Some of the positives of S&S, in my experience, are:
Its short form: ideally, each adventure should be one session. This keeps the goals clear, and allows you to try a variety of scenarios, monsters and challenges without bogging down in a protracted campaign that could easily become stale or confusing, and that demand more effort from the DM and more attention from the players.
Its lack of moral philosophising: anyone who stands in the PCs' way is fair game - and is probably evil anyway. Along with clear goals, this means that the road towards achieving those goals is also uncomplicated.
Its cinematic quality: the villains are over-the-top, and accordingly the PCs are meant to be action heroes. The DM should encourage them to act swiftly and do cool stuff. Attacking first in combat should mean killing one or two mooks there and then. Sneaking around should take the PCs past secret meetings, strange sacrifices or at the very least startling a damsel (M/F) who could scream and give them away.
Its short form: ideally, each adventure should be one session. This keeps the goals clear, and allows you to try a variety of scenarios, monsters and challenges without bogging down in a protracted campaign that could easily become stale or confusing, and that demand more effort from the DM and more attention from the players.
Its lack of moral philosophising: anyone who stands in the PCs' way is fair game - and is probably evil anyway. Along with clear goals, this means that the road towards achieving those goals is also uncomplicated.
Its cinematic quality: the villains are over-the-top, and accordingly the PCs are meant to be action heroes. The DM should encourage them to act swiftly and do cool stuff. Attacking first in combat should mean killing one or two mooks there and then. Sneaking around should take the PCs past secret meetings, strange sacrifices or at the very least startling a damsel (M/F) who could scream and give them away.