an army of dragons, that would be a huge deal and a major departure from our own historic record, with attendant ripple effects.

Click to shrink...

Please Elaborate what happens then.

Religion is ... :shrug: Maybe less 'demonization' of dragons in, eg, Christianity ... or maybe more? Depends on how dragons actually act and how people view them. You would probably need a much better grasp of historical religions and how they viewed the world than I do to say for certain, but I'm pretty sure that a fair few of them you really wouldn't see any major change.

Click to shrink...

Dragons are primarily territorial yet social animals in this case. They tend to live in solitary, pairs or groups of the same gender. When breeding through both parents, and possibly their pack mates, help raise their collective young. They are very aggressive though with Dragon on Dragon killings being almost certain. They prefer any kind of prey so long as it is of sufficient size but they do need to eat at least 1% of their body weight every day to stay alive.

As far as intelligence goes, I begin to suspect that 'domestication' isn't a particularly good word for what's going on. I mean, it's definitely a well-established trope that egg-laying dragons can be domesticated, but a lot of animals aren't domesticated - elephants, for example, haven't been; neither has the Cape buffalo (dolphins haven't either AFAIK). But with their physical abilities added to pretty high intelligence, domestication probably isn't really a good term, and pinning down exactly what is going on can change a lot of how things develop. Some form of partnership seems more likely, which means that you wouldn't necessarily see an army of dragon-riders in service to a state, but you probably would see smaller regions and states with dragons in mutually-beneficial defensive arrangements, where the dragons help protect against invaders in return for safe locations to rest, help with injuries, (more) guaranteed food, and so on.

Click to shrink...

I took this https://www.quora.com/What-is-a-good-list-of-animals-ordered-by-intelligence and went with it. In this regards they past both the mirror and cylinder tests along with occasional tool use. Thus they can recognize themselves in the mirror and learn.

 

[Entropy Judge]

I'd have thought that something of that size would have been considered heavy cavalry or something of it's own weight class. What also makes you believe that the dragons would be relatively fragile. For reference I used Flemeth from Dragon Age as a reference because I believed her size would be a balance between realistic and majestic.

Click to shrink...

I'll try to get to your other questions in the next few days, but I can actually answer this fairly quickly.

For the first part, 'light' and 'heavy' don't refer to weight class, but to role, and in my view, dragons would work better as raiders and skirmishers rather than line units because that makes the most of their strengths (mobility and highly destructive attacks) while minimizing their weaknesses. In particular, dragon wings are a huge vulnerability, and using them in any of the traditional heavy cavalry roles puts them at a rather large risk of being damaged, and permanent wing damage is basically going to cripple the dragon for life. Also, depending on dragon senses, using them as sentries and scouts could potentially be extremely valuable - they're certainly large, but if they can be taught/trained to maintain stillness, then they should be able to be camouflaged quite well, especially if the terrain is suitable. (And if they can be partially buried without issue, they would make extremely effective ambush troops.)


For their fragility, I'm assuming they're biological and not magical. Sure, they're likely to have scales that give them some protection, but they just aren't bulky enough to have truly thick scales, and when you take into account the fact that they're flying on pure muscle power they have to be pretty light. So with that in mind, you're probably looking at light and fragile bones, fairly thin skin, and bodies that might be somewhat sturdy, but can't sustain much damage before becoming a problem. And then you add in the fact that they're fire-breathers, and however they do that, it's going to take up valuable internal space that could have been used for muscles or other organs .... As far as I understand it, dragons are not biologically impossible, but if you have flying, svelte, fire-breathing dragons then you are going to be looking at huge tradeoffs in other areas, and fragility and brute force are the ones most likely to go (especially since fire-breathers wouldn't really have a need to claw-to-hoof with prey species).

 

[ThePoarter]

I'll try to get to your other questions in the next few days, but I can actually answer this fairly quickly.

For the first part, 'light' and 'heavy' don't refer to weight class, but to role, and in my view, dragons would work better as raiders and skirmishers rather than line units because that makes the most of their strengths (mobility and highly destructive attacks) while minimizing their weaknesses. In particular, dragon wings are a huge vulnerability, and using them in any of the traditional heavy cavalry roles puts them at a rather large risk of being damaged, and permanent wing damage is basically going to cripple the dragon for life. Also, depending on dragon senses, using them as sentries and scouts could potentially be extremely valuable - they're certainly large, but if they can be taught/trained to maintain stillness, then they should be able to be camouflaged quite well, especially if the terrain is suitable. (And if they can be partially buried without issue, they would make extremely effective ambush troops.)


For their fragility, I'm assuming they're biological and not magical. Sure, they're likely to have scales that give them some protection, but they just aren't bulky enough to have truly thick scales, and when you take into account the fact that they're flying on pure muscle power they have to be pretty light. So with that in mind, you're probably looking at light and fragile bones, fairly thin skin, and bodies that might be somewhat sturdy, but can't sustain much damage before becoming a problem. And then you add in the fact that they're fire-breathers, and however they do that, it's going to take up valuable internal space that could have been used for muscles or other organs .... As far as I understand it, dragons are not biologically impossible, but if you have flying, svelte, fire-breathing dragons then you are going to be looking at huge tradeoffs in other areas, and fragility and brute force are the ones most likely to go (especially since fire-breathers wouldn't really have a need to claw-to-hoof with prey species).

Click to shrink...

That's really informative. I never really thought there would be so many trade offs to this design and yes dragons are biological in this world.

I mean they're very large apex predators easily weight at least 6 tons in this world but I am surprised by how easy they would die or come down. Looking forward to your answers soon.

 

[Broken25]

If 10000 people need to work to produce food to feed a single dragon, I wonder how many dragons could even survive in the wild. A single dragon would need a hunting territory the size of Brazil.

Click to shrink...

OP didn't say you need 10k people to feed a dragon, tho. He said you need 10k people to support a dragon rider. That's rather different.

For comparison, a norman knight fee, that is, a manor capable of supporting a single knight (And his retinue), would need around 300 people. So, supporting a dragon rider would have a similar cost to supporting 30-40 knights.

 

[ThePoarter]

OP didn't say you need 10k people to feed a dragon, tho. He said you need 10k people to support a dragon rider. That's rather different.

For comparison, a norman knight fee, that is, a manon capable of supporting a single knight (And his retinue), would need around 300 people. So, supporting a dragon rider would have a similar cost to supporting 30-40 knights.

Click to shrink...

Thank you. Very people seemed to have understood my post in that regards. I can also see dragon riders being worth ten or twenty knights or melee fighters in this world although how much else their net values are are something I am also unsue of.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

Thank you. Very people seemed to have understood my post in that regards. I can also see dragon riders being worth ten or twenty knights or melee fighters in this world although how much else their net values are are something I am also unsue of.

Click to shrink...

That's approx 156 square miles of good arable land per dragon if you are basing it off the Knight's Fees that are used for the 300 peasants calculation.

 

[Squishy]

I also used this as a reference: The Domesday Book - Medieval Demographics Made Easy Where it says it takes the presence of 1500 people to justify the presence of a blacksmith in a city and increased it to 10,000 for a rider. It doesn't take 10,000 people to support a dragon rider unilaterally but it does take at least 10,000 people to justify ones presence.

Click to shrink...

By the way, many of the numbers in that calculator - and in the essay it's based on - are based on a misreading of the source text that results in them being off by up to two orders of magnitude, in some places.

 

[ThePoarter]

That's approx 156 square miles of good arable land per dragon if you are basing it off the Knight's Fees that are used for the 300 peasants calculation.

Click to shrink...

Yeah but these are multiple ton carnivorous beasts. I'm certain they'd have quite a lot of requirements to support them.

By the way, many of the numbers in that calculator - and in the essay it's based on - are based on a misreading of the source text that results in them being off by up to two orders of magnitude, in some places.

Click to shrink...

Hen what would be a better number and why?

 

[ThePoarter]

Anyone?