[Obdigore]

stone monkey, on Nov 26 2008, 09:36 AM, said:

And The Darkness That Comes Before served especially well at putting me off The Prince of Nothing - fyi I do get the philosophy and find it neither big nor clever.

This. I read Darkness once, and didn't like it. Everyone kept stating that I must not have understood it, so I read it again. Afaik, I do understand it, but I don't agree with it and dislike it just as much the second time.

Runelords, I agree with 'Byss. The world was nifty, the magic system seemed really cool... and it never materialized well. Was that because the publisher wouldn't let Farland go way the hell out there with it, or because Farland didn't want to? I read through book 3 or 4... The last book I read was obviously rushed, so I wonder if Farland didn't do something else completely unexpected, and the publisher made him rewrite it?

Goodkind - Honestly, the first book was ok. It was pretty good standard fantasy for a new author... then the publisher let him do whatever he wanted (I assumed his bald head mesmerized them) and he turned it into trash, trash, and more trash.

[Macros]

I'm with trouble, Rise wasn't a bad book at all, the first shoddy book feist produced was Shards, it was pretty pointless and really introduced the ridiculous over powered pug vrs enemy scenario where every charcter that isnt a super power magician or thomas should by rights be dead automatically.
Some of the legends of the riftwar books (written after shards afaik) were very good (apart from murder in lamut), but chronologically, anything after rage of a demon king is a slow slide in terrible (the latest set, i haven't even brought myself to read the concluding book)

[Lisheo]

Macros, on Nov 28 2008, 04:58 PM, said:

I'm with trouble, Rise wasn't a bad book at all, the first shoddy book feist produced was Shards, it was pretty pointless and really introduced the ridiculous over powered pug vrs enemy scenario where every charcter that isnt a super power magician or thomas should by rights be dead automatically.
Some of the legends of the riftwar books (written after shards afaik) were very good (apart from murder in lamut), but chronologically, anything after rage of a demon king is a slow slide in terrible (the latest set, i haven't even brought myself to read the concluding book)

It's actually offensive what he does with it. Truly. I didn't find Shards that bad, actually, because its what I expected it to be, an overpowered team of heroes wiping out everything that moves and wears sinister clothing after the war.
The latest book is truly terrible though. Im tempted to post a summary of it, but spoilers are bad.

[Macros]

yeah dont spoil it, i will read eventually, out of curiosity as to how bad it really is.

And honestly? offensive, Now I'm all for the dramatic over the top generalisatikons but thats plain ridiculous, whats so bad about rise? it kicks shit out of shards and you knows it!

[Lisheo]

I just couldn't stand the character of Roo and all his "cunning plans" To be honest, I now see that book as wanting to be everything that Lies of Locke Lamora was, the intrigue, the lies, the clever writing... It just seemed dragged out, and then iirc,

Spoiler

Roo dies offscreen and is never really heard of again

. He could have gone off and done another book about someone more interesting or someone we gave a damn about, or even someone that would actually reappear properly. Rise is the only Feist book I\'ve found truly hard to finish.

I\'ve even read the latest ones, for God's sake.
And to add insult to injury, I believe the whole purpose of Rise was to get money to defend against the Queen\'s army?
Bad justification for a below par book, for Feist at that time.

And seriously, Macros, I might bitch about Rise, but the latest one, Wrath of A Mad God (I think) is the worst he's written. Offensive was, in hindsight, perhaps a inappropriate word to use for Rise.
Its not for WaMG.

Grief edit for spoilers.
Bloody hell Fluffy, you're as bad as Lish...Ah...
Ive read some of his stuff, including Wrath and whatever series it is, and my advice is dont. Its just the usual over powered stuff with supposedly interesting "twists" that dont fit, as in, they dont contradict anything, but no ones heard of before, while that isnt a bad thing, it happens almost every book, and none of it fits with whats previously mentioed etc. It is just over powered heroes vs bad guys who everyones like "we dont stand a chance against them" and yet

Spoiler

when it comes to a pretty much straight fight, they win anyhow, with very little cunning or anything involved. All very predictable.

Rise wasnt terrible, but I didnt like it much either. I agree that its like Lies of Locke Lamora, and fails there, as all his "cunning plans" arent actually massively cunning.

WTF Grief, wouldn't it have been easier to post seperately? Ad I think everyones read the Serpentwar by now

[The Drum]

My two fav Fiests book were RoaDK and Honoured Enemy, Lord F Rake is right though things have gone downhill and the last book was a big disapointment. There were so many mistakes it was like nobody bothered proof reading it.

[Macros]

Honoured Enemy is fantastic, i think its one of his best, wether that was forsten (or soemtihng like that)'s influence or just the characters themselve I still dont know.

[Lisheo]

Macros, on Nov 29 2008, 12:17 PM, said:

Honoured Enemy is fantastic, i think its one of his best, wether that was forsten (or soemtihng like that)'s influence or just the characters themselve I still dont know.

Actually, speaking of good spin-off novels, I really loved the Jimmy the Hand book.

[Macros]

oh now you're joking, the one where he

Spoiler

headed south and helped the kids escape from sidi?

it was brock. the other jimmy book with bear in it was ok.

[Macros]

all this discussion prompted me to re-read the serpent war saga, only to find that somoen has poahed my shadow and rise, so i picked up rage and im thoroughly engrossed in the BEST BOOK EV4R!!!

[Sixty]

What makes everyone hate Goodkind so much? Now I might get a lot of flak for this (okay scratch that, a lot), but I thought it had plenty of merits. A lot of it was spontaneous (made even more obvious since I started reading wot immediately afterward), that much is true. However, the action scenes were pretty badass (gratuitously gory and flashy violence is great, one of the reasons I like erikson's books to begin with). One example is the whole ja'la match in the middle of confessor.
Once you get past all of the philosophical/preachy shit (something that may have become easier by my reading style, which is to read really damn fast and scan over parts that are boring), it's really a decent novel.
Then I saw the tv show, and I threw up.

[Lisheo]

Sixty, on Dec 1 2008, 01:01 AM, said:

What makes everyone hate Goodkind so much? Now I might get a lot of flak for this (okay scratch that, a lot), but I thought it had plenty of merits. A lot of it was spontaneous (made even more obvious since I started reading wot immediately afterward), that much is true. However, the action scenes were pretty badass (gratuitously gory and flashy violence is great, one of the reasons I like erikson's books to begin with). One example is the whole ja'la match in the middle of confessor.
Once you get past all of the philosophical/preachy shit (something that may have become easier by my reading style, which is to read really damn fast and scan over parts that are boring), it's really a decent novel.
Then I saw the tv show, and I threw up.

ie once you get past the Mord Sith scenes, the needless violence, the "romance scenes", the Richard Rahl's raptor eyes scenes, the philosophical scenes, the preachy scenes, your left with the really good blurb on the back cover

[Sixty]

Lisheo, on Dec 1 2008, 02:05 AM, said:

Sixty, on Dec 1 2008, 01:01 AM, said:

What makes everyone hate Goodkind so much? Now I might get a lot of flak for this (okay scratch that, a lot), but I thought it had plenty of merits. A lot of it was spontaneous (made even more obvious since I started reading wot immediately afterward), that much is true. However, the action scenes were pretty badass (gratuitously gory and flashy violence is great, one of the reasons I like erikson's books to begin with). One example is the whole ja'la match in the middle of confessor.
Once you get past all of the philosophical/preachy shit (something that may have become easier by my reading style, which is to read really damn fast and scan over parts that are boring), it's really a decent novel.
Then I saw the tv show, and I threw up.

ie once you get past the Mord Sith scenes, the needless violence, the "romance scenes", the Richard Rahl's raptor eyes scenes, the philosophical scenes, the preachy scenes, your left with the really good blurb on the back cover

Well I began reading reading Goodkind around the time I was twelve or thirteen, so needless violence = instant win. I suppose that would explain some things.

As for authors I really didn't like, I'd have to go with Feist. I've only read one trilogy of his (talon, then later kaspar?) and..eh. The way he does his pacing is annoying, randomly describing entire months or, at one point, two years or so, in a couple paragraphs, then spending pages on a few minutes' events. I got started on Tad William's Otherland series, which also happens to be the only fantasy series I haven't finished (or plan on finishing, in the case of asoiaf, wot, etc.). Just got bored. :/ Although I'm considering finishing it just to keep my streak alive.

This post has been edited by Sixty: 01 December 2008 - 01:17 AM

[teholbeddict]

Obdigore, on Nov 28 2008, 10:10 AM, said:

stone monkey, on Nov 26 2008, 09:36 AM, said:

And The Darkness That Comes Before served especially well at putting me off The Prince of Nothing - fyi I do get the philosophy and find it neither big nor clever.

This. I read Darkness once, and didn't like it. Everyone kept stating that I must not have understood it, so I read it again. Afaik, I do understand it, but I don't agree with it and dislike it just as much the second time.

I'm reading this trilogy now, I've finished Darkness and am halfway through Warrior Prophet. I bought all three at once so I'm stuck with them now, but I must say I'm not overly impressed. Maybe I'm too used to the fast pace of SE, as this series just seems to be incredibly slow. Everything is incredibly drawn out and lethargic. Book one was really underwhelming, but I moved on to the second book in hopes that it would pick up. While there does seem to be a bit more momentum and development taking place, Akka's inner turmoil, dithering and crying are driving me up the wall. The materials not horrible it just hasn't live up to the hype so far. We'll see if I've changed my opinion by the end of the trilogy, as it does have some interesting elements. There really is potential for the trilogy to be great, but it's just not coming together so far.

[Lisheo]

Sixty, on Dec 1 2008, 01:10 AM, said:

Lisheo, on Dec 1 2008, 02:05 AM, said:

Sixty, on Dec 1 2008, 01:01 AM, said:

What makes everyone hate Goodkind so much? Now I might get a lot of flak for this (okay scratch that, a lot), but I thought it had plenty of merits. A lot of it was spontaneous (made even more obvious since I started reading wot immediately afterward), that much is true. However, the action scenes were pretty badass (gratuitously gory and flashy violence is great, one of the reasons I like erikson's books to begin with). One example is the whole ja'la match in the middle of confessor.
Once you get past all of the philosophical/preachy shit (something that may have become easier by my reading style, which is to read really damn fast and scan over parts that are boring), it's really a decent novel.
Then I saw the tv show, and I threw up.

ie once you get past the Mord Sith scenes, the needless violence, the "romance scenes", the Richard Rahl's raptor eyes scenes, the philosophical scenes, the preachy scenes, your left with the really good blurb on the back cover

Well I began reading reading Goodkind around the time I was twelve or thirteen, so needless violence = instant win. I suppose that would explain some things.

As for authors I really didn't like, I'd have to go with Feist. I've only read one trilogy of his (talon, then later kaspar?) and..eh. The way he does his pacing is annoying, randomly describing entire months or, at one point, two years or so, in a couple paragraphs, then spending pages on a few minutes' events. I got started on Tad William's Otherland series, which also happens to be the only fantasy series I haven't finished (or plan on finishing, in the case of asoiaf, wot, etc.). Just got bored. :/ Although I'm considering finishing it just to keep my streak alive.

Myself and Macros have spoken of his latest series.
Don't finish it.
Please.
I ejoyed the Kaspar book, Exile's Return, but the rest is terrible, and even that is only middling.

Read Magician. Then everything up to the Serpentwar. Then forget Feist exists. Please.

[detritus]

Lisheo, on Dec 1 2008, 01:05 AM, said:

Sixty, on Dec 1 2008, 01:01 AM, said:

What makes everyone hate Goodkind so much? Now I might get a lot of flak for this (okay scratch that, a lot), but I thought it had plenty of merits. A lot of it was spontaneous (made even more obvious since I started reading wot immediately afterward), that much is true. However, the action scenes were pretty badass (gratuitously gory and flashy violence is great, one of the reasons I like erikson's books to begin with). One example is the whole ja'la match in the middle of confessor.
Once you get past all of the philosophical/preachy shit (something that may have become easier by my reading style, which is to read really damn fast and scan over parts that are boring), it's really a decent novel.
Then I saw the tv show, and I threw up.

ie once you get past the Mord Sith scenes, the needless violence, the "romance scenes", the Richard Rahl's raptor eyes scenes, the philosophical scenes, the preachy scenes, your left with the really good blurb on the back cover

I wouldn't call the blurb REALLY good. Maybe just kinda good at best...who am I kidding the blurb sucks too.

[Darkwatch]

mandog, on Nov 30 2008, 10:44 PM, said:

Lisheo, on Dec 1 2008, 01:05 AM, said:

Sixty, on Dec 1 2008, 01:01 AM, said:

What makes everyone hate Goodkind so much? Now I might get a lot of flak for this (okay scratch that, a lot), but I thought it had plenty of merits. A lot of it was spontaneous (made even more obvious since I started reading wot immediately afterward), that much is true. However, the action scenes were pretty badass (gratuitously gory and flashy violence is great, one of the reasons I like erikson's books to begin with). One example is the whole ja'la match in the middle of confessor.
Once you get past all of the philosophical/preachy shit (something that may have become easier by my reading style, which is to read really damn fast and scan over parts that are boring), it's really a decent novel.
Then I saw the tv show, and I threw up.

ie once you get past the Mord Sith scenes, the needless violence, the "romance scenes", the Richard Rahl's raptor eyes scenes, the philosophical scenes, the preachy scenes, your left with the really good blurb on the back cover

I wouldn't call the blurb REALLY good. Maybe just kinda good at best...who am I kidding the blurb sucks too.

I knew someone who loved the books a lot. And I mean a lot.
She wanted to dress up as a Mord Sith for Halloween.
She thought the ending of the series was well thought out.
If she could have any power in fantasy she wanted to be a Confessor.

So I asked her: "Does the series have any... Flying Fortresses? Maybe a long rich history that paints the world?"
Her answer: "No. But there's an awesome scene with a demonic chicken!"

Suffice to say I tried to push MBotF to her, no success was had.


And a random thought just occured to me. We should print t-shirts with the following slogan on them:

"Dragnipur > Sword of Truth"

[Stalker]

Darkwatch, on Dec 1 2008, 12:14 AM, said:

And a random thought just occured to me. We should print t-shirts with the following slogan on them:

"Dragnipur > Sword of Truth"

Wow, what a great idea. I would get one of those.

Also I noticed that many of the series listed here are ones that either are well liked as kids (except Goodkind), or are made with a purpose in mind. Like the Eddings stuff I loved when I was little so I do enjoy those. Then Feist wrote his beginning stuff based off a computer game so thats trying to get those gamers into reading. Anyway thats how I see it. While they may suck they sell well for whatever reason while sadly the really good ones don't always get noticed.

[Walker]

I would have to say Dragonlance and Eragon both need to be erased and never read by anyone ever again. Raistlin was the only good quality of Dragonlance for me, but even that wasn't enough to save the whole series for me.

[Lisheo]

Eragon is actually quite an offensive series. Paolini has no idea where he's going with it, there's no originality, the characters bore me to tears, and there's too much of a hint of beastiality going on with the whole Eragon-Saphira relationship. *shudders*



Dragnipur >The Sword of Truth