Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Rigorous Science

What good are herbivores in an animal army?

+0
−1

This is a multi-species animal army with predators of all shapes and sixes, foxes, lions, bears, tigers, leopards, wolves, lynx, eagles, falcons and so on.

The herbivores have been excluded from the army because they appear to serve no apparent purpose. They have no talons, no sharp teeth, no ability to pounce on a foe. A few of the more patriotic herbivores have volunteered their services but every time were rebuffed and ridiculed.

This is strictly animal on animal combat. There are no tools or artificial armor. All animals have achieved human level intelligence without tool building. They are able to vocally communicate fluently regardless of their physiology. They feel the same six emotions that humans feel, anger, fear, surprise, disgust, happiness and sadness. Each species has general personality attributes derived from that species' physical characteristics. Eagles tend to be a bit arrogant. Wolves are highly social. Elephants tend toward wisdom and pontification.

Discussion about what the carnivores eat is out of scope. Also, why the herbivores would want to help the carnivores is out of scope. They just do.

How can the herbivores prove that they have a place in the army alongside the carnivores? What special capabilities do they bring to the table that would be valuable in winning a war?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

General comments (3 comments)

1 answer

+3
−0

Armies need more than just soldiers that fight. Herbivores can easily be more efficient at these other tasks because they don't carry the extra expense of the fighting apparatus (claws, sharp teeth, etc), and often require less support. For example, the same amount of land can support more deer than pumas.

Some examples of herbivores useful in an army context:

  • Elephants can carry a lot of stuff.
  • Antelope can run fast, so useful as messengers over land.
  • Many birds could be useful messengers over long distances.
  • One horse can carry several wolves into battle, so the wolves are fresh when they get there.
  • A mouse can sneak somewhere undetected and gather intelligence.
  • A cold-blooded animal like a lizard can hang out somewhere observing for a long time without needing support.

Even in a fighting context, herbivores can still be useful. The predators are good at offense, but herbivores have evolved for defense. Not many predators can harm a healthy adult moose. I don't think there are any predators on earth today that wouldn't run out of the way of a stampeding herd of bison.

There are so many possible uses that it is pointless to continue, and I didn't even get into clerical and managerial jobs. Think of all the civilian jobs in our current army, or all those jobs where the worker isn't armed, even if they are actually soldiers.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

Sign up to answer this question »