Viking vs Knight Templar

[Ninja of Cao]

Two mighty medieval warriors of different cultures, regions and perhaps most importantly, religions: a fierce Nordic berserker who made the great kings of Europe cower in fear, and a walking tank who dealt death to the Arabs in the name of Christianity. Who would win in a duel to the death?

Spoiler:

Location: Amphitheatre-style arena
Preparation: 5 minutes
Knowledge: None
Starting distance: 10 m

Statistics Viking Knight
Years active: 700-1050 1119-1312
Armor: Mail Mail
Shield: Viking shield Iron shield
Close range: Dane axe Morning star
Mid range: Viking sword Longsword
Long range: 2 javelins Halberd

My own conclusion:

Spoiler:

The Viking axe will cut through chain mail as easily as cloth, and the Viking has the advantage of a ranged weapon which is powerful enough to penetrate mail as well. A morning star and an axe are both mighty weapons, but the axe is actually better when it comes to armor peneration due to the massive force concentrated into a single, thin line (compared to the morning star's spread-out spikes). The European longsword and the Viking sword are almost the same, only that the longsword has a bigger handguard and is heavier. But with the first few points, I'd say that the victory goes to the man of the North for his superior abilities of armor penetration and long-range combat.
Final conclusion: Viking wins

[Maruko]

Hmmm...Templars are more armored than vikings. Templar has no fear of death due to years spent in prayers, so he can go all out with no problem.
Also, templar would have better range with sword, but with morning star, it breaks against the dane axe.

[Ninja of Cao]

Originally Posted by Maruko

Hmmm...Templars are more armored than vikings. Templar has no fear of death due to years spent in prayers, so he can go all out with no problem.
Also, templar would have better range with sword, but with morning star, it breaks against the dane axe.

Which kind of Morning Star do you think is more appropriate for the knight templar? The one with a chain or the spike ball on a stick?

Also, the armor is pretty much the same only that the Templars have helmets that protect all of their faces. And Vikings also didn't fear death - according to the Norse faith, the only way to go to heaven was to die in battle and take as many enemies as possible with you.

[Maruko]

Yeah, but Vikings were raider/thieves before soldiers, while templars are the most elite knights.
More hype. :P

[Ninja of Cao]

Originally Posted by Maruko

Yeah, but Vikings were raider/thieves before soldiers, while templars are the most elite knights.
More hype. :P

Vikings actually fought knights with great success during the 9th and 10th centuries, so their ability in the field should not be underestimated. Also, I am confident that the Viking was a superior individual fighter since knights were more of an army while the Vikings were "every man for himself" berserkers. A Viking boy who did not make his first kill before the age of 13 was considered weak, and a warrior who died without killing several enemies was considered unworthy. Viking culture was all about killing as many enemies as possible

[NINE-TAILS-BIJU]

i say vikings, they are more fierce looking and look capable of killing the knights, Cao you took most of my reasons so i say ditto