But he doesn't then go and try to change the world. Even though he disagrees with how things are done, he himself isn't affected by it: he can fight his way out of trouble. He doesn't worry about the common people who don't have his strength and who have to suffer the consequences of a corrupt system.
In the REH stories, yes, Conan does change the world; he fails to change it for the better, despite being a sucker for a hard luck case...
I agree that there are antithetical elements to S&S present before Dragonlance. However, I would say that in terms of overall trends, that Dragonlance (and possibly Ravenloft*) turned D&D with greater force towards heroic fantasy. I also don't think it's exactly a coincidence that OSR points to Dragonlance as "the beginning of the end" for Old School play in their revisionist historiographical narrative.
Old School Play as exemplified by the OSR is something I never even heard about until the mid-1990s, despite playing since 1981. DragonLance as a game did do one thing: give a mechanism to track the good/evil axis of the character by their deeds... but no one I know was using DLA until the 90's.
The most important thing to remember about the actual "old school era" is that there was no unifying internet communications... different groups played in different ways, many without recourse even to the articles in Dragon.
This is pretty much just a huge aside, but this triggers me.
The notion "combat is scarily dangerous" just doesn't work in any genre where you're meant to fight a lot.
Works fine in a variety of games...
- Rolemaster is quite deadly... but it doesn't prevent people from running classic dungeon fantasy with it... and despite the 20 to 60 minutes, my downstairs neighbor in 1992-1994 was running a game that killed two to three PCs per session, without resurrection magic. My rolemaster books got a bunch of use from them...
- Prime Directive 1E: combat is particularly dangerous, but players know that Character gen only takes 10-15 minutes for any but the Analysis Paralysis crowd. On the other hand, explaining the initiative systemm is quite the hassle
- Any of the games set in WW II, Viet Nam, or Korea as infantry or armor troops.
- Many espionage games have deadly combat - the trick is to be the first to kill the opponent.
Deadliness isn't a dealbreaker for many. For some it's even a draw.
I've done a little S&S type play. When I ran it, it was deadly.
I don't know either, because B/X and 1e derived games of the OSR movement seem mostly geared towards S&S fantasy.
I never got an S&S vibe from BX. I got a medieval super-heroes vibe. Even in 1981. Especially given Tolkien's Orcs were a real and present danger. and D&D/AD&D Orcs were only a minor threat.
But I'm talking about games where every single swing is played out.
There really aren't many of those.
Car Wars, CORPS, GURPS,,,
If the combat turn's longer than 3 sec, it's not doing one roll per swing. I've seen many SCA knights able to get more than one swing per second. I've seen the same from HEMA guys. And from boffer larps. And stage actors. Olympic fencers are even faster,. due to the low weapon weight.
I'm struggling to get my head around the idea that gratuitous female nudity isn't popular with the masses. Here in the UK our most popular newspaper, The Sun, featured topless women on page 3 until 2015.
the US is much more uptight about nudity and sex than the UK, as a generality. The UK is generally more uptight about violence and gore than the US. Different cultures. Different things found offensive by the majority.
Really, two fairly different cultures divided by distance and revolution... and 230 years.