'Sword and Sorcery' vs. 'Heroic Fantasy' and the like.

[Stella Brando]

The D&D EEEEE Dungeon Master's Guide describes the fantasy sub-genres like this:

FLAVORS OF FANTASY

DUNGEONS & DRAGONS is a fantasy game, but that broad category encompasses a lot of variety. Many different flavors of fantasy exist in fiction and film. Do you want a horrific campaign inspired by the works of H. P. Lovecraft or Clark Ashton Smith? Or do you envision a world of muscled barbarians and nimble thieves, along the lines of the classic sword-and-sorcery books by Robert E. Howard and Fritz Leiber? Your choice can have a impact on the flavor of your campaign.

HEROIC FANTASY
Heroic fantasy is the baseline assumed by the D&D rules. The Player's Handbook describes this baseline:

A multitude of humanoid races coexist with humans in fantastic worlds. Adventurers bring magical powers to bear against the monstrous threats they face. These characters typically come from ordinary backgrounds, but something impels them into an adventuring life. The adventurers are the "heroes" of the campaign, but they might not be truly heroic, instead pursuing this life for selfish reasons. Technology and society are based on medieval norms, though the culture isn't necessarily European. Campaigns often revolve around delving into ancient dungeons in search of treasure or in an effort to destroy monsters or villains. This genre is also common in fantasy fiction. Most novels set in the Forgotten Realms are best described as heroic fantasy, following in the footsteps of many of the authors listed in appendix E of the Player's Handbook.

SWORD AND SORCERY
A grim, hulking fighter disembowels the high priest of the serpent god on his own altar. A laughing rogue spends ill-gotten gains on cheap wine in filthy taverns. Hardy adventurers venture into the unexplored jungle in search of the fabled City of Golden Masks.

A sword-and-sorcery campaign emulates some of the classic works of fantasy fiction , a tradition that goes back to the roots of the game. Here you'll find a dark, gritty world of evil sorcerers and decadent cities, where protagonists are motivated more by greed and self interest than by altruistic virtue. Fighter, rogue, and Barbarian characters tend to be far more common than wizards, clerics, or paladins. In such a pulp fantasy setting, those who wield magic often symbolize the decadence and corruption of civilization, and wizards are the classic villains of these settings. Magic items are therefore rare and often dangerous.

Certain DUNGEONS & DRAGONS novels follow in the footsteps of classic sword-and-sorcery novels. The world of Athas (as featured in numerous Dark Sun novels and game products), with its heroic gladiators and tyrannical sorcerer-kings, belongs squarely in this genre.

The book also has short descriptions of Epic Fantasy (like Dragonlance apparently, I never read it), Mythic Fantasy (Hercules and Xena), Dark Fantasy (Ravenloft), Intrigue (Game of Thrones-style potting), Mystery (CSI: Faerun), Swashbuckling (The Princess Bride), War (The Return of the King) and Wuxia (Kung Fu).

Anyway, I can’t help but feel that the description of Sword and Sorcery feels so much more appealing than 'Heroic' or 'High' Fantasy with its various elves and abundant magic and so on.

I’m sure you guys have your own opinions. What do you think?

 

[Shrimp]

I really disagree with the idea that the two apparently are supposed to be mutually exclusive. A warrior (or any kind of character) driven by avarice can still be the hero of the story. What if his motivation is the promised reward for completing certain heroic deeds like destroying a dark lord terrorising a country? What if the sense of conquering the unknown for the purpose of proving himself is his interest?

If I had to make a distinction between fantasy genres I'd much rather just split them in two: low fantasy for more 'grounded' and traditional adventures and high fantasy for the modern kitchen sink fantasy where more or less everything can be added and justified with throwaway excuses such as "it's just fantasy." From there on you can always say the story/universe/campaign features elements from the different types of fantasy sub-genres you listed.
Intrigue-oriented stories will play out differently in high fantasy and low fantasy settings, but will likely still run into the same situations and conflicts. In a tabletop context it also means the campaign would play out in a specific way. You'd probably have less combat encounters than in a dungeon crawling adventure and there might be a greater focus on characters, their personalities, relations and actions.

I think it ultimately comes down to what kind of campaign or game you're looking for. The description of Sword and Sorcery is broader and opens up more possibilities and opportunities since it's about a character venturing into the world, whereas the description of heroic fantasy suggests there already is a final goal or destination in mind. At its very heart and core D&D is built for dungeon crawling adventures so I guess it makes sense that the heroic fantasy (when using the description provided by the master guide) is the baseline for the ruleset.

 

[octavius]

Based on the definitions cited I prefer Heroic Fantasy for games and S&S for reading.

 

[Urthor]

I don't really give a shit about which specific genre or setting is used, I care about the writing, art style and execution of that setting.

Art in all forms is really not about my specific preference for whatever message the artist is actually delivering, what I want to see is excellent *delivery*

 

[Dorateen]

Heroic Fantasy



Sword and Sorcery

 

[InD_ImaginE]

Eh Sword and Sorcery is boring as fuck.

Big bad Wizard yada2, half naked hero smashing face, maybe saving some damsel. That's it.

Probably will be more interesting if there people who do more to it rather than that, but currently, no thanks.

 

[what am i doing]

As far as worldbuilding goes, out of those two, Sword and Sorcery by far; although it's not my favourite sort of setting it's still pretty up there. Certainly it's much better than the generic tripe they describe Heroic Fantasy as being.

 

[Neanderthal]

Anyway, I can’t help but feel that the description of Sword and Sorcery feels so much more appealing than 'Heroic' or 'High' Fantasy with its various elves and abundant magic and so on.

I'm with you.

 

[Melcar]

Sword and Sorcery description is (maybe intentionally) dull. Anyway, Heroic Fantasy for games and shit, while Swords and Sorcery makes good reading material. Personal taste. I really can't stand most of the Heroic Fantasy books.

 

[smaug]

All of the above.

 

[hell bovine]

The 'everyone is tripping on magic shrooms', aka Morrowind option.

 

[sputtering fart balloon]

Tolkien ruined the fantasy genre. I like him but people now literally believe that "fantasy" just means the genres you have listed, which are all inspired more or less by Tolkien in some way at least in their current popular incarnations. Gotta have swords and other pseudo-medieval stuff, people think (excepting Urban Fantasy or Magic Realism). But the pre-Tolkien definition of fantasy was just "occurs in a totally made up world", so you had stuff like Wizard of Oz.

Not a lot of old-style fantasy is written nowadays, but I have relatively recently enjoyed Walter Moers's Zamonia books, or at least I did a decade ago when I read them. This one is about a dog man (mythical German Wolpertinger) named Rumo on his quest to find the Silver Thread, with nary an elf in sight:

I wish there was a game based on this.