Explain this

[Grayson01]

Okay a "Riding Dog" Has More Str, Natural Armor then a Wolf!!!! HOW!? What were they thinking?

[CRtwenty]

Riding Dogs are bred for combat, Wolves are not.

[Der_DWSage]

They were thinking 'They better have a pretty good strength to carry two armored halflings and all their gear, just in case someone needs to double up.'

They also weren't considering that someone might, in fact, use them for combat...unless they were specifically trained for such, in which case it's actually fairly reasonable that they be slightly better than wolves. After all, they spent years training them, whereas Wolves just have natural viciousness going for them.

[CaladanMoonblad]

Because DnD wanted a halfling sized mount other than pony?

The wolf stats can also be upgraded to Large and 6HD... a Riding Dog, cannot. It's already maxed out.

[Xefas]

If you take a Wolf, and slap on the Warbeast template, to represent that it was specifically bred, raised, and trained with the intent to make it an optimal combat companion (much like the riding dog), then you'll find it eclipses them in power, much like the gulf between a standard dog and a riding dog.

[BowStreetRunner]

IRL there have been various breeds of dogs throughout history that could tear a wolf to pieces. Natural selection will certainly produce tough wolves, but they also need to be fast, stealthy, good at tracking food, wily enough to avoid predators and natural hazards, etc. Dog breeders can easily ignore any traits that aren't relevant to what they are looking for and produce breeds that are stronger with thicker and tougher hides to be used as mounts.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Hybrid vigour?

[TheStranger]

IRL there have been various breeds of dogs throughout history that could tear a wolf to pieces. Natural selection will certainly produce tough wolves, but they also need to be fast, stealthy, good at tracking food, wily enough to avoid predators and natural hazards, etc. Dog breeders can easily ignore any traits that aren't relevant to what they are looking for and produce breeds that are stronger with thicker and tougher hides to be used as mounts.

This is the answer. Wolves are tough, but riding dogs have been bred for hundreds of generations specifically to be stronger and tougher than nature could make them.

[Devils_Advocate]

So, riding dog breeders are skilled min/maxers who put fight in your dog so you can fight while you ride.

Sounds legit.

[zlefin]

This is the answer. Wolves are tough, but riding dogs have been bred for hundreds of generations specifically to be stronger and tougher than nature could make them.

no, that's a terrible understanding of evolution.
Nature could breed for strength and toughness, but that wouldn't be good for surviving in the wild. A loss of speed, or hunting/tracking ability could make it worse at finding food. Or it might just need to eat so much on a regular basis that it would starve in the wild.
Wolves are bred for wilderness survival, the riding dogs are not, they're bred to fight, and mostly just to fight, in an environment where they don't need stealth and their food supplies will be taken care of.

[ngilop]

ive alwasy seen it was dogs are like your normal pitbulls and shetlands and such, whilst ridings dogs are aking to mastiffs ( of the medieval variety).

compared to wolves which are just probably eastern wolves, so your leaving out tundra wovles, the Kenai Peninsula wolf (big MFers) and toehr subspecis of wolf

[Tvtyrant]

Also a fancy riding dog eats more regularly than a wolf does, so it will grow larger based on protein intake. A wealthy man can afford to feed his dogs a steak a day, which can really increase the size of an animal (humans too.) Wolves frequently undergo starvation diets between good times, which can cut a pups nutrition.

[Keld Denar]

So, riding dog breeders are skilled min/maxers who put fight in your dog so you can fight while you ride.

Sounds legit.

Yo dog, we heard you liked dogs, so we put more fight in your dogs so you can fight with your dogs?

[Fouredged Sword]

Yo Dog, we hear you like dogs, so we psi reformed your wild cohort riding dog to take wild cohort as it's third level feat.

So now your dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog's dog has a dog, so you can ride while mauling half the country side with your small army.

[Scow2]

I'd figure a Riding Dog would be superior in combat ability than even a normal Collie, which is capable of thrashing an entire pack of wolves. The strength of the wolves isn't in their attributes (Almost all human-raised dogs can beat them), but in their numbers. And even then, the human-raised dog usually comes out on top.

[Fouredged Sword]

Wolves are faster, lighter animals. It is why they have 10ft greater movement speed.

Riding dogs are heavier, stronger animals. Thus the greater natural armor and strength.

Simple as that.

[TheStranger]

a normal Collie, which is capable of thrashing an entire pack of wolves.

Citation needed. I suppose it's possible for a collie to run one or two wolves away from a herd, but if you give me Lassie vs. 4-5 wolves, my money's on the wolves. Even with just a single wolf, I'm inclined to bet against the collie. But I would love to be proven wrong on this if you have a source.

Anyway, I figure a riding dog is some sort of beast on the scale of a Tibetan mastiff. I don't doubt for a minute that one of those things could take on a wolf.

The bigger problem with riding dogs is that dogs just aren't built to carry weight. Maybe you could breed around that given enough time, but I suspect it's mostly a Rule of Cool thing.

[BowStreetRunner]

Anyway, I figure a riding dog is some sort of beast on the scale of a Tibetan mastiff.

For some reason, I always remember my old neighbor's Saint Bernard running around with the guy's grandson on its back.

[Asteron]

I'd figure a Riding Dog would be superior in combat ability than even a normal Collie, which is capable of thrashing an entire pack of wolves. The strength of the wolves isn't in their attributes (Almost all human-raised dogs can beat them), but in their numbers. And even then, the human-raised dog usually comes out on top.

What Collie are you talking about? They are all significanly smaller than the average wolf. Collies are medium dogs.

What they are talking about are the larger breeds like the Caucasian Shepherd (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_Shepherd_Dog) or the Rottweiler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rottweiler). Those and several others are better sutied for this discussion.

[hamishspence]

If you go by novels, like Jack London's Call of the Wild and White Fang, huskies (wolf-sized or slightly larger) got killed and eaten by wolves, under the right circumstances.

[Seharvepernfan]

Okay a "Riding Dog" Has More Str, Natural Armor then a Wolf!!!! HOW!? What were they thinking?

That's why I lowered it to +2 in my games. It's ridiculous. Lizardfolk have +5 - in no way does any dog come close to them.

[DeusMortuusEst]

In a real fight between a collie and a wolf, my money's on the wolf. However, wolves will rarely attack a dog just to get to a sheep, unless the wolf is desperate, or has experience with killing dogs.

It's not worth is for the wolf to risk injury in a fight when there might be easier food available.

[hamishspence]

That's why I lowered it to +2 in my games. It's ridiculous. Lizardfolk have +5 - in no way does any dog come close to them.

Maybe compare it to other animals, rather than monsters?

Monitor Lizard: +3
Lion: +3
Light Horse: +3
Light Warhorse: +4
Crocodile: +4
Bison: +4
Brown Bear: +5
Boar: +6

Crocodile is the only thing in its size class with comparable armour.

[TheStranger]

In a real fight between a collie and a wolf, my money's on the wolf. However, wolves will rarely attack a dog just to get to a sheep, unless the wolf is desperate, or has experience with killing dogs.

It's not worth is for the wolf to risk injury in a fight when there might be easier food available.

That's how I see it. Also, I suspect that wolves are aware that messing with dogs tends to bring people to the scene. I don't doubt that a collie could run a wolf away from a flock of sheep in most cases, but in a fight to the death, I want the wolf.

[Fouredged Sword]

A wild animal tends to call off the hunt if things don't go it's way. It hunts before it really needs to eat, so it can afford to be picky in it's targets. Even something as little as an alarm bark or a yelling child with a club will dissuade most predators. They haven't invested anything much in the hunt at that point, and they can afford to seek prey that doesn't run the risk of injury.

Remember, the wolf isn't looking to kill the dog or child, so any injury gained fighting it is pure loss. Better to find a sheep that strayed or a wild prey animal with no guardian. The wolf can kill the guardian and still be too weak to survive even after killing a sheep or two.

[BowStreetRunner]

There are always wolfhounds (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfhound) who were bred to bring down wolves.

[Eldan]

Maybe compare it to other animals, rather than monsters?

Monitor Lizard: +3
Lion: +3
Light Horse: +3
Light Warhorse: +4
Crocodile: +4
Bison: +4
Brown Bear: +5
Boar: +6

Crocodile is the only thing in its size class with comparable armour.

Huh. THat's just silly. In what way is a boar more armoured than a crocodile?

[nedz]

Riding Dogs are bred for combat, Wolves are not.

Surely Riding Dogs are bred for Riding ? :smallconfused:

[BowStreetRunner]

Surely Riding Dogs are bred for Riding ? :smallconfused:

No, no, no! You are thinking of War Dogs. They are bred for riding, just like warhorses! Next you will tell me that you park on a parkway and drive on a driveway. Sheesh!

[RFLS]

Huh. THat's just silly. In what way is a boar more armoured than a crocodile?

It's not so much armor as the fact that boars are mean. Like, shoot them, hit a vital organ, and they'll keep coming at you levels of mean. So...poorly represented, but has roughly the same mechanical result.

[Devils_Advocate]

no, that's a terrible understanding of evolution.
Nature could breed for strength and toughness, but that wouldn't be good for surviving in the wild. A loss of speed, or hunting/tracking ability could make it worse at finding food. Or it might just need to eat so much on a regular basis that it would starve in the wild.
Wolves are bred for wilderness survival, the riding dogs are not, they're bred to fight, and mostly just to fight, in an environment where they don't need stealth and their food supplies will be taken care of.
It really depends on what one means by "nature". If it's the wilderness, then nature doesn't/couldn't breed wolves for strength and toughness to the extent that humans breed riding dogs for those things, precisely because that's not what's best for surviving in the wild.

If "nature" just refers to however things are, on the other hand, then nature does breed canines for everything that humans breed them for, as humans are part of nature.


Surely Riding Dogs are bred for Riding ? :smallconfused:
They're bred for riding and combat. There are separate combat (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/ponyWar.htm) and non-combat (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/pony.htm) breeds of pony, but there is no non-combat breed of riding dog. They're not always trained for war, but it's what they were produced for.

Prior to the availability of battle mounts of that size, the options for creating them were breeding mounts of that size and to be more combative and breeding fighting animals of that size to be ridden. And different people took each of those approaches, thereby producing war ponies from ordinary ponies and riding dogs from war dogs.

There's no reason to breed dogs to be non-combat mounts, outside of a region that lacks animals more suited to that role.

[Wings of Peace]

The biggest advantage to the wolf over the riding dog has never been his base stats, it's that trip ability.

[zlefin]

you lose the argument devil's advocate, cuz you didn't read my words, and I already specifically SAID the point you raise. There's a HUGE difference between doesn't and couldn't, respect it, don't use them as if they were interchangeable.

[ojayaba]

The biggest advantage to the wolf over the riding dog has never been his base stats, it's that trip ability.

Sadly that's not even the case as riding dogs gains trip as a wolf...

[mattie_p]

no, that's a terrible understanding of evolution.
Nature could breed for strength and toughness, but that wouldn't be good for surviving in the wild. A loss of speed, or hunting/tracking ability could make it worse at finding food. Or it might just need to eat so much on a regular basis that it would starve in the wild.
Wolves are bred for wilderness survival, the riding dogs are not, they're bred to fight, and mostly just to fight, in an environment where they don't need stealth and their food supplies will be taken care of.

[nitpick]

No, that's a terrible understanding of evolution.

Nature does not breed for anything (nature has no objectives). A simple way of understanding it is the "survival of the fittest." The creatures with the traits that best allow them to breed (in other words, pass on their genetic traits) will tend to survive (over time).

Nature does not breed for wolves. Creatures that hunt/track with speed and pack tactics survive long enough to breed. They just happen to be wolves.

[Devils_Advocate]

a. To cause to reproduce, especially by controlled mating and selection: breed cattle.
b. To develop new or improved strains in (organisms), chiefly through controlled mating and selection of offspring for desirable traits. (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/breed)

By implication, the word does not exclusively refer to controlled mating and selection.

Also, generally speaking, sometimes statements are metaphorical in nature, e.g. by implicitly attributing intent to mindless things. You don't have to jump on something just because it's not true in the most literal possible sense.


you lose the argument devil's advocate
NO U :P


you didn't read my words
I read your post. Your assertion to the contrary is incorrect.

I may have misunderstood you, but that does not mean that I did not read what you typed.


There's a HUGE difference between doesn't and couldn't
And just what is that difference, pray tell? Sure seems like in the real world, something either happens or it doesn't. So just what does it mean to say that something could have happened, but didn't?

It's my understanding that the meaning of counterfactual statements and the like is a rather complicated philosophical issue. But if you have some brilliant, obvious-in-retrospect insight that slices through this particular Gordian knot, please do enlighten us.

[BowStreetRunner]

Let's keep it civil, gents. No need to get this thread locked now, is there?

[Seharvepernfan]

A lizardfolk and a crocodile are very similar physically in my mind, so I don't see the problem there. My point still stands; what dog has natural armor comparable to a FREAKING CROCODILE?!?

I can see one point: sometimes natural armor is reflected by thick muscle and fat (which is why boars have so much) and/or dense bone, but I still don't think +4 is accurate for riding-dog dogs (collies, huskies, st. bernards).

[Crasical]

Wolves and bears where among the baddest, nastiest predators in Europe for a long time. I think they got ingrained in memory as being mighty beasts for that reason, and they probably deserve that reputation.

That said, do a google search for 'Wolf Art' sometime. You get plenty of hits, because people looooove wolves, how noble and proud and majestic and spiritual they are. We've drifted away from the 'scary monsters in the forest' that wolves used to be seen as to a new perception.

What a wolf ACTUALLY is, how we see it culturally, and how it's represented in the game. Interesting to measure among the three.

[nyjastul69]

The SRD entry for riding dog states that they only get a trip attack if they are trained for war. They don't normally get a trip attack.

[Zombimode]

The SRD entry for riding dog states that they only get a trip attack if they are trained for war. They don't normally get a trip attack.

Sure, but if you want to use the Riding Dog either as a mount or as a combatant in battle, you would train it for war, right?

So in most applications the Riding Dog actually can trip like a wolf.

[Rhynn]

IRL there have been various breeds of dogs throughout history that could tear a wolf to pieces. Natural selection will certainly produce tough wolves, but they also need to be fast, stealthy, good at tracking food, wily enough to avoid predators and natural hazards, etc. Dog breeders can easily ignore any traits that aren't relevant to what they are looking for and produce breeds that are stronger with thicker and tougher hides to be used as mounts.

Yup, this.

If we take the gray wolf as the standard for D&D wolves, then Akbash Dogs can have 50 pounds on their average, Polish Tatra Sheepdogs are the same size or bigger, and Kuvasz are enormous (males 100-150 lbs., but up to 200!). Anatolian Shepherd Dogs, Armenian Gampr Dogs, Caucasian Shepherd Dogs and Komondors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Komondor_male_03.jpg) are also larger, on average, than gray wolves.

Most other livestock guardian dogs (Maremmas, Great Pyrenees, Slovak Cuvac) are "only" the size of wolves; hard to say whether they're tougher than a wolf in a fight.

Many LGDs also have thick fur, especially around the neck, specifically to protect from wolf bites.

So, lots of dogs are bigger and tougher than wolves. You'd probably only use comparable breeds for riding on.

[Gwendol]

The riding dogs are ridiculous. Wolves may be lighter than the largest bred dogs, but they are quick and lethal. Hunting dogs in Sweden are reportedly killed by wolves every year, but I've never read of the opposite happening. Even though we breed dogs for hunting moose and bear.

[Rhynn]

The riding dogs are ridiculous. Wolves may be lighter than the largest bred dogs, but they are quick and lethal. Hunting dogs in Sweden are reportedly killed by wolves every year, but I've never read of the opposite happening. Even though we breed dogs for hunting moose and bear.

How often do you hear of "wolf-dogs" (like the Maremmas and related breeds) being killed by wolves? Bear-hunting dogs are not bred to fight bears. Many livestock guardian dogs are bred to fight and kill wolves, and have been for hundreds or thousands of years. That's why they were used - because they could either scare off or, less frequently, fight off wolves.

And the OP specifically asked about Strength and natural armor. Those are easily addressed. (The riding dogs are slower than wolves in D&D!)

[Gwendol]

Do you know how they are used during the hunt?

I agree that the shepherd-breed dogs that exist have a fair shot at the wolf, that is their purpose after all, but wolves are not small, nor weak, by any measure.

[Asteron]

Do you know how they are used during the hunt?

I agree that the shepherd-breed dogs that exist have a fair shot at the wolf, that is their purpose after all, but wolves are not small, nor weak, by any measure.

Most of the larger breeds would have more than a fair shot in a one on one situation. On average, they have 50+ lbs on the average Grey Wolf. That is a huge difference, especially in canines. It would be outmuscled in every way. By this measure, the wolf is smaller and weaker. Throw in any training for fighting the dog would recieve, and the wolf is in for a bad time.

The difference is usualy the pack. More wolves= better chances. Even with an even number of dogs, the wolves have the advantage in experience with tactics. The dogs aren't nearly as used to fighting in groups.

[TheStranger]

Another way of thinking of this: large dogs are descended from wolves, or similar canines. Granted, some of them have been selectively bred to the point that it's hard to imagine that the animals are related, but others are still pretty close, to the point that if you cross them with a wolf, you get something that's pretty much a wolf.

Anyway, if you started many years ago with wolves, or something close, as your breeding stock, you would expect that the traits you selected for, like strength and toughness, would be greater in your selectively-bred population of dogs than in wolves.

One thing that's easily overlooked, however, is that stats can't account for the general viciousness of an animal. As they say, it's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.

[Fouredged Sword]

Also, the differences are't overwhelming. +2 AC and +2 to damage are a solid edge, but are not an overwhelming advantage at 2 HD. A second wolf almost ensures a wolf victory, and whoever lands the first hit is at significant advantage. If one side is knocked prone, it has almost assuredly lost, and while the dog has a slight advantage with that, the advantage is slight.

A wolf can and will kill a dog if it gets a little lucky or attacks from a vantage point.

[Scow2]

Also, the differences are't overwhelming. +2 AC and +2 to damage are a solid edge, but are not an overwhelming advantage at 2 HD. A second wolf almost ensures a wolf victory, and whoever lands the first hit is at significant advantage. If one side is knocked prone, it has almost assuredly lost, and while the dog has a slight advantage with that, the advantage is slight.

A wolf can and will kill a dog if it gets a little lucky or attacks from a vantage point.

Well... Dogs and wolves DO both have a +4 Stability bonus against Trip Attacks, due to being four-legged. Then again, the trip attacks are free...

[undead hero]

I love it when gamers talk science I really really do.

It gives me a warm fuzzy feeling inside.

[BowStreetRunner]

I love it when gamers talk science I really really do.

It gives me a warm fuzzy feeling inside.

Catgirl hater?