D&D: High Fantasy vs. Sword & Sorcery

[Desdichado]

It seems to me that D&D has always kinda trodden a middle ground that picks up influence equally from both High Fantasy (a la J. R. R. Tolkien or C. S. Lewis) and Sword & Sorcery (a la Robert E. Howard or Fritz Leiber.) While I suspect that most people prefer that balance between the narrow subgenres, frequently folks with tastes leaning more heavily towards one or the other try to find ways to adapt D&D to more fully emulate the genre of choice.

So, my question to y'all is: if you had to choose one of the two subgenres to be "ascendent" which one would you?

I already suspect that most people kinda like D&D as it is, so I'm not even going to have that as an option; that'd simply skew the results I'm looking for. You have to pick one if you're going to vote!

And: if you're a little unclear on the distinction between the two subgenres, I've made them hotlinks to the Wikipedia article describing them above. Vote intelligently! Do some research first if you need to!

 

[Zulgyan]

S&S mainly. But I feel a good balance is best.

 

[Felix]

High Fantasy for my D&D game.

Sword and Sorcery for my literature.

 

[Ilium]

High Fantasy for my D&D game.

Sword and Sorcery for my literature.

Same as Felix. Except completely the opposite.

 

[Brazeku]

I voted High Fantasy, but I'm basing my vote on the assumption that the difference between the two is scope - High Fantasy is large setting-based conflicts, and Sword and Sorcery is individual conflicts. Am I correct?

(this is what the articles led me to believe, anyway).

 

[der_kluge]

Low Fantasy

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

I like a good bit of both in my games, though I probably lean more towards High Fantasy.

 

[Desdichado]

I voted High Fantasy, but I'm basing my vote on the assumption that the difference between the two is scope - High Fantasy is large setting-based conflicts, and Sword and Sorcery is individual conflicts. Am I correct?

That is one of the most significant differences. The role and scope of the supernatural usually is different too, since S&S often has much more of a swashbuckling Arabian nights feel to it. That means that the supernatural is usually an exotic foe to be overcome rather than necessarily a tool to be used, as High Fantasy usually paints it.

Also, humano-centric vs. a selection of humanoid races with pseudo-mythological origins is a useful marker. Although plenty of high fantasy stories are humano-centric too.

 

[Asmor]

I'll take the reese's peanut butter cup, please.

By which I mean, I want an epic story in High Fantasy scope, but I want swashbuckling heroes, a somewhat lighter tone, and lots of action, including a healthy dose of the "over the top" variety.

 

[jdrakeh]

Honestly, you should have prefaced this poll with a collection of genre tenets as there are a great many ENWorld posters (not necessarily in this thread, as of yet) who consider any Fantasy with combat, magic, and monsters to be 'Swords & Sorcery' (which, of course, isn't the case).