Okay CHAZ the chat made me look at the Storm Breaker Saga a little closer and as it was said in the last chat Chaz dose not fit the 1000 A.D. time frame, but he is not the only one, Torgamous' armor is also of late medieval standard, now every one other than him is early, they were chain-mail, don't have mask helmets, one handed swords, so why not Torg?

Oh and Chaz is a 2 handed sword, I was just watching a thing on Knights and it states that late medieval armor aloud them to stop using man size shields, that means 2 handed swords.

So he'd stand out in that armour? Like how in movies the hero and the villain are dressed in distintive clothing so we know who to watch and who to cheer for?

But seriously, as leader of Mercia, it makes sense that Torg would have better armour.

According to wikipedia full plate wasn't around until the 14th century, well after the Norman conquest, which sets the end of possible timing for the saga. I'm sure there's someone around who can give more detail, bt I'm afraid it's not me at this time.

Magic weapons tend to be older in age than the current weapons. And Chaz somes off as kinda old and powerful. Thesword may have been a family heirloom and Torgamous may have just used them for that reason, plus the magical powers of Chaz.

But the armor fits the time of Chaz's disign but every one elts has early medival armor, as far as I know the armor was not magical so where the the armor?

Huh?

Maybe the red armor Torg was wearing was complementary to Chaz. Like it was the King's personal armor and sheild.

The "Great Sword of Battle" or the "Bastard Sword", was it's own shield.

For all we know its magical too, just not as much as Chaz, perhaps only a +1 or +2 fullplate...or maby their all insane. They started a war over someone saying the other's beard smells like cheese.

For myself, I always thought the armor was a reference to the beginning scene of Bram Stroker's Dracula where Dracula mourns for his wife. You know, Vampires. Warlords.

Mercia was extinguished by the Vikings, not the Normans. England was unified under the Saxons by the time of the Norman Conquest.

The fact is, there are elements from several disparate times involved. Mercia did not exist after about the year 1000. There never was a Trent nation, just a river. The sword and armor are both from a later period. And Lysinda was there and already a vampire; yet, in the Vampires storyline there was a reference to the Year of Lysinda 824. Subtract that from 1998 and you get Lysinda becoming a vampire in 1174 (or at least beginning her circle that year).

None of it works out, and I think Pete did that deliberately. His way of saying "Once Upon a Time."

You want an in-continuity answer? Perhaps the Sluggy main universe is not entirely parallel to ours and Mercia lasted as an independent kingdom a few hundred years longer than here.

LadyBlanc you have a point but just for arguments sake Lysinda may have been a lower rank Vampier at the time, I mean a Vampire Master is not made in a day right, ancient pagan people often used years of kings or emperors rule to set their years, Vampires would do the same, so maybe the last master of the circle was taken out in 1174, ether by a vampire hunter or Lysinda herself.

A distinct possibility, Raptor, though the way the name is used makes is sound like Lysinda was the founder of the circle. But you could well be right.

LadyBlanc thank-you and in answer to this Lysinda is a tyrant and a gang leader, she could have renamed the Circle after taking it over.

After all sam Decided to name it the Sam circal mujamma (obvoiusly spelled that wrong)