Discussing Sword & Sorcery and RPGs

[aramis erak]

@Dioltach didn't say that Conan doesn't change the world. He says that Conan doesn't go and try changing the world.

He didn't? He set out with a drive to avenge his parents and to become a king... For a Cimmerian to become king of Aquilonia is a HUGE change. Any of the "civilized" kingdoms having a Cimmerian on the throne is a big change to the politics.
Conan also being a softie, he is constantly deciding to help people beyond what he's paid for.
Conan, despite being the vision of S&S for the masses who are not bibliophiles, is really an edge case. He has a destiny.

Then again, Conan wasn't afraid to use a wizard when he needed one, either. He just tried to not need one...

In no small irony, Conan is often the most civil character in the story... and he's the barbarian.

For me, the key tropes of S&S are:

• Magic is slow but potentially powerful; the longer the ritual and the more narrow the ritual window, the more powerful.
• Skill at arms trumps magic in the short term; skill at magic trumps war in the long term.
• Many magics are gained from demonic pacts, rather than innate abilities or personal learned skill.
• No matter how good the haul, you'll be broke before the next job.
• Skill at arms is a dangerous profession...
• Most are mildly xenophobic, a large minority are majorly xenophobic.
• Protagonists often have friends in other cultures and odd places.

 

[Argyle King]

For Conan in particular, there are also elements of Howard trying to explore what it means to be "civilized."

Despite Conan being viewed as a savage and a barbarian, there are times when he is arguably far more virtuous than people who claim to be morally superior and civilized. I mean, yeah, Conan is hacking people to bits, drinking, and womanizing, but his approach to life is arguably more straightforward and honest than scheming politicians, poisoners, and so on.

I'm not sure if that's a personal battle (which tends to be something that a lot of S&S contains) or if it's more of a personal view of Howard's coming through in his work.



Is anyone else familiar with Thundarr the Barbarian?

 

[Aldarc]

He didn't? He set out with a drive to avenge his parents and to become a king... For a Cimmerian to become king of Aquilonia is a HUGE change. Any of the "civilized" kingdoms having a Cimmerian on the throne is a big change to the politics.

I strongly suspect that you are misunderstanding and quibbling about what was likely meant by setting out to make change.

 

[aramis erak]

Is anyone else familiar with Thundarr the Barbarian?

Moderately. I do agree with someone else that it is S&S, despite the post-holocaust setting and multiple intelligent species.

 

[Yora]

For Conan in particular, there are also elements of Howard trying to explore what it means to be "civilized."

Despite Conan being viewed as a savage and a barbarian, there are times when he is arguably far more virtuous than people who claim to be morally superior and civilized. I mean, yeah, Conan is hacking people to bits, drinking, and womanizing, but his approach to life is arguably more straightforward and honest than scheming politicians, poisoners, and so on.

I'm not sure if that's a personal battle (which tends to be something that a lot of S&S contains) or if it's more of a personal view of Howard's coming through in his work.

I believe an important bit that often gets unnoticed, is that Howard sees both types of societies as deeply flawed and full of problems. He was a huge history nerd, and if I am not mixing up my sources, saw the fall of the ancient civilzations as great tragedies. He loves great civilizations, or at least the idea of them, but unlike many of his contemporaries was under no illusions that this time it is different and Western Civilization has won the struggle forever. Would have been fascinating what he would have thought of the nuclear arms race.
He describes barbarism as the natural state of human society, to which civilizations are temporary aberrations. But that doesn't make barbarism better, or even desirable.
Now I could be absolutely wrong and completely mix up different people, but I think Howard even said somewhere that he probably wouldn't be doing well in a barbaric society. Conan is not a role model, but a fanciful fantasy.

 

[Bilharzia]

Phllip Emery writes about the motifs of sword & sorcery, instead of plot elements. This is a better and more useful way of thinking about the genre.

1. Sword-&-sorcery is intense. All else is subjugated to this effect
2. Sword-&-sorcery is potentially amoral
3. Sword-&-sorcery is the combination of violence and the numinous: a double-helix of violences which entwine around intensity
4. Sword-&-sorcery eschews explicit development of milieu or character or concept
5. Sword-&-sorcery is generally naturally a short story form
6. Sword-&-sorcery contains an element of deathwish in its sensibility
7. Sword-&-sorcery has a Chthonic sensibility
8. Sword-&-sorcery has a potential element of tragedy in its sensibility
9. Sword-&-sorcery combines explicit and implicit horror
10. The Sword-&-sorcery protagonist is a loner – a figure apart or other
11. Sword-&-sorcery addresses the irrational through the very fact of its connection with the numinous effect
12. Sword-&-sorcery is about power
13. Sword-&-sorcery is highly ‘visual’ (either through the presence or the absence of the visual).

This list is taken from an interview with Emery on Black Gate magazine:

The Aesthetics of Sword & Sorcery: An Interview with Philip Emery – Black Gate

www.blackgate.com

 

[pemerton]

Can't we get a long way by saying that, in S&S the protagonists leads rather than being led. So if things go wrong, it's on them - they're not victims of fate or "larger forces". And if things go right, it's because of the choices they made.

That's not perfect - there's still the role of the phoenix on the sword in The Phoenix on the Sword - but it's a start to trying to identify the contrast with LotR or even Earthsea.

In the context of RPGing I'm always an advocate of player-driven rather than GM-driven play, but I think S&S even moreso demands this sort of approach.

 

[CapnZapp]

Phllip Emery writes about the motifs of sword & sorcery, instead of plot elements. This is a better and more useful way of thinking about the genre.

1. Sword-&-sorcery is intense. All else is subjugated to this effect
2. Sword-&-sorcery is potentially amoral
3. Sword-&-sorcery is the combination of violence and the numinous: a double-helix of violences which entwine around intensity
4. Sword-&-sorcery eschews explicit development of milieu or character or concept
5. Sword-&-sorcery is generally naturally a short story form
6. Sword-&-sorcery contains an element of deathwish in its sensibility
7. Sword-&-sorcery has a Chthonic sensibility
8. Sword-&-sorcery has a potential element of tragedy in its sensibility
9. Sword-&-sorcery combines explicit and implicit horror
10. The Sword-&-sorcery protagonist is a loner – a figure apart or other
11. Sword-&-sorcery addresses the irrational through the very fact of its connection with the numinous effect
12. Sword-&-sorcery is about power
13. Sword-&-sorcery is highly ‘visual’ (either through the presence or the absence of the visual).

This list is taken from an interview with Emery on Black Gate magazine:

The Aesthetics of Sword & Sorcery: An Interview with Philip Emery – Black Gate

www.blackgate.com

Good post!

 

[CapnZapp]

This line thou

"Sword-&-sorcery is the combination of violence and the numinous: a double-helix of violences which entwine around intensity"



"Luckily", he goes on to explain:

the double-helix mentioned refers to characterizing REH’s way of depicting violence into physical violence or kinetic violence, emotional or potential violence (the berserker rage his protagonists tend to experience conflates the kinetic and the emotional), and stylistic violence, in respect of Howard simply the power of his prose or poetry. The second strand of the helix refers to the ideas of the theologian Rudolph Otto, who broke the effect of the numinous into three components, which he collectively names the ‘mysterium tremendum’, these being ‘overpoweringness’, ‘energy’ or ‘urgency’, and ‘awefulness’ or ‘unapproachability’.​

 

[Aldarc]

Phllip Emery writes about the motifs of sword & sorcery, instead of plot elements. This is a better and more useful way of thinking about the genre.

1. Sword-&-sorcery is intense. All else is subjugated to this effect
2. Sword-&-sorcery is potentially amoral
3. Sword-&-sorcery is the combination of violence and the numinous: a double-helix of violences which entwine around intensity
4. Sword-&-sorcery eschews explicit development of milieu or character or concept
5. Sword-&-sorcery is generally naturally a short story form
6. Sword-&-sorcery contains an element of deathwish in its sensibility
7. Sword-&-sorcery has a Chthonic sensibility
8. Sword-&-sorcery has a potential element of tragedy in its sensibility
9. Sword-&-sorcery combines explicit and implicit horror
10. The Sword-&-sorcery protagonist is a loner – a figure apart or other
11. Sword-&-sorcery addresses the irrational through the very fact of its connection with the numinous effect
12. Sword-&-sorcery is about power
13. Sword-&-sorcery is highly ‘visual’ (either through the presence or the absence of the visual).

This list is taken from an interview with Emery on Black Gate magazine:

The Aesthetics of Sword & Sorcery: An Interview with Philip Emery – Black Gate

www.blackgate.com

I would wager that #10 is one of the biggest hurdles of trope play for a largely group-oriented hobby.