My response to "S&S vs HF" Part 1

Read James Mishler's comments pertaining to an essay about the impact of Sword & Sorcery and High Fantasy on D&D by Santiago. I will comment on Santiago's post once I have time to digest it. Instead I will focus on James Mishler's, because that's where I read it first.

James argues that the classic S&S character wasn't fated to become a hero like those in high fantasy and 'new school' gaming. Characters such as Conan and Elric were self-made and not destined. Problem is that we first meet Conan as king of Aquilonia. Conan is already at the top. Only two Conan stories, written by Howard, occur after the first story chronologically. Narratively, Conan is predestined to become Aquilonia's king because the reader is first introduced to him as king. As for Elric, fate plays a hand throughout all the early stories. Heck, Elric inadvertently ushers in the new world, aka ours, because that is his purpose. So I wouldn't say that Sword and Sorcery characters achieved their success entirely on their own.

I do agree that fate plays a much stronger role in High Fantasy. That's because High Fantasy is about Good versus Evil. In contrast Sword and Sorcery is not about good versus evil nor does it try to prove a point. Unlike S&S, the protagonists face circumstances that may require sacrifice or result in tragedy. Honestly, Elric would also qualify as a High Fantasy character. Just not within traditional definitions. Hence, the creation of Dark Fantasy genre.

Honestly, I don't really think High Fantasy gaming truly exists, at least not in D&D. Sure a game may try to emulate LotR. Problem is its only an emulation not a true representation of high fantasy. Few game systems, D&D included, can accomodate the genre trappings.

Likewise, true S&S style games don't exist either. Sword and Sorcery stories show snapshots of their protagonists lives. S&S does not occur in a day-to-day manner for it is more episodic. After all, many S&S stories weren't published, much less written, in chronological order. So how is a campaign that proceeds in a continuous, day-to-day fashion a true Swords and Sorcery campaign.

The final contention is that modern gaming, particular D&D 4E, follows High Fantasy literaturewhere characters cannot fail or are meant to. There's problems in that assertion. One, fourth edition is more gamist than any previous edition. Two, the game and its players have more than just literary influences. Third, Sword and Sorcery characters have the same success rate as their High Fantasy counterparts. Its all predetermined. Fourth, characters tend to start out as experienced novices in RPGs. They rarely do in fiction, S&S or High Fantasy. The Conan in Tower of the Elephant is inexperienced as a thief but he is an experienced fighter.

If there is one thing that fourth edition, and gaming in general, can be accused of is that is has de-emphasized its Sword and Sorcery roots.