High Fantasy v. Swords-n-Sorcery

[Agback]

G'day

We've discussed this before, I think. And the main upshot of the discussion was taht there are two entirely different bodies of opinion about what 'high fantasy' means. Some people take the term to refer to the grandiose end of the 'plot issues' scale, to fantasy in which the fates of kingdoms, civilisations, and even worlds are at stake. Others take it to refer to fantasy (whatever its action or plot issues) that is set in secondary worlds with no relationship to the real world (and therefore contrasted with fairy stories, historical fantasy, urban fantasy, beast-fables etc., not with swords and sorcery).

I guess taht if we ask, we are going to find that there is a similar diversity in our use and understanding of the term 'swords and sorcery'. Perhaps some people understand it to mean fantasy that is set in a world with technology generally equivalent to the ancient and mediaeval world, and in which people cast spells, and perhaps others understand it to refer to action adventure set in low-tech fantasy worlds.

I am afraid that what we have here is not so much a poll as a failure to communicate.

Regards,


Agback

 

[Nightfall]

What ever you say Agback.

I still say I vote S&SS any day!

 

[Melan]

Sword&Sorcery for me. As in:
-wastelands
-humanocentric world
-less mediaeval and more ancient Mediterranean culture
-lots of pulp monsters like "savage man-apes" or "cannibal tribesmen"
-very little "good" with lots of militant neutrality and outright evil
-slavery
-nekkid amazons
-violence

 

[Agback]

Sword&Sorcery for me. As in:
-wastelands
-humanocentric world
-less mediaeval and more ancient Mediterranean culture
-lots of pulp monsters like "savage man-apes" or "cannibal tribesmen"
-very little "good" with lots of militant neutrality and outright evil
-slavery
-nekkid amazons
-violence

I think perhaps you have been watching too many Sword and Sandal epics.

Regards,


Agback

 

[Desdichado]

Fritz Leiber and Robert E. Howard vs. William Morris and J.R.R. Tolkien.

That's how I view Sword and Sorcery vs. High Fantasy.

 

[Krieg]

Since my players are far more likely to break into the King's palace, murder his son & rob the royal treasure than they are to help him save the world...S&S all the way!

 

[Arnwyn]

Definitions, please. I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[S'mon]

Classic Sword & Sorcery - Leiber, Howard.
Classic High Fantasy - Tolkien, Donaldson.

Moorcock does high fantasy sword & sorcery, though...

Orcs, elves, dwarves, dark lords - high fantasy

beastmen, inhuman elder races, insane demon gods - swords & sorcery

Hmm...

 

[d4]

Fritz Leiber and Robert E. Howard vs. William Morris and J.R.R. Tolkien.

That's how I view Sword and Sorcery vs. High Fantasy.

if that's what he meant, then i'm definitely in the High Fantasy camp.

 

[blackshirt5]

I have to agree with all the above posters; this needs to be defined better before I can cast my vote.