| Leadjunky | 08 Mar 2019 10:18 p.m. PST |
If you were only going to do one – Viking Age or Age of Arthur? |
 PaulCollins  | 08 Mar 2019 10:27 p.m. PST |
Age of Arthur. I do have both, however. |
 Unlucky General | 08 Mar 2019 10:31 p.m. PST |
Well one was real and the other is myth so it depends if you want historicised fantasy or romanticised history. |
| Katzbalger | 09 Mar 2019 4:48 a.m. PST |
Age of Arthur--or the Fall of the Roman Empire, they might just be the same, so I would definitely go for that one. But, as PC noted, I also have both. Rob |
| rustymusket | 09 Mar 2019 5:38 a.m. PST |
Age of Arthur. I have an "historic" (?) Arthurian army. I have almost done Vikings from time to time. |
| coopman | 09 Mar 2019 7:43 a.m. PST |
Vikings. 200 years of history offers a lot of possibilities. |
| skipper John | 09 Mar 2019 8:09 a.m. PST |
I've never attended a Saga tournament that hasn't had at least one Viking army present. 10 years now. Good troops, full of surprises. Worthy adversaries! |
| Grelber | 09 Mar 2019 8:27 a.m. PST |
Versatile Vikings. Not only lots of historical games against pretty much every other contemporary army west of China, but they are the basis for various fantasy type human armies, useful as D & D characters, and come with their own mythology and folklore, plus there are the sagas to read for inspiration. Oh, yeah, I have both, also. Grelber |
| ether drake | 09 Mar 2019 5:28 p.m. PST |
I started out in the Age of Vikings but have ended up committing to the Age of Arthur, or Age of Invasions. Many of the armies in this era can be combined since the various invaders – Goths, Huns, Saxons, Franks, etc – all served each others and the Roman army. You can have quite an eclectic collection or build one army into several others. Rulesets like SAGA, Dux Britanniarum and Dux Bellorum serve Arthur well, but can serve the Viking Age with minimal to no tweaks. |
| Leadjunky | 09 Mar 2019 6:46 p.m. PST |
Well I have bought figures for both trying to decide. I like them both and you can have some cavalry in the earlier period, but I like the idea of raids and pig wars scenarios. Maybe I will just do both which was what I was trying to avoid. Maybe big based AoA and skirmish based Vikings/Saxons. |
| TodCreasey | 10 Mar 2019 5:40 a.m. PST |
Age of Vikings for Britain as there is a greater variety of troops (especially once the Normans show up). For continental Europe Age of Arthur is the one with variety |
| bruntonboy | 10 Mar 2019 2:21 p.m. PST |
Not much in it really. The earlier period has (for me ) more interesting and varied armies. The later Viking age has more historical sources to base our games on and a reasonable variety of troops who are evenly matched. Well until William shows up and cheats by using massed armoured cavalry that spoils the fun. To be fair as both periods are mainly smallish armies why choose between then- buy both. |
| Aethelflaeda was framed | 11 Mar 2019 8:32 a.m. PST |
Vkings make great stand ins for Age of Arthur Saxons. Dark age armies all pretty much look alike at 28mm. Round shields, spangelhelm, sword, axe or spear. A smattering of chain mail. |
| SBminisguy | 11 Mar 2019 10:06 a.m. PST |
Vkings make great stand ins for Age of Arthur Saxons. I do Age of Arthur using Dux Britanniarum. Age of Arthur Saxons also make great stand-ins for Vikings as well. |
| Ten Fingered Jack | 17 May 2019 3:48 a.m. PST |
|
| Uesugi Kenshin | 21 May 2019 11:30 a.m. PST |
Age of Arthur appeals to me more on a historical level but Vikings win for gaming. |
| Captain Carter | 24 May 2019 2:04 p.m. PST |
I'll think I'll end up doing both. Viking currently. But most likely will end up doing sub Roman brits and Early Saxon to. It's too tempting |
returns from Mexico with a new vision for making palm trees from scratch.
