01-31-2013, 07:03 PM | #61 | |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Virginia, US
|
Re: Romans vs. Vikings
Quote:
Last edited by Kage2020; 01-31-2013 at 07:18 PM. |
|
01-31-2013, 07:57 PM | #62 |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Romans vs. Vikings
Conceivably a Romanised Germanic/Belgae/Celtic client king ruling some of what would have become* the dominions of the Kings and sometimes the Dukes of Burgundy, specifically the Burgundian Netherlands, i.e. coastal areas north of the Roman Germania Inferior and Gallia Belgica provinces. His lands would thus be a buffer zone between the Romans and the Angles, Saxons and then the even more Nordic 'Vikings'.
Of course, if the Vikings and the Romans coexist in the setting, some decision about where that leaves the Saxons, Angles and Jutes is necessary. Those were, for all intents and purposes, proto-Vikings who fought Rome in the area and in Britain, but lacked the navigation and sailing technology to become true world powers. Add more advanced ships to them and you have instant Vikings. Have Rome or any other regional neighbours adopt advanced ships, sailing techniques and navigation methods as soon as they are invented, and you'll never have anything resembling Viking kingdoms, as the North Germanic people will never be in a position to create them. In a world where they are not regional leaders in naval technology, the Vikings are Saxons by another name. *Alternate history does strange things to grammar.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! Last edited by Icelander; 01-31-2013 at 08:05 PM. |
02-02-2013, 02:41 AM | #63 | ||
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
Re: Romans vs. Vikings
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
There is no "i" in team, but there is in Dangerious! |
||
02-02-2013, 08:14 AM | #64 | |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2008
|
Re: Romans vs. Vikings
Quote:
|
|
02-02-2013, 08:18 AM | #65 |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Romans vs. Vikings
Why is that odd? There are still Gaulish linguistic roots being affected by Roman and Germanic influences, which means that it is not impossible to postulate a language that we would consider 'French', even if the specifics are quite different.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! |
02-02-2013, 08:53 AM | #66 | |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2008
|
Re: Romans vs. Vikings
Quote:
Is Germania still wild and wooly like in RW Roman times, or has it advanced like your norse regions? |
|
02-02-2013, 09:07 AM | #67 | |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2008
|
Re: Romans vs. Vikings
Quote:
I would say those are substantially different things. |
|
02-02-2013, 09:29 AM | #68 | |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Romans vs. Vikings
Quote:
In any event, the Viking kingdoms did evolve hundreds of years later. The GM will have to decide where in their history other polities are.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! |
|
02-02-2013, 04:02 PM | #69 | |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Middletown, CT.
|
Re: Romans vs. Vikings
Quote:
|
|
02-03-2013, 03:42 AM | #70 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
Re: Romans vs. Vikings
I haven't worked out much about the Germanics since they're not the focus of the campaign. They are going to be wooly and wild like they were in the Roman period, or close to it. I'll work something out if it comes up in the campaign but currently I'm focussing on the interaction between the Romans and Vikings.
__________________
There is no "i" in team, but there is in Dangerious! |
Tags |
alternate history, low tech, romans, vikings, vikings vs romans |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|