Ok, so breaking this down a bit...

• Heroic and romantic, in all senses of those terms
• Unapologetic good guys
• Grand quests
• Bright colors
• Melodramatic
• PCs are generally virtuous and altruistic heroes
• More like Han Solo than Boba Fett or Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser
• Combat tends to be dramatic but low on PC lethality
• Exploration is about heroic quests, the thrill of discovery and interaction than logistics and resources.*
• Interaction is a central element of this style, and tends to the melodramatic.
• Worldbuilding is also key, but focused on story and dramatics rather than ‘realism’ or the elaboration of premises."
• Howard Pyle and Hal Foster
• Brighter parts of Tolkien and Lewis
• Fantasy and medieval films of the 30s-60s and 80s
• Select Disney films
• Video games The Legend of Zelda and Dragon Quest
  
• Star Wars IV-VI
  
• Old Hollywood
• Clean
• Good-guy
• Noblebright
• Dragonlance (with the caveat about the novels)
• Elmore art
• General tone of 2nd edition

Pretty much what I thought, what a friend of mine calls "Comic Code D&D".

*Eh, this looks a little bit like "Stupid common wisdom horseshit about Old D&D again".  Sure the Dungeoncrawl specifically has (as necessary) logistics and resource concern, but there being no thrill of discovery...try to fail less.

Talking about P&P I'm going to link this quote:

Spoiler

Now the picture isn't P&P obviously, but the reason I used the quote (which is abridged there) is to point out that there's really two worlds.
1. The way things ought to be.
2. The way things are.

So I see P&P as a type of Utopian fantasy.  A place where Honor, Justice, Valor, Love, Compassion are more than just lies we tell children.

I kind of object to this type of fantasy in general because it essentially reinforces the idea that anything other than being a totally self-centered selfish piece of shit is an Unattainable Utopia, which is obviously incorrect.  Utopian fantasy can be fun, sure, whether it's P&P or whatever you want to call Blue Rose, but, like Paranoia, it's kind of a one-trick pony.

I prefer Paladins who don't live in a world of P&P, but are trying to attain the world of P&P.  By fighting corruption, fighting evil and living as an Exemplar, a Paladin reveals the Great Lie - that people have to be corrupt, that living like animals is the only rational way to survive, and shows everyone that spark of good/divine/whatever inside them that doesn't wallow in Vice, but can actually live in Virtue.

The Paladin isn't there just to fight evil for the normal person, the Paladin is there to show the normal person what they can be.

I contend that in a Paladins and Princesses world, there is no real need for the Paladin.

Now, obviously, it's a dial, not a switch.  But, if you're talking about specifically playing P&P as a genre, you're probably kicking it up to the point of quasi-surrealism, in which case, the Paladin isn't needed, any good fighter can do...and there are many of them.  In a P&P world, the Paladins won ages ago, and all retired.

I think Beyond the Wall would do very well indeed for P&P style gaming. It is wrtitten to emulate coming of age fantasy, Lloyd Alexander's "Prydain", Narnia, the Hobbit, Earthsea.
The character creation system creates young heroes with ties to their community. Even playbooks like the Untested Thief and reformed Bully assume that the character is basically a "good guy". The Would-be Knight is perfect for the aspiring paladin, and the Nobleman's Wild Daughter gives us Princess Eilonwy.

Combat is pretty quick and bloody, as in most low level D&D. But characters do recieve Fortune Points which can be used to stave off death, among other things.

BtW has rapidly become my favorite itteration of the D&D chassis.

Quote from: CRKrueger;928969Now the picture isn't P&P obviously, but the reason I used the quote (which is abridged there) is to point out that there's really two worlds.
1. The way things ought to be.
2. The way things are.

So I see P&P as a type of Utopian fantasy.  A place where Honor, Justice, Valor, Love, Compassion are more than just lies we tell children.

I kind of object to this type of fantasy in general because it essentially reinforces the idea that anything other than being a totally self-centered selfish piece of shit is an Unattainable Utopia, which is obviously incorrect.

I posit that the world of P&P, as a whole, is not necessarily utopian (witness the sorry state of late Third Age Middle-Earth from Bree to Gondor to Umbar and Far Harad), even if the protagonists themselves may hail from "pockets" of utopia (typically rural and bucolic and Merrie England-ish), and set out from their homeland to defend it from something that threatens the world as a whole. They ride forth from pockets of Good the better to defend them from encroaching Evil.

Contrast with S&S protagonists who often hail from barbaric tribes at the rugged edges of human dominion, or the mean streets of a fantasy metropolis, all places where life is cheap and where hardship tempers them into Nietzschean overmen. And though they tend to be harsh, unforgiving types as befits one who hails from harsh, unforgiving lands (S&S has this Naturalist streak a mile wide), they recognize the value of civilization and the rule of law and may indeed become its champions, e.g. King Conan. They ride forth from places where the rule of Law is weak, the better to defend it from encroaching Chaos. (I'm not being subtle about the one-axis vs. two-axes alignment divide here, am I?)

Often there is melancholic talk of a Golden Age who were actually Good and just and hard-working predecessors to modern man (as opposed to, say, debauched slave-owning sorcerer-kings) who pushed back Evil when the world was young (rather than, say, opening portals to other dimensions and summoning eldricht horrors to do their bidding), but in time were brought low by arrogance and complacency (actually the same thing happened to the sorcerer-kings... fucking fantasy writers all read Spengler and Toynbee, it was definitely a thing back then, as was decolonization i.e. empires getting dismantled) and now, once more Evil menaces all that is Good (or some idiot warlock is hellbent on opening the vaults of the old ones and awakened a nameless horror, or barbarians are at the gates, and through the short-sightedness of Man does Chaos/barbarism rise again to threaten Law/civilization).

Sword-and-sorcery is about building a new world from the ashes of an old one, and defending it from menaces within and without, without utopian delusions.

High fantasy is about restoring the world to its Golden Age template.

Quote from: The Butcher;928977I posit that the world of P&P, as a whole, is not necessarily utopian (witness the sorry state of late Third Age Middle-Earth from Bree to Gondor to Umbar and Far Harad),

High fantasy is about restoring the world to its Golden Age template.

See also, Dark Crystal, Willow, and The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe.

Quote from: CRKrueger;928969So I see P&P as a type of Utopian fantasy.

I'd disagree. I think the idea underpinning the tone is that the world can be a Good Place, or a Bad Place, depending on what people do about it. There's usually a cycle where things are Good, then the good people become corrupted, and things slide into Bad, until a hero or heroes take it upon themselves to bring things back to Good. Until the next cycle.

QuoteA place where Honor, Justice, Valor, Love, Compassion are more than just lies we tell children.

This is true. Either because these virtues exist objectivley in the world, or that there are powerful forces that support the ideas. Or maybe a little of both.

We've certainly done this with some homebrew GURPS campaigns. Generally it involves interfering gods who interfere to benefit devout followers who stick to their codes, and sometimes sick them on each other's followers.

Quote from: The Butcher;928977Sword-and-sorcery is about building a new world from the ashes of an old one, and defending it from menaces within and without, without utopian delusions.

High fantasy is about restoring the world to its Golden Age template.

Wait, are you saying that high fantasy and Paladins & Princesses are the same thing? I'm not sure that's a given. High fantasy and fairy-tale fantasy are distinct to me but would both fit under the scope of P&P.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;929064Wait, are you saying that high fantasy and Paladins & Princesses are the same thing? I'm not sure that's a given. High fantasy and fairy-tale fantasy are distinct to me but would both fit under the scope of P&P.

Fairy tale fantasy would probably be too dark for Paladins and Princesses. No, I'm not being ironic, just thinking of a few well-known fairy tales:).

And I think the point is that not all high fantasy needs to be about Paladins and Princesses, but all Paladins and Princesses games are high fantasy;).

Reading this makes me think the difference between sword & sorcery and paladin & princess is like the difference in the art between AD&D 1E and the original run of AD&D 2E books (before they changed it all for cheaper, uglier art). Fairytale heroism and goody-two-shoes PCs and all that, right?

oh, and as far as the OP's question on that RPG.net thread goes, I guess the answer to "why a game where most of the kings and innkeepers and stuff tend to be good-hearted sorts?" is "stakes". If the people in your community are generally nice folk who you get on with then you're going to want to protect them way more than if they are mixed bag of good eggs and buttholes, which helps motivate you to take all those juicy heroic risks when it comes to protecting them. If the dragon's about to burn down the Inn of the Dancing Duck then you're going to be more invested if the innkeeper is your buddy and the inn is associated with all sorts of glowy warm feels than if the innkeeper is a rude dick and the last meal you had there wasn't very good.

Quote from: PolearmPatrol;929080Reading this makes me think the difference between sword & sorcery and paladin & princess is like the difference in the art between AD&D 1E and the original run of AD&D 2E books (before they changed it all for cheaper, uglier art). Fairytale heroism and goody-two-shoes PCs and all that, right?

That's a lot of it, yes. Although I personally associate 1E art more with "Knaves & Kobolds" and "Dungeoncrawling & Demons." "A Paladin in Hell" straddles the line between P&P and DC&D.

Some good stuff here so far.  CRKrueger- nice list!  

Willow is a movie that leaps to mind (god I love that movie- aside from the worst trolls ever).  Legend definitely.

Larry Elmore's art is perfect for it, and right up there would be Keith Parkinson.  

Disney-esque fantasy works, but I like that term "noblebright"

As far as rpg systems for this style of play- it can be a game that nails the tone- as AD&D 2nd ed seems to be getting a solid vote for.  It can be a game that mechanically reinforces it- whatever.

I'm thinking it's a bit old westerns vs. Spaghetti Westerns... some John Wayne (though NOT The Searchers!) movie where rules of behavior are clear and followed by most of the people in town... people actually being as good and upstanding as they'd like to think they are, with a few solid protectors around for when The Other tries to prey on their good inrentions and naivete.
I like those older stories but I'd find it difficult to play that way... at some point I'd be wanting to subvert it, question it, poke it in the eye. Probably fine for a one-shot or short adventure though.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;929064Wait, are you saying that high fantasy and Paladins & Princesses are the same thing? I'm not sure that's a given. High fantasy and fairy-tale fantasy are distinct to me but would both fit under the scope of P&P.

I strongly identify Paladins & Princesses with the high fantasy genre. Fairy tales are a poor fit except in their most bowdlerized versions.

Some classic fairy tales would make Conan blanch.

Quote from: Simlasa;929099I'm thinking it's a bit old westerns vs. Spaghetti Westerns...

That's a good analogy.