Sword & Sorcery or High Fantasy?

[Azgulor]

Thieves World and Warhammer are both high fantasy. Both have world-shaking magical power in them. Low fantasy would be like A Princess of Mars, Gor, or that recent King Arthur movie thingie.

Actually, I think most would put them in the low-fantasy camp. In fact, there was a Dragon from years back that had an article called the Highs and Lows of Fantasy that showcased the two styles. TW was in the low fantasy camp.

Low Fantasy doesn't mean magic isn't powerful. It is much rarer and certainly more dangerous than magic is in High Fantasy. If you read the sorcery & campaign essays in the Conan RPG, they highlight this fact rather nicely.

I would submit, however, that Warhammer Fantasy Battles tends to run in the High Fantasy camp. Since WHFRP shares the same setting, it could be run in either fashion. However, the gritty survival theme is much more appropriate to low fantasy than high.

My 2 cents anyway.

 

[pawsplay]

Actually, I think most would put them in the low-fantasy camp.

Most who? Low fantasy is basically a retronym to describe things that are not high fantasy, and high fantasy is generally considered to be fantasy set in an imaginary world (or an imaginary pseudo-history) that incorporates fairy tale magic and the mythological. It's a definition that explictly includes Thieves World, which is set in an imaginary, Earth-like world, and features a number of powerful spellcasters. The original anthology has a protagonist who is a magician. Althoug magic is rare-er in Thieves World than in Warhammer, it is still an important presence that overshadows anything that would let it to be a pseudohistorical, low fantasy setting.

The archetypal low fantasy is swords-and-sandal fiction, but with made-up country names. You can then add some hoodoos and dark fantasy elements and you're still in the same zip code. But as soon as you add a dragon or an identifiable tradition of publically recognized magicians, you're already wandering into romance territory, and it's just a skip and a jump from there to high fantasy.

Low fantasy usually means quasi-historical characters, no overt metaphysics, and sub-threshold magic, where that threshold is approximately, "Would people start wondering how cost-effective castles are, because of the threat of wizardry?"

 

[Reynard]

Perhaps a couple definitions would help:

Since its inception, many attempts have been made to redefine precisely what "sword and sorcery" is. Although many debate the finer points, the general consensus is that it is characterized by a strong bias toward fast-paced, action-rich tales set within a quasi-mythical or fantastical framework. Unlike high or epic fantasy, the stakes tend to be personal, the danger confined to the moment of telling.

and

The term high fantasy (also epic fantasy) generally refers to fantasy that depicts an epic struggle between good and evil in a fantasy world, parallel to ours. The moral concepts in such tales take on objective status, and are not relative to the one making the judgement.
The moral tone and high stakes — usually world-shaking — separates this genre from sword and sorcery, while the degree to which the world is not based on a real-world history separates it from historical fantasy.

There's also a really poorly written section on the sub-genre "Heroic Fantasy" which included both Conan and LotR in its definitive works, so I am going to at once toss it out the window and say that's what D&D is.

 

[pawsplay]

There's also a really poorly written section on the sub-genre "Heroic Fantasy" which included both Conan and LotR in its definitive works, so I am going to at once toss it out the window and say that's what D&D is.

Tolkien, at least, saw himself as writing into an established "high fantasy" genre. It is not confusion so much as LOTR is a cornerstone of all of modern swords-and-sorcery, epic high fantasy, and modern iterations of the chivalric romance genres, as well as being only one step removed from modern genre fantasy. Modern genre fantasy, especially that of a Mercedes Lackey and the like, is a further iteration of the common tradition Tolkien was writing into.

But when Tolkien was writing, there was no Fantasy/SF section as a proper bookstore. You had some musty old books, and then there were the pulps on the magazine rack. I think it was probably the late 70s before it was clear that several, distinct genres were coming into being. Certainly, Jack Vance's works are uncategorizable if you try to put them into the S&S/high fantasy boxes.

 

[Azgulor]

Most who?

I should have been clearer in my post. I meant that they (TW & WFRP) lean closer to low-fantasy than high-fantasy. Thieves world is clearly Sword-n-sorcery, and that was the original question: swords-n-sorcery vs. high fantasy.

From the (excellent) Thieves' World Gazetteer by Green Ronin: "Thieves World is a sword-n-sorcery setting, not a high-fantasy one; it's focus is more personal than epic, and even it's world-altering stories have a gritty, realistic flavor" (emphasis mine).

From the (uber-awesome) Conan RPG: (After stating that Conan is not 'Low Magic' or 'Low Fantasy'; "However, Conan, as originally visiualised by Robert E. Howard, is not 'high fantasy' either, but sword-and-sorcery. It has much the same relationship to the works of Tolkein as the hard-boiled crime fiction of Raymond Chandler to the more distinctive tales of Agatha Christie. This is visceral, dark, weird fantasy. (emphasis mine again)

Obviously, sword-n-sorcery is it's own genre. When I hear gritty, visceral, personal, etc., however, I tend to think it lies closer to low-fantasy than high fantasy. I think most of the fans of TW, Conan, etc. would tend to agree. Certainly the author of the Dragon article I referenced did.

I didn't mean to imply that it HAS to be that way.

 

[S'mon]

Actually, I think most would put them in the low-fantasy camp. In fact, there was a Dragon from years back that had an article called the Highs and Lows of Fantasy that showcased the two styles. TW was in the low fantasy camp.

Yup. Pawsplay's definifition is not one I've seen anywhere else. Thieves' World is classic low fantasy. Sword & Planet - his 'low fantasy' - is not generally considered fantasy at all.

 

[xechnao]

modern genre fantasy

What is this?

 

[pawsplay]

Yup. Pawsplay's definifition is not one I've seen anywhere else. Thieves' World is classic low fantasy. Sword & Planet - his 'low fantasy' - is not generally considered fantasy at all.

My definition agrees with what is crawled over at Wikipedia:

Low fantasy is an umbrella term, describing various works within different sub-genres of fantasy, to contrast specific works with high fantasy. Though a vague term, some features that may indicate low fantasy are: downplaying of epic or dramatic aspects, de-emphasising magic, real-world settings, realism, cynical storytelling and dark fantasy. An archetypal example of low fantasy might take place in a quasi-historical setting where the protagonists lack a clear moral initiative, are haunted by dark pasts or character flaws and where conventional fantasy elements (such as magic, elves, or dwarves) are lacking or absent.

Clearly, Thieves World is not "classic" low fantasy although it might fit some people's definitions.

One area of confusion seems to be that swords-and-sorcery is often low fantasy, but could be high fantasy. Many people are treating high fantasy as equivalent to LOTR, but there are plenty of high-magic, high adventure settings that are not dualistic and metaphysical. That is why I always specific "epic high fantasy," epic as in grand and heroic, high fantasy as in fantastical. So we have a problem in that there are several ways to describe swords-and-sorcery, whereas high fantasy tends to conflate themes with the setting.

Swords-and sorcery, low fantasy:
Arguably, Conan
The Beastmaster
Lankhmar
The Coming of the Horseclans

Swords-and-sorcery, high fantasy:
Elric
The Dying Earth
Lawrence Watt-Evans's Ethshar series

 

[pawsplay]

What is this?

There are some flavors of fantasy that are almost science-fictional in that they play with certain premises, rather than being about swords-and-sorcery action or epic confrontations between good and evil. Off the top of my head:

- Many of Merceds Lackey's books a lot of what is called fantasy romance
- Modesit's order-chaos books
- Piers Anthony's Xanth
- The Hero and the Crown
- Virtually any setting where magic turns out to have a rational explanation, Warlock In Spite of Himself, Flight of Dragons, etc.

You can see this genre really blossom in the early 1980s. By this time, much of has cross-fertilized other types of stories and the genre is not as distinct. Genre fantasy has come to overlap a lot with high fantasy, S&S stuff, whereas urban fantasy and dark heroic fantasy have become more distinct.

 

[pawsplay]

I should have been clearer in my post. I meant that they (TW & WFRP) lean closer to low-fantasy than high-fantasy. Thieves world is clearly Sword-n-sorcery, and that was the original question: swords-n-sorcery vs. high fantasy.

Sorry, I misread it as to whether Thieves World is low fantasy, which to any great extent it is not.