Vikings or Celts

[jdrakeh]

Celts.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Vikings.

Celts are too new-agey neo-hippie Enya/Yanni sorority girl spine tatoos for my taste. No offense, I'm sure they're total badasses, but they didn't make the Rape, Burn, and Pillage Plan for National Success internationally famous, nor did they aid in the collapse of a decadent Empire, only to adapt it's own faith as theirs.

I'd also like to do a Mongolian/Central Asian thing, though. So maybe I likes me the Wave of Mutiliation.

 

[Fate Lawson]

Mongols.

Really, if you're going for a medieval period with the classic "Knight in shining armour" you've already moved beyond the eras of "barbaric" Vikings and Celts. By this period you've moved into the era of the Mongol hordes.

 

[Agemegos]

Umm why is everyone looking at me like that?

Because the Norse (vikings) had agriculture.

 

[EdL]

Vikings.

Celts are too new-agey neo-hippie Enya/Yanni sorority girl spine tatoos for my taste. No offense, I'm sure they're total badasses, but they didn't make the Rape, Burn, and Pillage Plan for National Success internationally famous, nor did they aid in the collapse of a decadent Empire, only to adapt it's own faith as theirs.

I'd also like to do a Mongolian/Central Asian thing, though. So maybe I likes me the Wave of Mutiliation.

Quoted for truth. But yeah, by the middle ages the Mongols are the way to go.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Of the options presented, Vikings.

However, I have to cast a vote for Mongols as well, for the same reason I prefer hobgoblins to orcs in a fantasy world: the 'civilized' peoples are eventually going to lose to the invading Mongols in a pitched battle, whereas they will eventually wear down and defeat the raiding Vikings.

 

[Agemegos]

the 'civilized' peoples are eventually going to lose to the invading Mongols in a pitched battle, whereas they will eventually wear down and defeat the raiding Vikings.

Normandy. The Norman kingdom of Sicily. The Rus.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Normandy. The Norman kingdom of Sicily. The Rus.

Technicalities!

As primarily 'raiding'-type 'barbarians' go, the Vikings were astonishingly successful. There's no question they're 500% cooler than any others of that variety.

However, the Vikings did not conquer all of Christendom. For instance, the Normans carved out their territory, but only conquered England after adopting the tactics and most of the culture of France, and even then only after the Saxons defeated a larger force of Vikings fighting in the traditional manner and had to face the Normans without any real chance to recover their strength. At the greatest expanse of Viking power, they had probably traveled as far or farther than the Mongols at their height, but ruled a comparatively miniscule population and dramatically less territory.

The Mongols, by contrast, conquered almost the entirety of the known world in a generation - including the Viking rulers of what is now Russia.

Mongols > Vikings > Celts

 

[Turanil]

My idea was not a purely historical setting. But a setting with those archetypes drawn from European history. As such I don't care if the mongols would be more relevant.

Anyway, my question is really which type is more "cool" in a RPG. So the poll indicates more people voting for Vikings, but the posts are more toward Celts... Mmmmmh...

Hope to see more answers.

 

[jdrakeh]

But a setting with those archetypes drawn from European history.

To be fair, I'd have chosen Picts if given the option. They were fierce enough that their presence was used as a reason (if not the reason) to construct Hadrian's Wall.