Mike Richards said:
Sci-fi has the Doctor, basically end of story.
Never bet against the Time Lord.
This.
The Doctor has the TARDIS, so he can go back in time and change things to go in the battle's favor. Plus he had the sonic screwdriver which can pretty much do anything, let's hope he upgrades the thing so it will work on wood.
But since even the Doctor Who villains and monsters would be able to fight on Sci-Fi's side, do a controlled release of Vashta Narada in the Fantasy controlled zones, no organic beings would be left alive.
And for the things that The Doctor would deem objectionable, The Master would take those jobs.
Nautical Honors Society said:
You can have elements of sci-fi in a fantasy and still have it be fantasy, but you can't have elements of fantasy in sci-fi and still have it be sci-fi. So fantasy wins, although I love both.
That's not true. There is plenty of sci-fi with fantasy in it, but you would never see people looking for it in the fantasy section for it. Because if a story has a sci-fi base, it will always be considered sci-fi. Nit picky purists are the only ones that would think such things.
But pretty much all sci-fi has fantasy in it: Any sci-fi that takes place on some unknown world or in some point in the future, has fantasy in it. The sci-fi writer fantasies what that unknown world is going to be like, or what new and different technologies might be in said future, fantasizing if there are any new lifeforms. Fantasizing takes imagination, a lot of imagination goes into lifeforms and new technologies in sci-fi.
Your interpretation on how the two mix is wrong, because it would go both ways, fantasy couldn't be fantasy if it has sci-fi in it. It is a stalemate, we have to determine if a story has more fantasy or more sci-fi, and then the one it has the most of is the side it goes on.
Still, no way fantasy can win.