I painted a few 28mm vikings (brief Ravenfeast report Aug 17)

[Aesthete]

You see it today with footie nutters. They rip their shirts off, beat there bare chests like King Kong, then charge Plod who's wearing full riot gear. Substitute extra strength lager/wizz for magic mushrooms and job's a good 'un!

Exactly! That was pretty much going to be my next point, but you got there before me...

[Aesthete]

Agreed. I've been enjoying this discussion and I appreciate you taking the time to clarify things. Too often tone and nuance gets lost in the rush to post.

I'm actually interested in what evidence other people think is relevant and why, so seeing the Gallehus horn cited was of interest to me. I've been collecting nuggets like this for some time for a medievalism paper I may one day write about why people think the way they do about berserkir.

If you're interested, there's a whole raft of pathologies devoted to berserksgangr, starting in the seventeenth century with berserkir being black magicians in the thrall of the demon Odin all the way through to PTSD and genetics as the most recent explanations. Ödmann's mushroom theory is just one among many that follow the latest research of the time in anthropology, medicine, psychology, etc., and none of them can be directly related to the medieval descriptions of berserkir in the sagas. My favourite is the Norwegian priest who blamed it on a bad hangover. Gotta wonder if he was trying to get his parishioners to drink less. I'm of the view that berserksgangr was performative. The narrative structure of berserkr episodes in Old Norse literature suggests that the medieval audience understood it that way. I would suggest that the Viking Age reality was probably closer to that than to modern depictions of frenzied warriors: i.e. Old Norse berserkr does not mean the same thing as present day English berserker. If you want to do some deep reading on the topic, you might find this PhD thesis of interest: https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/28819/

I'm super interested - and thanks for sharing the link - I'll be reading it on and off over the next few days. And I agree with you that understanding berserksgangr as performative makes sense.

[Aesthete]

Started today. 1st bondi in foreground, 1st beserkir in background.

So it begins...

Do you have system in mind?

[FierceKitty]

If system means a rules system, I use my own rules, which have evolved over a number of decades. The medieval section was designed mainly for the crusades, so there are a few tweaks for Nordic forces (I'll be throwing them mainly at Byzantines for now).

If it's the system you mean by which I organise painting, I usually do about two batches at a time, about eighty figures. The final army is destined to be about 450+, with a fortified camp and longship to add colour.

[Aesthete]

If system means a rules system, I use my own rules, which have evolved over a number of decades. The medieval section was designed mainly for the crusades, so there are a few tweaks for Nordic forces (I'll be throwing them mainly at Byzantines for now).

Interesting. I'm continually impressed by the number of people here who've developed their own rules. I'm curious - what's to main differentiator of your ruleset? By that I mean - we all have things we like in our game systems - either because we find them fun purely on a gameplay level, because they model some aspect of warfare we find interesting, because they are good simulators of how we think history (or fantasy) played out, and so on. What's your focus?

If it's the system you mean by which I organise painting, I usually do about two batches at a time, about eighty figures. The final army is destined to be about 450+, with a fortified camp and longship to add colour.

I am impressed by the scope of your ambition (and by the implication that you'll complete it in a reasonable timeframe). I probably have 2-300 vikings (+ three ships, now that you mention it), but I would not claim that they're destined to be painted in any time of reasonable timeframe

Looking forward to see your progress

[Aesthete]

In the meantime, I finished three (3) viking types last night and photographed them this morning:



https://miniaturefront.blogspot.com/2019/11/granny-and-boys.html

[FierceKitty]

Interesting. I'm continually impressed by the number of people here who've developed their own rules. I'm curious - what's the main differentiator of your ruleset? By that I mean - we all have things we like in our game systems - either because we find them fun purely on a gameplay level, because they model some aspect of warfare we find interesting, because they are good simulators of how we think history (or fantasy) played out, and so on. What's your focus?

I am impressed by the scope of your ambition (and by the implication that you'll complete it in a reasonable timeframe). I probably have 2-300 vikings (+ three ships, now that you mention it), but I would not claim that they're destined to be painted in any time of reasonable timeframe

Looking forward to seeing your progress

My rules tend to be pretty organic as they develop, with the ideal always to balance reasonably satisfying realism with some period detail and comfortable playability...which is probably what every rules writer says, mind you.  I think the DBx range had too little period flavour (or attention to reality, grammar, or mathematics) to be satisfying, and gave an easily playable game that favoured rules lawyers over historical tacticians. I suspect this is also the case with what I've seen of grid games and WH (is it?), where there is precious little feel for period, troop types, or equipment types. On the other hand, earlier generations of WRG, with their endless minutiae of weapon and armour classes...life's too short! I recognise three degrees of armour (including none) and likewise shields; oversimplified, true, but on a given battlefield it works acceptably (I don't see the need to distinguish the heavy armour of a Sarmatian cataphract from the much heavier armour of a gensdarme; they'll never meet this side of Valhalla anyway).

 My rules are mostly where they are now because of several decades of suggestions from opponents and little flashes of ideas that light up while reading ("Ah, yes, auxilliaries must be able to interpenetrate legionaries so the latter don't have to pursue a recoiling enemy into rough going...", or "Musketry is too deadly; mutual annihilation means there's something wrong with the rules...what if first volley kills in a mutually destructive exchange of fire, but others don't...unless grenadiers or superior discipline class...?"). Some of these little changes are admittedly there to make otherwise very one-sided battles playable, so that Martini-Henries and Gattlings don't assure victory all the time in 19th century Africa, for example. I'll be sticking in ammendments on my deathbed, I'm sure.

Two things that do satisfy me; 1) my wife, who plays good chess but has never read the rules, frequently beats me; and 2) we usually finish even a large battle in under three hours, and frequently two.

Happy to send a copy if you want idle reading. You could doubtless make some useful suggestions.

As for setting targets, do remember I game in 10mm. There are things you don't need to do painting that small. Washing and highlighting can still look good in close up, but they are invisible in play; different from those delectable new figures just posted above! 10 mm don't work in skirmish, but that doesn't interest me much (tried a year ago with some wild west stuff - a bit more fantastic than my usual, but no zombies or steam tanks, at least - and gave up after a few games; figures all became the 12th Maryland Militia for the WNA armies that followed). They do look good in regiments. I think the world is big enough for both approaches (except in the matter of Japanese battles, where I blow steam out of my ears at the prevailing idea that The Seven Samurai is what Sengoku warfare was all about!).

I'm hoping to post a piccie later today, if the cats allow it.

[FierceKitty]

I hope this works. Lee's the camera and computer boffin, and she's away this weekend.

[FierceKitty]

(delete, please)

[FierceKitty]

1st Bondi, 1st Berserkir (with Ulfhednar and Shieldmaidens), and 1st Huscarls, led by Viljar Vandrikkar and the Raven banner.

[FierceKitty]

(delete)

[FierceKitty]

Sorry - posting was a bit erratic.

[Aesthete]

Finished a unit of 12 Gripping Beast spear wielding warriors. They will definitely be used as vikings, though I think they can be used for other purposes as well.

I went for a much more muted palette than normal for my dark ages folk, attempting to model warriors of more modest means dressed mostly in more frequently worn homespun clothing. Not that you can really see that since the photo is mostly of their shields...

[Aesthete]

1st Bondi, 1st Berserkir (with Ulfhednar and Shieldmaidens), and 1st Huscarls, led by Viljar Vandrikkar and the Raven banner.

Looking nice. There's something great about troops in volume, and 10mm is great for that. What's the make of the miniatures?

... I have a bunch of 10mm Warring States/ Han Chines as well as some of Copplestone's nice fantasy. One day I will paint those. That is definitely the plan.

Re: what you mentioned earlier about sharing your homebrew rules - I'm not much of a rules analyst or giver of feedback to be honest, but I'm curious to see what your approach is if it's not inconvenient for you to share them.

[FierceKitty]

The figures are pretty eclectic; Pendraken dark ages range, Pendraken fantasy (here and there), Kallistra, Magister Militum, and a few conversions from leftover Newlines and Irregular Miniatures (including a small number of Warring States chaps, oddly enough).

Copplestone's 10mm fantasy are super figures; my late Roman and Byzantine armies use some of their horse tribe chaps as Alan auxilliaries, and my 3rd crusade army has a few spearmen too. I wish they'd do more historical figures.

Your Leidang laddies above look the works. Sometimes an economical and restrained colour scheme really delivers.

I'll need an email if you want the rules (or is there a way to do attachments which I have overlooked?).