Wheel of Time vs The First Law Trilogy vs The Sword of Truth

[Liquor Box]

Hi All

I am looking for some suggestions on which fantasy series to embark on.

I am a big fan of A Song of Fire and Ice. I also read (mostly as a child) many books in the Dragonlance universe, and many of the Feist books. I have also read the first book of the Wheel of Time series (Eye of the World) and found it ok, but not great.

My preference is for grittier worlds where people are less clearly good and evil and are portrayed more realistically. (so more akin to ASoFaI then LOR). Perhaps veering toward dark fantasy. I think I also like the low magic ASoFaI setting, but that's not crucial and I realise most settings have big magic.

Which of the above series should I look at next? Any others? Any recommendations gratefully received.

[Forum Explorer]

Hi All

I am looking for some suggestions on which fantasy series to embark on.

I am a big fan of A Song of Fire and Ice. I also read (mostly as a child) many books in the Dragonlance universe, and many of the Feist books. I have also read the first book of the Wheel of Time series (Eye of the World) and found it ok, but not great.

My preference is for grittier worlds where people are less clearly good and evil and are portrayed more realistically. (so more akin to ASoFaI then LOR). Perhaps veering toward dark fantasy. I think I also like the low magic ASoFaI setting, but that's not crucial and I realise most settings have big magic.

Which of the above series should I look at next? Any others? Any recommendations gratefully received.

Do not read the Sword of Truth books at all. Ever. Not even if someone is paying you to do so. They are really really bad. To be fair the first few are alright. Some weird sex stuff and way to much rape (like holy crap, I think every book has multiple rape scenes in it), but overall a C-. But it drags on, gets worse and worse with crappy pseudo philosophy garbage, the main character gets more and more Sueish, with more and more absolutely drop dead gorgeous women fall madly in love with him, while the main villains plot is really stupid and relies on everyone in the world apparently being a moron.

So yeah, do not read.


I would recommend the Codex Alerea series. It basically has magic Romans with a pretty decently unique fantasy universe. It's Romans so lots of politics, backstabbing, and alliances of convenience to boot.

[Kitten Champion]

I would recommend the The First Law trilogy if you have no issue with grittiness or darker plot elements. Unlike Martin's work though, it's less about verisimilitude in the world-building/characters/politics and more of a grim satirical work which uses fantasy tropes in a self-aware manner ultimately to criticize our contemporary world in a variety of ways.

While I love Wheel of Time, it's decidedly Heroic fantasy and comfortable with that. More meta about itself perhaps, and there are shades of grey in there, but the work as a whole is pretty black & white where the black at least is pretty well defined. I will say the Eye of the World is fairly weak as far as the overall series goes, Jordan following the general framework from Fellowship of the Ring and the characters being pretty nascent in their development makes it feel more generic. Once he starts getting his ideas out there it gets a lot more interesting.

As to Sword of Truth, don't read it. It's funny at points for how seriously it takes itself relative to the goofiness and melodrama of the actual material, but once you run into the multi-page Objectivist rants it's just a chore to read through. Sword of Truth is the most self-indulgent work I've read, just incomparable arrogance in written form.

[HasSIn]

Of those three The First Law is the closest in tone to ASOIAF, so I would go with that. Also, make sure to read his standalone novels, too. Personally, I think they are better than the trilogy.

[Khedrac]

Personally I don't think the Sword of Truth that bad, but I woud way that it is not what I think you are looking for. (It also suffers badly from being too long, the middle books are distinctly poor and I think the series would have been a lot better if kept a lot shorter (say 3 boks not 10).
I've not read The First Law and I gave up about 4 or 5 books into The Wheel of Time

I'd second the Codex Alera recommendation.

[Anteros]

It really depends on what you liked about ASoIaF. In terms of prose, world building, and attention to detail Wheel of Time is the closest by quite a bit. It's more classical fantasy though.

First Law's prose reads a bit more like a young adult novel. The characters didn't grab me enough to finish the series, so I can't really give a detailed review on it.

Sword of Truth is almost universally reviled....and not without cause. The first book is mediocre and it goes downhill from there. I would only recommend this series if you enjoy rape fantasy and mary sue protagonists.

If what you liked about GRRM's novels is a fantasy story with likable characters in a crapsack world with an author who doesn't pull his punches then you might try the Lies of Locke Lamora series. It's much less epic in scope than ASoIaF, but well written.

[dps]

You might want to check out Glen Cook's Black Company books. Definitely not low-magic, but people for the most part aren't clearly good and evil. Well, some of them are quite clearly evil, but clearly good characters are a bit hard to find (the protagonists, the Black Company, are mercenaries who are working for the bad guys).

[paddyfool]

The only one of those I've read is the wheel of time, which I enjoyed initially but found the plot started to slow down painfully after about the first three books, although I eventually made it about 9 books in.

It may be worth glancing through this list for some more ideas: https://www.buzzfeed.com/awesomer/fantasy-forever?utm_term=.ugQDvYJn7#.epd2QApR0

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Wheel of Time is an amazingly epic series, though not without its flaws (looking at you, Books 6-8). Sword of Truth is a pretty poor series—I made it about 5 books in before giving up. I haven’t read the other option that you mention, so no opinion there. I think, however, that WoT is pretty different in tone from ASoIaF, so that is something to keep in mind.

[The Glyphstone]

I was scared that this was going to be an actual Vs. thread, and ready for multi-page arguements of whether MORAL CLARITY is stronger than FATE.

[Knaight]

The First Law fits your criteria the best, and as has been stated above The Sword of Truth is just bad - if you read Atlas Shrugged and thought it was great, but it just needed less editing and more poorly thought out fantasy elements, it might be to your taste, otherwise avoid it.

That said, there are other books I'd recommend over these given your stated preferences, starting with the vast majority of Guy Gavriel Kay's writing with the notable exceptions of the Fionavar Tapestry and Ysabel. On the slightly more obscure end I'd also recommend M.K. Hume's retellings of Athurian myth, which is much more historically grounded than usual, has much more human characters, and is generally borderline historical fiction enough to be found outside the Fantasy section in libraries.

[An Enemy Spy]

Sword of Truth is horrible. Bad prose, overpowered protagonists who at times are only better than the villains because the bad guys are so over the top evil that it becomes silly, long moralistic screeds that are just Terry Goodkind preaching directly to you through his characters' mouths, gratuitous rape fantasies that were probably typed with one hand, and chickens that are not chickens but evil manifest. Oh, and Terry Goodkind is a massive egotist and a jerk who thinks his books are so high above the rest of his genre that they can't even be called fantasy 'cause they've got like, themes and stuff. And he ripped off Wheel of Time and then said anyone who's read WoT and sees the similarities is too young and immature to understand his books.

[BWR]

Chung Kuo by David Wingrove. SF, not magical fantasy, set in a not too distant future where true history is hidden, a Chinese-based society has taken over and stagnated. Some people, chafing under the restrictions and racism, rebel. Tons of characters, good characterization, lots of politics, few obvious good guys and radical change in the world from beginning to end.
The sad thing about it is that it starts off really, really good but the last couple of books are pretty bad. It's still worth a read for the good ones, just be aware you will be disappointed at the ending. I've only read the original 8 books, however, not the expanded re-release series, so it may have been fixed somewhat.

[Douglas]

Of these three series, the only one I've read is Wheel of Time. For the primary protagonists and antagonists, it is indeed very much a classic good vs evil story. However, one of the things I like most about it is that it takes a standard hero-literally-saves-the-world type of story and shows how much of an ugly sprawling mess such a situation would really be. Oh, you're the guy all those prophecies are talking about? Great! Now to do the job prophecy has laid out for you, you just need to prove your identity as the prophesied hero, convince a dozen major national governments of it, persuade hundreds of diverse politicians to put aside their personal ambitions and pet causes long enough to help you, resist all of their efforts to take over control from you (sometimes by force) because they obviously know what should be done better than you, somehow get them all to work together, beat some of the more stubborn ones into submission, and forge all their armies into a united force. Oh yeah, and fight all the bad guys too.

So, I think Wheel of Time has some of the more realistic portrayal you want, though the most prominent characters are still pretty clearly either good or evil. Also, The Eye of the World doesn't show much of all that stuff, and is one of the weaker books in the series.

[GrayDeath]

Of the three you mentioned, the First Law Trilogy fits your criteria best by far.

it is also a series I would recommend anyone who likes sarcastic and rather grey worldbuilding and charactrers, so go for it.

Wheel of Time is... Long. And filled with crappily made women that pull their braids for apges on end, and bloated with unnecessary stuff (Books 6-8 indeed, argh), but voerall a good to very good series IF you can cope with said flaws and a very clear Good/Evil Divide.

Sword of Truth.... well. Its not as horrible as many say, but not good in any way either, so just avoid it unless youa re immune to InBook Preaching of the most obvious kind (I read them when Iw as much younger and found the first book to be good, and the second and third to be decent, from then onwards it gets ...weirder....).

[Gnoman]

Sword of Truth.... well. Its not as horrible as many say, but not good in any way either, so just avoid it unless youa re immune to InBook Preaching of the most obvious kind (I read them when Iw as much younger and found the first book to be good, and the second and third to be decent, from then onwards it gets ...weirder....).

On the contrary. Most of the people in this thread are making it sound much better than it actually is.

[kraftcheese]

I've really enjoyed China Mieville's Bas Lag trilogy; it's not so much low fantasy as it is weird fantasy though.

It has it's problems (Perdido Street Station especially has some bloated descriptions and odd plot points that don't lead anywhere) but over all it's a really interesting setting with a great deal of history and an incredible sense of place....like everything and everyone that you encounter throughout the story has a history and reason for being there.

[JeenLeen]

I haven't read First Law (or I forget all details about it), but I have read Wheel of Time and Sword of Truth. I liked both, though I think Sword of Truth got a little weird near the end.

Anti - Sword of Truth
Sword of Truth has one of the most depressing books I've ever read in it; a friend of mine who loved that series would re-read it every year or two, and just skipped that book. Part of it is the author showing political leanings (not Democrat vs. Republican type, but communist vs. liberterian, I guess... I don't want to get into discussing that part in detail lest violate forum rules), and it starts off minimal enough but in the end gets annoying. Like, even if you agree with the general philosophy the author has, it's still bothersome and breaks verisimilitude.
And, yeah, there's a rape scene in about (if not) every book. The level of detail varies, but in some books it's bad. BUT it's not really a defining part of the books overall; rather, it's just scene in one chapter of each book (at least, for most books). I once recommended it to a teenage parishioner at my church who liked fantasy and sci-fi, but only later remembered the rape scenes and rather hoped their mom never found out I recommended the book.

Pro Sword of Truth
But, despite all that, I found it a really nice read. The metaphysics are interesting, I found the characters engaging (at least in the early books), and the magic system is neat if loosely defined. It has some strong cliches, but there aren't horribly done. For the most part, I found it a rather fun series.

Pro Wheel of Time
It's probably the best fantasy series I've read that isn't a classic like Tolkein's stuff. I'm also a huge fan of Brandon Sanderson, so his finishing it up was a plus for me.

Anti Wheel of Time
It can drag at times. My friend who loved both series skips most of one book when he re-reads since it has a huge part of just politics, like the political maneuvering of one nation and how its trade agreements are going and such. I found it interesting, but I can see why some would find it really boring. I think at least one book had just a few chapters with the main character in it, which can be off-putting but works. (On the other hand, one of the books in Sword of Truth also is from a different point of view, so that's a mark against both series.)

Overall

When I first tried to read Wheel of Time, I found the first book too uninteresting to get engaged. So I read Sword of Truth first. This was sometime in high school. A few years later, I started Wheel of Time. I can say that Wheel of Time is a better read, but Sword of Truth is an easier read.

Codex Alerea

Great, great series.

[Xyril]

Personally I don't think the Sword of Truth that bad, but I woud way that it is not what I think you are looking for. (It also suffers badly from being too long, the middle books are distinctly poor and I think the series would have been a lot better if kept a lot shorter (say 3 boks not 10).

I enjoyed the first few Sword of Truth books. Not so much anything after that. I vaguely recall reading somewhere that around halfway through the series, the author either ditched his editor, or perhaps had become so popular that the power dynamics between him and his publisher/editor had shifted. Not sure if that's actually true, or just someone's speculation online, or if I'm just completely misremembering, that would be explain the main flaws I see in the latter works: A bit bloated, very sloppy, and as others have mentioned, maybe a little self-indulgent by an author who likes his own writing a bit much.`The first few books weren't particularly highbrow or original, but they were fun enough and made me care about the characters enough to keep reading even after they stopped being fun... for a while, at least.

[Velaryon]

I haven't read First Law (or I forget all details about it), but I have read Wheel of Time and Sword of Truth. I liked both, though I think Sword of Truth got a little weird near the end.

Anti - Sword of Truth
Sword of Truth has one of the most depressing books I've ever read in it; a friend of mine who loved that series would re-read it every year or two, and just skipped that book. Part of it is the author showing political leanings (not Democrat vs. Republican type, but communist vs. liberterian, I guess... I don't want to get into discussing that part in detail lest violate forum rules), and it starts off minimal enough but in the end gets annoying. Like, even if you agree with the general philosophy the author has, it's still bothersome and breaks verisimilitude.
And, yeah, there's a rape scene in about (if not) every book. The level of detail varies, but in some books it's bad. BUT it's not really a defining part of the books overall; rather, it's just scene in one chapter of each book (at least, for most books). I once recommended it to a teenage parishioner at my church who liked fantasy and sci-fi, but only later remembered the rape scenes and rather hoped their mom never found out I recommended the book.

Pro Sword of Truth
But, despite all that, I found it a really nice read. The metaphysics are interesting, I found the characters engaging (at least in the early books), and the magic system is neat if loosely defined. It has some strong cliches, but there aren't horribly done. For the most part, I found it a rather fun series.


I enjoyed the first few Sword of Truth books. Not so much anything after that. I vaguely recall reading somewhere that around halfway through the series, the author either ditched his editor, or perhaps had become so popular that the power dynamics between him and his publisher/editor had shifted. Not sure if that's actually true, or just someone's speculation online, or if I'm just completely misremembering, that would be explain the main flaws I see in the latter works: A bit bloated, very sloppy, and as others have mentioned, maybe a little self-indulgent by an author who likes his own writing a bit much.`The first few books weren't particularly highbrow or original, but they were fun enough and made me care about the characters enough to keep reading even after they stopped being fun... for a while, at least.

It has been many years since I last read anything from Terry Goodkind, but from what I remember...

His political beliefs (i.e. those of Ayn Rand) are present to some degree since the beginning, but don't really monopolize the story until around book 5. Books 7 and 8 are the absolute nadir of the series IMO, and then it somewhat gets better from there. However, around that time is when the main character's absolute Mary Sue-ish qualities are at their worst as well.

A large part of each book can be summed up as:

Richard: "__________."
Literally everyone else: "You're wrong about __________."
Richard: "No, I'm right about __________."
*Events prove Richard to be right and everyone else to be wrong.*
Everyone else: "We never should have doubted you about __________."
*And then they go through the same routine in the next book.*

I was a pretty big fan of the series as a teen, but even then a few things bothered me. One is that Goodkind is really bad about just dropping characters out of the story for numerous books at a time, with little to no explanation for why they've suddenly stopped participating much in the plot. Sometimes they come back later, sometimes they don't.

[Xyril]

It has been many years since I last read anything from Terry Goodkind, but from what I remember...

His political beliefs (i.e. those of Ayn Rand) are present to some degree since the beginning, but don't really monopolize the story until around book 5. Books 7 and 8 are the absolute nadir of the series IMO, and then it somewhat gets better from there. However, around that time is when the main character's absolute Mary Sue-ish qualities are at their worst as well.


As a more or less libertarian person who probably agrees with a good number of the broad tenets of Objectivism, I probably have a higher threshold of tolerance for Goodkind's particularly philosophical screeds than than someone who strongly disagrees with them--and I found them intolerable enough to stop reading about halfway through the series.



I was a pretty big fan of the series as a teen, but even then a few things bothered me. One is that Goodkind is really bad about just dropping characters out of the story for numerous books at a time, with little to no explanation for why they've suddenly stopped participating much in the plot. Sometimes they come back later, sometimes they don't.

This is one of the reasons why I think that a few books in, his editor became Norma Bates in the wine cellar. An editor who doesn't have the whole story living in his head can ask the questions the audience would ask and point out omissions like this.

[Kitten Champion]

A large part of each book can be summed up as:

Richard: "__________."
Literally everyone else: "You're wrong about __________."
Richard: "No, I'm right about __________."
*Events prove Richard to be right and everyone else to be wrong.*
Everyone else: "We never should have doubted you about __________."
*And then they go through the same routine in the next book.*


It's protagonist-centred morality, written by someone whose Hero is a mouthpiece for his own worldview which he believes to be absolutely and objectively correct. It's more black & white than Wheel of Time, just the black is whatever personally affronts Goodkind - be they liberal Democrats, peace activists, or vegetarians - while white is his "Truth". Thus you get every other character either falling into lockstep behind his Hero in obvious awe of his genius and profound insights into the universe of which they were oh-so ignorant before, or see themselves erected into strawmen to be debased (and if that villain is female, likely sexually so) and destroyed.

Which is something maintained regardless of what the Hero actually does, because in Goodkind's mind the ends literally do justify the means. What you do doesn't define your moral worth so much as believing what Goodkind believes with the fierceness that he believes it. Murder, torture, beating children, whatever -- if you're in the Right than everything is permitted to you and without consideration or conscience, which are the fetters of lesser men.

It could've been a brilliant parody of the Heroic fantasy genre as a very might-make-right kind of thing. Giving its hero a magic sword with "truth" literally written on it, prophecies to surround him and mark his future greatness, a wise hermit mentor to exclaim how exceptional and great he is, and then have him go out into the world to tear through all who stand in his way like a hot knife through greasy butter. That lining up all these cliched moral symbols somehow justify his ever-growing body-count and extremely questionable positions.

However, Goodkind's works are well above such trite, according to Goodkind, and has no relation to Fantasy, parody or otherwise.

[Ogrezero]

The Malazan Book of the Fallen series may work. It's definitely a dark tone, it's a complex world, and basically all of the characters are shades of gray.

[Tvtyrant]

I haven't read First Law, but Wheel of Time is extremely stock fantasy focused on massive exposition dumps. You can get a lot of the same feeling just reading RPG campaign/setting books.

Sword of Truth is nearly identical to Wheel of Time for the first three books, but darker and edgyer. Then it nose dives from generic satanists and manical madmen to bad communists who turn out were completely incompetent individually but collectively are behind everything and also caused Ye Olde Apocalypse. It's a fun read if you like 90s edgy stuff, but badly written.

The Prince of Nothing series is a more recent version of the same generic "high magic brought low by apocalypse" but set in a slightly better world and even edgier.

[JeenLeen]

One thing that bugged me a lot about Sword of Truth was that, when talking tactics and strategy, the good guys make a conclusion that just seemed obviously false. I'll spoiler what it is, and if anyone who read Sword of Truth can justify it, please do.

I'm mentioning this for the OP to at least state that there is a plot hole that might bug you if you like strategy behind large scale fantasy battles. I don't recommend looking in the Spoiler if you might read the books.

So many people think that killing the "dude who can mind control people who aren't sworn to Richard" won't help things because another leader will show up.

That's just not true. Yes, another leader will show up and you'd still have a massive army to fight. So it doesn't solve all your problems.
BUT killing the mind-controller will mean they don't have a mind-controller. That is huge. Plus, they probably lose almost all their spellcasters since the casters were largely coerced into serving.


Again, I enjoyed the series all-in-all. I agree that the first few books are better than the tail-end of the series. Book 1 is a pretty solid fantasy read, cliche in its plot but interesting (or maybe I'm thinking 1 & 2. I forget when book 1 ends.)

[Tvtyrant]

One thing that bugged me a lot about Sword of Truth was that, when talking tactics and strategy, the good guys make a conclusion that just seemed obviously false. I'll spoiler what it is, and if anyone who read Sword of Truth can justify it, please do.

I'm mentioning this for the OP to at least state that there is a plot hole that might bug you if you like strategy behind large scale fantasy battles. I don't recommend looking in the Spoiler if you might read the books.

So many people think that killing the "dude who can mind control people who aren't sworn to Richard" won't help things because another leader will show up.

That's just not true. Yes, another leader will show up and you'd still have a massive army to fight. So it doesn't solve all your problems.
BUT killing the mind-controller will mean they don't have a mind-controller. That is huge. Plus, they probably lose almost all their spellcasters since the casters were largely coerced into serving.


Again, I enjoyed the series all-in-all. I agree that the first few books are better than the tail-end of the series. Book 1 is a pretty solid fantasy read, cliche in its plot but interesting (or maybe I'm thinking 1 & 2. I forget when book 1 ends.)
One of the delicious things about the book series is it is actually a great argument for why Ayn Randian politics don't work. The bad guys' ideology is so persuasive that the majority of the human race is happily enslaved by them, and can maintain a colossal empire while sending millions to fight in a foreign land. Apparently even killing their leaders doesn't effect this, because the vast majority are content with this.

Said foreign land has a tiny army, its allies constantly betray it, and they only win using a godmoding cheat code where they genocide most of the human race. IE their ideology is so persuasive that they don't even believe in it, and they have to nuke the world to win.

[paddyfool]

Just a thought:


My preference is for grittier worlds where people are less clearly good and evil and are portrayed more realistically.

Real-world historical fiction would actually fit this bill perfectly. Wolf Hall might be a good place to start, for instance.

[Anteros]

I'm seeing a lot of praise for Codex Alera, but is it really that good? Butcher's stuff is usually too pulpy and his prose is a bit too simple for my tastes. I guess I'll just have to pick it up and see.


I haven't read First Law, but Wheel of Time is extremely stock fantasy focused on massive exposition dumps. You can get a lot of the same feeling just reading RPG campaign/setting books.


This is only true if you ignore the fact that a lot of the "stock fantasy" you're referencing either stole from Jordan or were heavily influenced by him. It's like blaming Tolkein for being generic fantasy. It doesn't make sense.

Also, the part about massive exposition dumps is just false. Those pretty much don't exist in the series at all except for the the first few pages of each book. Did you actually read this series, or did you give up a few pages in?

[Clertar]

A suggestion that's surprisingly still under a lot of people's radars: Ed McDonald's Blackwing (https://www.amazon.com/Blackwing-Ravens-Mark-Ed-McDonald/dp/0399587799), the first book in a dark fantasy epic trilogy. The second book is out in a couple of months, and the third will be next year.

I loved Blackwing, it has fun characters, a great plot and a really original worldbuilding.

https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1496335323l/34826946.jpg

[Misery Esquire]

I'm seeing a lot of praise for Codex Alera, but is it really that good? Butcher's stuff is usually too pulpy and his prose is a bit too simple for my tastes. I guess I'll just have to pick it up and see.

It's pretty alright.

On some of the others ;

Malazan : Books of the Fallen is an unusual grey-on-grey, but our protagonists are the... Er... better people, story. It is also bizarre. It starts off complex, you think you're getting a handle on everything being introduced, and then a few books later, you realise that the new stuff is going to make everything even more of a mess. And you have to worry about them all dying, all the time. The number of characters to keep track of grows almost constantly.

Black Company is entering Classical territory, what with some later fiction having taken notes from it now being the base for another generation. Magic is front-and-center a lot of the time, but the story usually has to do with something else. Essentially no one can claim to be The Good Guy(s)*, just the not-as-bad side.

Wheel of Time book 1 reads like a Lord of the Rings, Extended & Clothier Edition, but then as it continues on it turns into "What does it mean when The Chosen Martyr-Hero Who Has To Save The World For Us has to deal with... Actual people". It does become everything and the kitchen sink, but if you enjoy proliferation of point-of-views (I do) and the exploration of a fantasy staple, this is good.

Sword of Truth ... It... Tried to steal notes off Wheel of Time, except the main character in addition to being super-powered is also ALWAYS RIGHT and any cost to him is wholly momentary. And Goodkind stops to soapbox all the time after the first book. And the point of most of the books is just to be a soapbox. And rape-fetish. And... It's... Just don't. It's not much like Wheel of Time at all, actually. But Rand Al'Thor and Richard Dahl having somewhat similar names and madhax powerz gives them odd parallels.

: Also, there's probably a historical-fiction viewpoint version of the War of the Roses, if you enjoyed A Game of Thrones. Please note, that it may seem less realistic but has the advantage over fiction in being able to point back and say, look, that really was what happened.

Robin Hobb wrote a pair of intertwined novel series that are heartbreaking at times and though the good guys are obviously the good guys, they don't just get away with everything scot free, and they don't always make the right decisions. Also, they get really depressing. Also, they get reall- Ahem. I disliked the conclusion of one set so very much that I couldn't continue, however. It's probably not as much of a problem as I make it out to be, and other readers were probably fine with it, but for me just argh.


* Except for ONE person**. You know who.
** Alright, two, depending on how you look at nailed-to-a-chair.


I was scared that this was going to be an actual Vs. thread, and ready for multi-page arguements of whether MORAL CLARITY is stronger than FATE.

No, no. Nothing to worry about. Besides, Moral Clarity is... Uh. Strong... but not as strong as the narrative quite literally being on your side.

... Actually, in an odd way, Rand gets to win Versus questions whenever it comes down to tonal questions like Friendship Magic! vs. Grimdark. Because having the story on your team means that you're recruiting the author of whichever side would be writing.

[Sinewmire]

I'd strongly recommend The First Law series, in that case.

It's a strong focus on characters, with some mild world-building. The characters are set up and then knocked down as we're forced to look at them in a new light and ask "Are these the good guys? Are they good?" The characters are set up as archetypes and then explored - what would this look like in the real world? A dnd style barbarian who flies into violent rages - how horrifying would that be in the real world?

An excellent review said that if Abercrombie had written the Lord of The Rings, Gandalf would have turned out to be Saruman all along and the hobbits would all have caught radiation poisoning from carrying the ring.

The standalones that follow them are excellent too, as are his his Viking-style young adult novels.

[GrayDeath]

I'm seeing a lot of praise for Codex Alera, but is it really that good? Butcher's stuff is usually too pulpy and his prose is a bit too simple for my tastes. I guess I'll just have to pick it up and see.





It varies between above average and really good.

The first three to four (depending on definition) books are effectively textbook examples for a smart but very underpowered "Hero" in a High Power World of *******s.

So if you like that, well ;)

The End is a bit....unsatisfying, for me at least, but probably had to be that way to allow potential follow up series.

The Canim and marat (Not Human People there) rock, the whole "Roman Empire with Elemental Summoners" theme I like a lot


Overall I`d recommend it to just about any fantasy reader, unless reall good prose and total Inventieveness are something books HAVE to have for you to like them.






Also, @ Poster before me: You might want to put a spoiler tag on that, as humurous or not, it might ruin some surprises for new readers, even if its very ... allegory.

[JoshL]

It's worth noting that the first book in Wheel of Time is intentionally aping LOTR in terms of structure. When Jordan was pitching his planned 5 book series (ha!) to the publisher, they came to the decision to make the first book feel familiar, in order to get people reading and give the rest a chance. Given that the series deals with archetypes and recurring mythologies, I think it kinda works, even if it was more a marketing decision than an artistic one.

Not swords and magic (more space magic), but I like Dune for the same reasons I like Game of Thrones. Especially if you stick with the whole series, even the two post-Frank books (despite TERRIBLE writing in those). Avoid the prequels at all costs.

[Reddish Mage]

What are you talking about "two post Frank novels," Brian Herbert (the guys son I think) wrote a long number of sequels.

Here is all the Dune novels and Frank Herbert novels (https://www.dunenovels.com/novels). Since the OP was all over ASOIAF its interesting Frank wrote not only Dune but a book called "Game of Authors."

[JoshL]

Yes, Sandworms of Dune and Hunters of Dune finish the story, based on Frank's notes. Anything else with Brian's name is best avoided. Most are prequels, except, from the looks of things, the "Heroes of Dune" series which takes place in between the early books. They started in 2008, long after I stopped giving him a chance, so I can't speak to their quality.

[Tvtyrant]

This is only true if you ignore the fact that a lot of the "stock fantasy" you're referencing either stole from Jordan or were heavily influenced by him. It's like blaming Tolkein for being generic fantasy. It doesn't make sense.

Also, the part about massive exposition dumps is just false. Those pretty much don't exist in the series at all except for the the first few pages of each book. Did you actually read this series, or did you give up a few pages in?

Yes, truly having a 10 page explanation given to the characters about the rise and fall of a particular town to explain the existence of evil mist contained no exposition at all. This is a series where Jordan had to introduce multiple characters whose primary purpose was to tell the audience what they were looking at any given time.

I have in fact read every book at least twice, and while I welcome disagreement over what an exposition dump may be I certainly don't welcome you dismissing me outright over thise disagreements.

[Ibrinar]

Wanted to add a recommendation against the black company because I consider it rather boring. Partly because it never managed to make me care about anything that happens after all the MC don't even care that much themselves they are just mercenaries for someone evil. Partly because for my taste what got detail and what got summary was chosen in uninteresting ways. Honestly I don't quite remember the details of what I didn't like just that I don't consider it worth reading. Of course others like it quite a bit so you might as well.


I'm seeing a lot of praise for Codex Alera, but is it really that good? Butcher's stuff is usually too pulpy and his prose is a bit too simple for my tastes. I guess I'll just have to pick it up and see.



This is only true if you ignore the fact that a lot of the "stock fantasy" you're referencing either stole from Jordan or were heavily influenced by him. It's like blaming Tolkein for being generic fantasy. It doesn't make sense.

Also, the part about massive exposition dumps is just false. Those pretty much don't exist in the series at all except for the the first few pages of each book. Did you actually read this series, or did you give up a few pages in?

I always disagreed with that argument, whether it was the story that made a trope popular or not is historically interesting. And might matter if you were judging how creative the author was or something. But it simply doesn't matter for reading it. It would have been different when it came out sure but you aren't reading it when it came out you are reading it now and the stories that make you consider it stock fantasy might be newer but you read them earlier and that is what matters. (Well aside from the beginning maybe I personallydon't consider WoT stock fantasy yes many known fantasy tropes but it isn't just these tropes, but that is beside the point.)

[HolyDraconus]

So many people think that killing the "dude who can mind control people who aren't sworn to Richard" won't help things because another leader will show up.

That's just not true. Yes, another leader will show up and you'd still have a massive army to fight. So it doesn't solve all your problems.
BUT killing the mind-controller will mean they don't have a mind-controller. That is huge. Plus, they probably lose almost all their spellcasters since the casters were largely coerced into serving.


they go nuts past book 3. As for the actual SPOILER it was supposed to be implied (which is actually delved into in the later books) that killing him will do nothing: another mind controller, but with even MOAR POWA will rise up on his death. You can't kill that particular snake that way. That was the real problem, but it wasn't fully cleaned up about that part till in a later book, which happens a lot past book 7. from a guy that forced himself to get the entire series of 15 (ish) books plus the side series.... don't read past book 3 in Sword of Truth. It tanks hard and only really improves around book 11, well after Confessor.

[Telonius]

I'd suggest some Gene Wolfe if you're interested in morally grey, gritty worlds. Book of the New Sun is kind of on that line between Sci-Fi and Fantasy (set in the far future, decayed/decaying society, but "magical"-ish elements and swords).

[Jaxzan Proditor]

It occurred to me that if you enjoy low-magic settings with a darker tone you may enjoy The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant. Pretty low-magic, although magic definitely is still an important part of the story, and I would definitely call it a dark work.

[Knaight]

I'd suggest some Gene Wolfe if you're interested in morally grey, gritty worlds. Book of the New Sun is kind of on that line between Sci-Fi and Fantasy (set in the far future, decayed/decaying society, but "magical"-ish elements and swords).

Gene Wolfe is excellent, but there are some caveats here - you want to read his books quickly, preferable in one sitting or with little time between them. You don't want to be multitasking at all when reading, and you want to be in a fairly alert state. His writing expects a lot of your memory, and it's worth it if you put the effort in.

That said, I'd start with Soldier of the Mist.

[Velaryon]

Wanted to at a recommendation against the black company because I consider it rather boring. Partly because it never managed to make me care about anything that happens after all the MC don't even care that much themselves they are just mercenaries for someone evil. Partly because for my taste what got detail and what got summary was chosen in uninteresting ways. Honestly I don't quite remember the details of what I didn't like just that I don't consider it worth reading. Of course others like it quite a bit so you might as well.

Seconded. I really liked the sound of The Black Company before I read it, but the narration is just so.. flat. It's very matter-of-fact and does absolutely nothing to try and get the reader emotionally invested in what's going on. "We were here and we did some fighting. Three weeks later we went to the other place and did more fighting. Then we met this powerful magician, and did some more fighting while trying to stay out of the powerful magician's way." Obviously not a real quote, but the book didn't try a whole lot harder to draw me in than that little blurb I just made up.

Some people love it. I can't even remember whether I actually finished the first book before giving up.



I always disagreed with that argument, whether it was the story that made a trope popular or not is historically interesting. And might matter if you were judging how creative the author was or something. But it simply doesn't matter for reading it. It would have been different when it came out sure but you aren't reading it when it came out you are reading it now and the stories that make you consider it stock fantasy might be newer but you read them earlier and that is what matters. (Well aside from the beginning maybe I personallydon't consider WoT stock fantasy yes many known fantasy tropes but it isn't just these tropes, but that is beside the point.)

I do and don't agree with you here. On the one hand, this helps when you're reading something heavily influenced by other works. In my case, I had no idea that The Sword of Shannara was almost a total rip-off of Lord of the Rings, and I fell in love with that series, which ended up being my gateway into reading fantasy in general. On the other hand, I don't really think it's fair to judge a work by those that came after it. Is LotR cliched because it uses elves, dwarves, and orcs? I'd say no, even if you've read a hundred other stories that use the same handful of fantasy races before first reading Tolkien.

[Liquor Box]

Hi All

Really appreciate all the suggestions and commentary - the debate about The Sword of Truth has been an interesting read with an initial wave of negative reviews, and then a few people sticking up for it.

I forgot to mention in the OP that I also dislike protagonists that are Mary Sues - not just in terms of morals but also in terms of being super capable of everything. So the Sword of Truth series may not be for me.

Based on this thread I have bought a copy of the first book in the First Law Trilogy. But if I don't like it, or if I finish it, I will absolutely return to this thread for other recommendations.

I am really grateful to see recommendations beyond the three series' I referred to in the title (and beyond the fantasy genre) and I wish I had invited that in the OP.

[Liquor Box]

Just a thought:



Real-world historical fiction would actually fit this bill perfectly. Wolf Hall might be a good place to start, for instance.

Yes, you are quite right. I have read a lot of historical fiction, and particularly Bernard Cornwell. I might check out Wolf Hall.

[Dienekes]

I've read a lot of what's written here and of the initial books, I'd definitely recommend The First Rule. I really enjoy Abercrombie's works, I buy everything the guy's written, and the only "disappointment" I have is the collection of short stories. Of which some were actually pretty good but the core set of stories were about 2 characters I didn't really care about.

But one thing Abercrombie is good about is creating morally complex characters. He has a fun habbit for turning heroes into villains then revealing something that turns them back into heroes. Or makes them fall somewhere in the middle.

His books also have a fast pace, which, when compared to some of the sections of ASoIaF and even more so Wheel of Time is a nice change. I will give the warning that the start seems pretty generic fantasy adventure, but if you enjoy reading about the characters it's worth completing.

After that of the initial three I'd definitely next suggest Wheel of Time. It has some pacing issues, especially in the middle books. But it has an interesting world and theme. And I like the characters, even as some become overpowered by the end.

The distant third would be Sword of Truth. It has some amusing sections, but once you read about the chicken that is not a chicken, there's nothing really of value in it.

Of the other books listed.

Malazan: Books of the Fallen is probably the closest to ASoIaF in terms of tone, if not setting. It's much more high fantasy, with magic powers taking a more central focus in how the world works. Also it is dense. Apparently no one told Erikson about the concept of a learning curve. He just dumps you straight into the thick of things and expects you to keep track of everything.

Dune, I can definitely see the comparisons that can be made between Martin's and Herbert's fiction. I will say that Dune is written with in 3rd person omniscient, which can be jarring when you start out. But it's definitely worth reading. At least up until God Emperor of Dune, honestly I kinda think the whole series went off the deep end after that.

Codex Alera is very good. I personally like it much better than Dresden Files, the author's other famous book series.

I often hear or read a lot of praise for Black Company, but honestly, it never really drew me in. Which is odd since I usually love military fiction, which Black Company definitely is.

The Gentleman Bastards series, starting with Lies of Locke Lamora is fantastic. I have only read the first two, but they were truly great. But they are more heroic fantasy heroes, only in this case the heroic protagonists aren't the usual warrior kings. They're basically a band of D&D rogues. One of whom multiclassed into Fighter, admittedly. But still, it's reading about their genius heists in a growingly complex world of tangled politics, magic, and grudges.

There is also the book that inspired Martin to write Thrones: Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn. It basically set the style for Martin with it's focus on multiple characters of differing and opposing morals and factions.

[Ibrinar]

I quite like Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn even if I might never read it again but just wanted to say that the first chapters can be a bit boring (at least on rereads) until he gets out of the castle.

[JeenLeen]

Hi All

Really appreciate all the suggestions and commentary - the debate about The Sword of Truth has been an interesting read with an initial wave of negative reviews, and then a few people sticking up for it.

I forgot to mention in the OP that I also dislike protagonists that are Mary Sues - not just in terms of morals but also in terms of being super capable of everything. So the Sword of Truth series may not be for me.

Based on this thread I have bought a copy of the first book in the First Law Trilogy. But if I don't like it, or if I finish it, I will absolutely return to this thread for other recommendations.

I am really grateful to see recommendations beyond the three series' I referred to in the title (and beyond the fantasy genre) and I wish I had invited that in the OP.

For Wheel of Time, while the main character is very powerful at the end of the series, he still has important limitations on his power that preclude him from being super capable at everything. That is, if he solves problem X, then problems Y and Z are still out there not being handled, so probably X and Y are handled by his allies. There's also issues with what he's mentally/socially able to handle; for example, a phobia or distrust might make him not handle one problem, or he's not really a politics dude so his friend who is a princess/queen handles that angle. And then there's conflict about how to handle different angles, which makes for interesting conflict between the 'good side'.


they go nuts past book 3. As for the actual SPOILER it was supposed to be implied (which is actually delved into in the later books) that killing him will do nothing: another mind controller, but with even MOAR POWA will rise up on his death. You can't kill that particular snake that way. That was the real problem, but it wasn't fully cleaned up about that part till in a later book, which happens a lot past book 7.

Wow. I really missed that. I thought it was something like a mind-controller is a genetic (or the magical equivalent) anomaly, and the chance of one showing up is 1 in <absurdly high number>. It was basically a coincidence one showed up and founded an evil empire around the same time Richard was active. So I thought killing the mind-controller would mean that you probably won't get another one for centuries.

[hamishspence]

A good example of the protagonists (not Richard himself, but his consort Kahlan) authorising torture - was that scene in one of the later books (I think Faith of the Fallen), where an assassin kills one of their side - the assassin is caught, and the person bereaved, asks for the assassin to be tortured to death.

He is (taking several hours), on Kahlan's orders. When he asks for mercy, Kahlan says that this is mercy - and that were it left up to her to choose the punishment, she'd have chosen much worse.

According to TV Tropes, Kahlan has committed Cold Blooded Torture herself, in the very first book:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Literature/SwordOfTruth

[Anteros]

I don't see how anyone can seriously argue that Goodkind views torture as wrong when we consider what he does to his poor readers.

[hamishspence]

If you bomb a civilian center and kill women and children, how long would it take for the men to decide that they didn't want to fight after all. If you were in charge and had to choose between torturing a few know terrorist's or bombing the country supporting them, which would be the lessor evil?



The difference is that in this case, it's not for information - it's solely "to punish them for their crimes".


I'm advocating that in war there are no rules.

The whole notion of "war crimes" is rooted in the idea that there are rules, that need to be followed, in order to minimise "tit for tat barbarity" among other things.

[Anteros]

I think this is venturing a little too close to real world politics and morality for this forum.

On an unrelated note, I've started Codex Alerea. I do think the prose is better than in the Dresden Files, and I'm interested in the setting. I'm not crazy about any of the characters yet, although I'm only about 10 chapters in. I like it well enough to finish the first book, and I'll decide if I want to finish the series from there.

[Dienekes]

[QUOTE=hamishspence;22971086]A good example of the protagonists (not Richard himself, but his consort Kahlan) authorising torture - was that scene in one of the later books (I think Faith of the Fallen), where an assassin kills one of their side - the assassin is caught, and the person bereaved, asks for the assassin to be tortured to death.

He is (taking several hours), on Kahlan's orders. When he asks for mercy, Kahlan says that this is mercy - and that were it left up to her to choose the punishment, she'd have chosen much worse.

You are correct. She does so on numerous occasions order torture. The Assassin kills Warren the Prophet. I had forgotten that she does order that and more done. So then that would be a question as to whether torture is always wrong "Black and White" or can be justified. Do you think that if our government tortured known terrorists to get information to protect American lives is wrong? I'm not advocating that the means justify's the ends, I'm advocating that in war there are no rules. eg Just as no army can march without food, no army can march without the support of the people at home. If you bomb a civilian center and kill women and children, how long would it take for the men to decide that they didn't want to fight after all. If you were in charge and had to choose between torturing a few know terrorist's or bombing the country supporting them, which would be the lessor evil?

Yes it is.

Because torture doesn’t work. Torture is very good at getting people to say what you want them to say, to get them to confess something. It is terrible at getting accurate information. Hell Thomas Hobbes figured that out over 350 years ago. This is all but confirmed with the JTF-GTMO leaks. Which I don’t think I can get into without being reprimanded. Go read Deutschmann’s report on it if you like.

Furthermore that’s not even what Goodkind’s characters are doing. She wasn’t trying to get information, she was trying to kill a man in the most vile way possible.

Which, honestly, is not actually a problem, on the surface. To use the much better First Law books. Glotka is one of my favorite characters and he is a professional torturerer. The book goes into details of him beating and threatening his victims, usually not to get information but to get them to sign confessions. You know what it was actually used for in the early modern period.

But we, the reader, are lead to think that this is repulsive. Hell Glotka thinks he’s repulsive. We are informed immediately that we are dealing with seriously flawed characters.

That’s the difference. Goodkind presents his protagonists as being right and justified in everything they do, from pointless torture to running down and murdering your own civilians who are having a peaceful protest. No matter how horrible they’re never considered anything other than noble.

[Dienekes]

Am I breaking some rules? If so I will stop. I was only replying to what others were saying, but I don't want to upset anyone.

Codex gets better with each book. The pacing takes a while to build up, but it is worth it. Unless you are completely bored by the end, try the second, it's where it really starts to get good.

The only one you’ll upset is the mods. We can’t talk about real world religion and politics here. It’s lame, stifles interesting discussion, and taken to a ridiculous degree on occasion (I was once given a reprimand for discussing 17th century laws on impressment and prostitution). But that’s the cost of posting here.




But Kahlan is intentionally flawed. She makes numerous mistakes. She is constantly allowing her passion to control her. Richard is the main protagonist and he does none of those things. In the end he sends all his enemies to earth. I wouldn't have been so kind. But I also am flawed.

Richard was the one who ran down the peaceful protesters

[hamishspence]

"The Laws & Customs of War" as a trope, is Older Than Dirt. Even in a fantasy setting, there's pragmatic reasons to apply some rules.

The question is - do the protagonists engage in hypocrisy - treating certain actions as Moral Event Horizon crossings when the enemy does it, but "pragmatism" when they do it?

[hamishspence]

Naked Empire - from his point of view, the protesters were "blocking his way to bad guys" but he didn't even try to go around them.

In the early books, a point is made of how villains, often, genuinely believe they're doing The Right Thing - and how heroes need to be careful not to slip into villainy.

In the later books, this is dropped.

[Tvtyrant]

True. He does lead an attack against those people. If you didn't understand why he did it, then I certainly can't convince you. lol. But I will say that Richard does try (from what I can recall) everything he can think of to accomplish his goal without breaking his own morality or ethics. He does try to reason with them. And those peaceful protesters attacked their own people once their peaceful protest didn't accomplish their goals. ie Richard taught his ideals to a group of men. He lead them in a fight against the enemy. The "peaceful protesters" stood in the way. When they saw that their methods weren't working they attacked. They were only peaceful protesters until that didn't work, then they took up arms.

Each book is centered on one wizard's rule. Each story within the story is made to show how that rule can be broken and hos it can be followed. Book 8 Faith of the Fallen deals with rule eight "Deserve Victory." The people of this peaceful land were only peaceful because they had their heads in the sand. They knowingly left children alone when they did bad when their were predators that could kill them. They refused to punish evil. They tried rationalizing with it, and reasoning with it. But when that didn't work they sent the most evil of themselves out into the world away from themselves. They turned loose on the rest of the world the worst their society had to offer.

It would be like us sending rapists' and murderers to another country and not telling them we did it. Richard and the group of men he lead, realized that if their cause was to succeed they had to know that it was a good cause and a just cause and that they 'Deserved Victory'. The entire set of books is about how dangerous ideas are and how to combat them. If someone punch's me and then says 'sorry', and then punch's me again and then says 'sorry', how many times will it take to justify my punching them back? The struggle Richard faces is the death of himself and all he cares about.

Life and freedom are Richard's greatest values. He intends to wipe out the idea that his life and freedom mean nothing. He intends to kill anyone that would seek to end his life or enslave him. The allies of that opposition are just as deadly because they support the people that are coming to kill and enslave him. The peaceful protesters intend to enslave him. They want him to do what they want. They will protect the soldiers that are going to enslave or kill him. This cannot in any way be construed as Peaceful protesting at least not without hippocracy. A peaceful demonstration would not condone violence on either side. A peaceful demonstration would not have the ulterior motive of forcing their wills and ideas on someone and enslaving them.

The earlier books do hit hard on preventing yourself from becoming the villain. Rule 2: Passion rules reason. Kahlan breaks that rule when she orders the torturing. Rule 3: There is Magic in sincere Forgiveness, both in forgiveness received and given. Rule 6: Only allow reason to rule you. However, what we see hear is a woman in pain. Does she slip up? yes. Is saying it's a slip up an understatement? Depends on the context. Kahlan looses the one thing she shouldn't in those scenes: rationality and reason to ones own beliefs and morals. Her failure is clearly defined by Goodkind. He doesn't defend her actions. He shows how she failed. Kahlan is portrayed (rightly or wrongly) as a weaker version of Richard. She is shown to be more emotional and less restrained than Richard. Where Richard would have had patience, Kahlan doesn't. Where Richard would have executed someone, Kahlan has them tortured. Some might argue that this is showing Kahlan as the "weaker sex". Whether Goodkind did this intentionally or not I don't know. On the other hand, some might argue that Kahlan has the strength to punish harshly whereas Richard lacks the resolve to do what is necessary. Was the torture necessary? It depends on who is doing the observing. If the man had a wife, she would undoubtedly have said No. Did the soldiers Kahlan was leading need to hear the screams of their enemy in pain to bolster their moral? Possibly. Did the side Kahlan was fighting for need to know that she was not going to give quarter to the enemy and that what they visit upon her would be visited upon the enemy? Yes, or at least some might argue so.

He tries so hard he ends the book series by destroying the souls of the majority of the planet, sends them (including many of his allies) to another planet, then distributes the land among his own followers.

He does this after gaining infinite cosmic power and could have resolved the issue in whatever matter he wants, and chooses genocide.

Goodkind also makes it so your only choice is to cult like worship the Rahls or fall under mindcontrol, undermining conceptionally the very nature of the conflict. Not a lot of freedom when your only choice is between which sixe to die on.

[Forum Explorer]

It's kinda hard to have a serious conversation about a story that is such garbage. There's very little that actually makes sense in the story, and most of that is in the earlier books.

Of course the events in the books proves Richard right, that's kinda why we call him a Mary Sue, because they really really shouldn't.

And of course there are things like evil pacifists, a nigh infinite army of fanatics, and a neverending supply of retards, which is why we call the bad guys Strawmen for whatever Goodkind feels like bashing that book.

You can't really use the events in the books as proof of a coherent philosophy when the books themselves are an incoherent mess of deus ex machinas, stupidity, and nonsensical events.

[GrayDeath]

Codex gets better with each book. The pacing takes a while to build up, but it is worth it. Unless you are completely bored by the end, try the second, it's where it really starts to get good.

Maybe back to Topic, hm? ^^

I agree with the above quote, the books truly build on one another. When I first bought it the first book didnt really "do much" for me except introducing the world, but once you are through the series and reread it, there are some really interesting Hints (aside from the single obvious one^^).

[Talar]

Codex Alera is awesome, and came out of bet Butcher made with a fan, which makes it cooler IMO. And if you are a fan of his writing I cannot say enough good things about The Dresden Files though it is urban fantasy so maybe not quite in your wheelhouse.

I would also recommend The Stormlight Archive by Sanderson. The third book just was recently released; personally I have only read the first 2 books so far but they are some of the better epic fantasy I have read recently.

[Xyril]

You have one limited view of what is in his writing. Their are two sides to the statement " if you're in the Right than everything is permitted to you and without consideration or conscience, which are the fetters of lesser men." The Protagonist fights against this. Period.

This is true--ish--of Richard in maybe the first book or two. It's true of Richard in the fun but unremarkable--yet still much better than the source material--Legend of the Seeker TV series. This is also how Richard continues to see himself right up until I stopped reading. The problem is, the more the series went on, the more Richard's self-image was inconsistent with the actions that he at first tacitly condoned, and then increasingly became a more active participant in.

Part of it might be because Goodkind is a terrible writer, because he is. There are many, many good works in which the hero takes an action he previously condemned, struggles with it in a realistic way, maybe faces some sort of future consequences for that decision, and comes off seeming somehow heroic. Sword of Truth is not one of those works. When Richard actually does question whether or not a decision is a necessary evil, it comes off as insincere, both on his part and on that part of the author. It's almost like a cynical caricature of confession--the Catholic, real world one--where acknowledging the evil of an action is there solely because it gives you the karma points to get away with said action. Which is precisely how Richard's actions come off, since the brief moments of Richard questioning himself are usually forgotten in the wake of the grand paeans to why everyone else sucks for questioning Richard.

Beyond these rare moments of doubt, Richard doesn't hesitate, nor does he tolerate hesitation in others because, as you say, "The Protagonist fights against this. Period." You seem to believe that your statement is praise of Richard, but it's not--it's a condemnation of Richard and his lack of self-awareness, and of Goodkind and his sloppy writing. Because no matter what decisions he makes, no matter what conduct he condones, no matter how much his allies and friends question his reasoning, Richard always, always, sees himself as the Protagonist who's fighting against evil. Period.

[Anteros]

About 25 chapters into Codex Alerea now and I'm starting to wonder if Butcher has ADD. He has more trouble maintaining a plot line than Jordan. I like the story and the setting, but the constant changes of focus every single time something starts to get interesting are beginning to take me out of the story.

[Adderbane]

Codex Alera is awesome, and came out of bet Butcher made with a fan, which makes it cooler IMO. And if you are a fan of his writing I cannot say enough good things about The Dresden Files though it is urban fantasy so maybe not quite in your wheelhouse.

I would also recommend The Stormlight Archive by Sanderson. The third book just was recently released; personally I have only read the first 2 books so far but they are some of the better epic fantasy I have read recently.

I would not recommend The Stormlight Archive to someone looking for a grittier fantasy world. (Not that I don't like it; if quality keeps up, it may dethrone LotR as my favorite books ever) It seems to me that Stormlight is pretty much the antithesis of ASoIaF.

[Mechalich]

I would not recommend The Stormlight Archive to someone looking for a grittier fantasy world. (Not that I don't like it; if quality keeps up, it may dethrone LotR as my favorite books ever) It seems to me that Stormlight is pretty much the antithesis of ASoIaF.

Stormlight Archive is dark but not gritty, especially by the end of book two when the big time powers start getting thrown around in earnest. The state of the world is awful and the various superheroes are all deeply flawed, but they're still superheroes.

[GrayDeath]

About 25 chapters into Codex Alerea now and I'm starting to wonder if Butcher has ADD. He has more trouble maintaining a plot line than Jordan. I like the story and the setting, but the constant changes of focus every single time something starts to get interesting are beginning to take me out of the story.


Its a huge, and very unexp0laind for the reader, setting.
Yes, its a bit jumpy, especially in book one, but that does get better. And honestly, its mostly due to him not being as good at smoothing over the changes in viepoints/arrival of new stuff as some other authors.
It fits the age and mental acuitiy (and jumpiness) of Tavi pretty well though, so it did notm detract much from my enjoyment. ;)

In his Dresden Files Books for example, he avoids things that would NEED such switching almost entirely, so he is obviously aware of the fact.

[An Enemy Spy]

Actual Sword of Truth excerpts.

No war! No war! No war!" the people shouted as Richard led the men up the street at a dead run.

"Out of the way!" Richard yelled as he closed the distance. This was no time for subtlety or discussions: the success of their attack depended in large part on speed. "Get out of the way! This is your only warning! Get out of the way or die!"

"Stop the hate! Stop the hate!" the people chanted as they locked arms.

They had no idea how much hate was raging through Richard. He drew the Sword of Truth. The wrath of its magic didn't come out with it, but he had enough of his own. He slowed to a trot.

"Move!" Richard called as he bore down on the people.

A plump, curly-haired woman took a step out from the others. Her round face was red with anger as she screamed. "Stop the hate! No war! Stop the hate! No war!"

"Move or die!" Richard yelled as he picked up speed.

The red-faced woman shook her fleshy fist at Richard and his men, leading an angry chant. "Murderers! Murderers! Murderers!"

On his way past her, gritting his teeth as he screamed with the fury of the attack begun, Richard took a powerful swing, lopping off the woman's head and upraised arm. Strings of blood and gore splashed across the faces behind her even as some still chanted their empty words. The head and loose arm tumbled through the crowd. A man mad the mistake of reaching for Richard's weapon, and took the full weight of a charging thrust.

Men behind Richard hit the line of evil's guardians with unrestrained violence. People armed only with their hatred for moral clarity fell bloodied, terribly injured, and dead. The line of people collapsed before the merciless charge. Some of the people, screaming their contempt, used their fists to attack Richard's men. They were met with swift and deadly steel.

At the realization that their defense of the Imperial Order's brutality would actually result in consequences to themselves, the crowd began scattering in fright, screaming curses back at Richard and his men.

The bird let out a slow chicken cackle. It sounded like a chicken, but in her heart she knew it wasn't. In that instant, she completely understood the concept of a chicken that was not a chicken. This looked like a chicken, like most of the Mud People's chickens. But this was no chicken.

This was evil manifest.

As Six and the commander were talking, Richard turned a little, feigning a stretch. In an instant, his hand was on the sword. In another instant the blade was free.

Having a weapon, a sword, in his hand, instantly flooded Richard with memories, forms, and skills he had spent long hours learning. The lessons might have in part come from otherworldly sources, but the knowledge was not magic. It was the experience of countless Seekers before Richard. Even though he didnt have that weapon with him, he still had that knowledge. […]

He knew where Kahlan was, and he had to get to her.

These men were in his way.

Richard swung, taking off an arm wielding an axe. The cry, the spray of blood, made the men nearby flinch. In that sliver of an instant, Richard made his move. He brought his sword up through another man lifting his sword. The man died before he even had his arm fully cocked back. Richard spun out of the way of weapons coming for him.

Despite the sudden cacophony of metal clanging, of men yelling, Richard was already in a silent world of purpose. He was in control. These men might have thought that they had an army against him, but in a way that was his advantage. He didn't fight an army. He fought individuals. They thought like a collective mass, a collective element, allowing one another to move, as if the soldiers were trying to be one big fighting centipede.

That was a mistake. Richard used it to cut into them. While they hesitated waiting for others to act, waiting for an opening, Richard was already moving through their lines, cutting them down. He let them swing and lunge, using strength and effort, while he floated through the onslaught of steel. Every time he thrust, he made contact. Every time he swung his weapon, he cut. It was like going through thick brush, slashing aside the branches that reached out at him. He let the momentum of the sword power the next strike, keeping it in continuous motion rather than using effort, and precious time, to draw it back. If he brought the blade down, slicing through the side of a man's neck, he continued the movement, bringing the weapon up behind to run a man through as he rushed in, and then, as he pulled the blade out, he spun away as swords, axes, and flails came down where he had been only a moment before. It was a fluid dance, moving through the grunting, diving, jumping men. Slice, slice, slice, letting the screams fill the morning air, letting the alarm of not being able to stop him cause others to hesitate in fear of what could be happening.

Jennsen gestured vaguely back at the men and the town behind her. "Since I've been with them, they have come to see that I'm not a witch, and Betty is not a spirit guide - although for a time there I was afraid they might be right about Betty."

Richard peered down at the goat. Betty cocked her head. "I guess none of us but Betty knew the truth of what Nicholas was up to." At the sound of her name, Betty's ears pricked forward and her tail went into a fit of expectant wagging.

<<snip>>

After Richard picked up his pack and slipped his arms through the straps, Owen gripped Richard's hand. "Thank you, Lord Rahl, for showing me that my life is worth living."

Marilee stepped forward and hugged him. "Thank you for teaching Owen to be worthy of me."

Richard laughed. Owen laughed. Cara gave Marilee an approving clap on the back. And then all the men laughed.

Betty pushed in and with a flurry of tail wagging got the point across that she didn't want to be left out.

Richard knelt down and scratched Betty's ears. "And you, my friend, from now on I don't want you letting any Slides using you to spy on people."

Betty pushed her head against his chest as he scratched her ears, and bleated as if to say she was sorry.

"Go away!" He threw his arms out and pointed again. "I want you to go away and never come back!" Gratch tried to put his arms around Richard again. Richard pushed them away again. Gratch's ears lay down against his head.

"Grrratch luuug Raaach aaarg." Richard wanted more than anything to hold his friend and tell him that he loved him, too. But he couldn't. He had to make him go in order to save his life.

"Well I don't love you! Go away and never come back!"

Gratch looked to the hill Pasha had run down. He looked back at Richard. his green eyes were filling with tears. He reached out for Richard.

Richard shoved him away. Gratch stood with his arms out. Richard remembered the first time he had held the furry beast. He had been so little then. He was so big now. But as he had grown, his friendship, and his love, had grown, too.

He was Richard's only friend, and only Richard could save him. If Richard really loved him, he had to do this.

"Go away! I don't want you around anymore! I don't want you to ever come back! You're just a big dumb bag of fur! Go away! If you really love me, then you'll do as I ask, and go away!"

Richard wanted to keep yelling, but the lump in his throat caught the words. He backed away. Gratch seemed to wither in the cool night air. His arms came out again with a pitiful, forlorn wail. He called with a plaintive, keening cry.

Richard took another step back. Gratch took a step toward him. Richard picked up a rock and heaved it at the gar. It bounced off his huge chest.

"Go away!" Richard cried. He threw another rock. "I don't want you around anymore! Go away! I don't ever want to see you again!"

Tears ran from the glowing green eyes, over the wrinkles of his cheeks. "Grrratch luuug Raaaach aaarg."

"If you really love me then you will do this! Go!"

The gar looked again to the hill Pasha had run down, turned, and spread his wings. With a last look over his shoulder, he bounded into the air and flew off into the night.

When he could no longer see the dark shape against the stars, or hear the sweep of wings, Richard crumpled to the ground. His only friend was gone.

"I love you, too, Gratch."

He cried in racking sobs. "Dear spirits, why have you done this to me? He was all I had. I hate you. Every last one of you."

Nicci's gaze rose up the legs, the robes, the arms, the bodies of the two people, up to their faces. She felt as if a giant fist squeezed her heart to a stop.

This was what was in Richard's eyes, brought into existence in glowing white marble. To see it fully realized was like being struck by lightning.

In that instant, her entire life, everything that had ever happened to her, everything she had ever seen, heard, or done, seemed to come together in one flash of emotional violence. Nicci cried out in pain at the beauty of it, and more so at the beauty of what it represented.

Her eyes fell on the name carved in the stone base.

LIFE

Nicci collapsed to the floor in tears, in abject shame, in horror, in revulsion, in sudden blinding comprehension.

...In pure joy.

<snip>

The two figures in the center posed in a state of harmonious balance. The man's body displayed a proud masculinity. Though the woman was clothed, there was no doubt as to her femininity. They both reflected a love of the human form as sensuous, noble, and pure. The evil all around seemed as if it was recoiling in terror of that noble purity.

More than that, though, Richard's statue existed without conflict; the figures showed awareness, rationality, and purpose. This was a manifestation of human power, ability, intent. This was life lived for its own sake. This was mankind standing proudly of his own free will.

This was exactly what the single word at the bottom named it:

LIFE

That it existed was proof of the validity of the concept.

this was life as it should be lived--proud, reasoned, and a slave to no other man. This was the rightful exaltation of the individual, the nobility of the human spirit.

Everything on the walls all around offered death as its answer.

This offered life.

Victor and Ishaq were on their knees, weeping.

<snip>

"You are ruled," Richard said in a voice that rang out over the multitude, "By mean little men."

The people gasped as one. To speak against a brother was treason, most likely, and heresy for sure.

"My crime?" Richard asked aloud. "I have given you something beautiful to see, daring to hold the conviction that you have a right to see it if you wish. Worse...I have said that your lives are your own to live."

A rolling murmur swept out through the multitude. Richard's voice rose in power, demanding in its clarity to be heard above the whispering.

"Evil is not one large entity, but a collection of countless, small depravities brought up from the muck by petty men. Living under the Order, you have traded the enrichment of vision for a gray fog of mediocrity -- the fertile inspiration of striving and growth, for mindless stagnation and slow decay -- the brave new ground of the attempt, for the timid quagmire of apathy."

With gazes riveted and lips still, the crowd listened. Richard gestured out over their heads with his sledgehammer, wielded with the effortless grace of a royal sword.

"You have traded freedom not even for a bowl of soup, but worse, for the spoken empty feelings of others who say that you deserve to have a full bowl of soup provided by someone else.

"Happiness, joy, accomplishment, achievement...are not finite commodities to be divided up. Is a child's laughter to be divided up and allotted? No! Simply make more laughter!"

Laughter, pleased laughter, rippled through the crowd.

Brother Narev's scowl grew. "We've heard enough of your extremist rambling! Destroy your profane statue. Now."

Richard cocked his head. "Oh? The collective assembly of the Order, and of brothers, fears to hear what one insignificant man could say? You fear mere words that much, Brother Narev?"

Dark eyes stole a quick glance at the crowd as they leaned forward, eager to hear his answer.

"We fear no words. Virtue is on our side, and will prevail. Speak you blasphemy, so all may understand why moral people will side against you."

And now, to the other part," Michael continued, "to the real suffering around us. While we have worried about the boundaries that have not harmed a single one of us, many of our families, friends, and neighbors have suffered, and died. Tragic and needless deaths, in accidents with fire. Yes, that is what I said. Fire."

People mumbled in confusion. Michael was starting to lose his bond with the crowd. He seemed to expect it; he looked from face to face, letting the confusion build, and then dramatically he thrust his hand out, his finger pointing.

At Richard.

"There!" he screamed. Everyone turned as one. Hundreds of eyes looked at Richard. "There stands my beloved brother!" Richard tried to shrink. "My beloved brother who shares with me" - he pounded a fist to his chest - "the tragedy of losing our own mother to fire! Fire took our mother from us when we were young, and left us to grow up alone, without her love and care, without her guidance. It was not some imagined enemy from accross a boundary that took her, but an enemy of fire! She couldn't be there to comfort us when we hurt, when we cried in the night. And the thing that wounds the most is that it didn't have to be."

Tears, glistening in the sunlight, ran down Michael's cheeks. "I am sorry, friends, please forgive me." He wiped the tears with a handkerchief he had handy. "It's just that only this morning I heard of another fire that took a fine young mother and father, and left their daughter an orphan. It brought my own pain back to me and I couldn't remain silent." Everyone was now solidly back with him. Their tears flowed freely. A woman put her arm around Richard's shouldder as he stood numb. She whispered how sorry she was.

"I wonder how many of you have shared the pain my brother and I live with every day. Please, those of you who have aloved one, or a friend, who has been hurt, or even killed, by fire, please, hold up your hands." Quite a few hands went up, and there was wailing from some in the crowd.

"There, my friends," he said hoarsely, spreading his arms wid, "there is the suffering among us. We need look no further than this room."

Richard tried to swallow the lump in his throat as the memory of that horror came back to him. A man who had imagined their father had cheated him lost his temper and knocked a lamp off the table as Richard and his brother slept in the back bedroom. While the man dragged his father outside, beating him, his mother pulled Richard and his brother from the burning house, then ran back inside to save something, they never knew what, and was burned alive. Her screams brought the man to his senses, and he and their father tried to save her, but couldn't. Filled with guilt and revulsion at what he had caused, the man ran off crying and yelling that he was sorry.

That, his father had told them a thousand times, was the result of a man losing his temper. Michael shrugged it off; Richard took it to heart. It had instilled in him a dread of his own anger, and whenever it threatened to come out, he choked it off.

Michael was wrong. Fire had not killed their mother; anger had.

Arms hanging limply at his side, head bowed, Michael spoke softly again. "What can we do about the danger to our families from fire?" He shook his head sadly. "I do not know, my friends.

"But, I am forming a commission on the problem, and I urge any concerned citizen to come forward with suggestions. My door always stands open. Together we can do something. together we will do something."

The rage in Drefan's eyes was nothing to match the rage thundering into Richard's heart.

"Drop the sword, drefan, now. Or I will kill you."

Drefan swept the sword around. "How? With your bare hands?"

Richard vividly remembered what Zedd had told him when first giving him the Sword of Truth: the sword was only a tool: the Seeker was the weapon. a true seeker didn't need the sword.

Richard started forward. "And with hate in my heart."

"I will enjoy killing you, at last, Richard. even if you don't have a weapon."

"I am the weapon."

Richard was running. The distance between them shrank at an alarming rate. Kahlan screamed for him to get away. He hardly heard her. Richard was committed.

Drefan lifted the sword overhead, pulling a breath in preparation to cleave Richard.

That was the opening. Richard knew that a thrust was faster than a cut.

He was in the iron grip of deadly determination.

Richard was lost in the dance with death.

Drefan bellowed in rage as the sword started down.

Richard dropped to his left knee, through the opening, using his forward momentum and a twist of his torso to add force to his strike. Fingers straight and stiff, he drove his arm ahead with all his might.

Before the sword could touch him, Richard struck like lightning, driving his hand through Drefan's soft middle. In the blink of an eye, he had seized Drefan's spinal column and yanked it back out, ripping it apart.

Drefan pitched backward, crashing against the sliph's well, slumping down in a spreading, crimson flood.

<snip>

Drefan, leaning up against the well of the sliph where he had fallen, somehow still hanging to a thread of life, was holding up the sword. Richard was lying right there, on the floor, within reach. Drefan was going to kill him.

"No!" Kahlan screamed.

But the sword was already sweeping down. Faint, maniacal laughter drifted on the air.

Kahlan threw her fist up, calling the blue lightning to protect Richard. It didn't come. She was blocked from her power.

Cara was already diving toward Drefan, but she was too far away. She wasn't going to make it. The sword was halfway there.

A silver arm swept down and seized Drefan' arm, holding it tight. Kahlan held her breath.

Another liquid silver arm enveloped Drefan's head. "Breathe," the sliph cooed, a voice promising the sating of bestial lust, a voice promising rapture. "I wish you to please me. Breathe."

Drefan's chest rose as he inhaled the sliph.

He went still, holding the sliph in his lungs. The sliph freed him, and he slumped to the side. His breath left him, releasing the sliph he had inhaled.

It drained from his mouth and nose, not silver, but red.

Genocide: The Moral Choice! Kill Every Last Child! Moral Clarity! We're the Good Guys! (https://books.google.com/books?id=8V4jEcSlcCcC&pg=PA448&lpg=PA448&dq=sword+of+truth+jocopo&source=bl&ots=VqSvi-wYiH&sig=o6XSTF_OCWkOmk4wJt1-toA7_TY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj7_sDq5KbaAhUCKqwKHffODwwQ6AEIkgEwEQ#v= onepage&q=sword%20of%20truth%20jocopo&f=false)

This is but a taste of what these books hold.

[Anteros]

Its a huge, and very unexp0laind for the reader, setting.
Yes, its a bit jumpy, especially in book one, but that does get better. And honestly, its mostly due to him not being as good at smoothing over the changes in viepoints/arrival of new stuff as some other authors.
It fits the age and mental acuitiy (and jumpiness) of Tavi pretty well though, so it did notm detract much from my enjoyment. ;)

In his Dresden Files Books for example, he avoids things that would NEED such switching almost entirely, so he is obviously aware of the fact.

It did get better as the first book went along, but the middle parts were pretty bad. I think it's exacerbated by the fact that the Isana/Kord plot line really has almost nothing to do with the main plot and doesn't really advance it in any meaningful way. I'm sure they will be an important character going forward, but it was a chore to read in this book.

It did lose a bit of the ADD nature as it went along though, and it was good enough that I'm going to give the rest of the series a try. It helps that the books are pretty short, so I can get through one in a few days while I'm off since I normally work numerous 12 hour shifts in a row.

[Kitten Champion]

Actual Sword of Truth excepts.
And now, to the other part," Michael continued, "to the real suffering around us. While we have worried about the boundaries that have not harmed a single one of us, many of our families, friends, and neighbors have suffered, and died. Tragic and needless deaths, in accidents with fire. Yes, that is what I said. Fire."

People mumbled in confusion. Michael was starting to lose his bond with the crowd. He seemed to expect it; he looked from face to face, letting the confusion build, and then dramatically he thrust his hand out, his finger pointing.

At Richard.

"There!" he screamed. Everyone turned as one. Hundreds of eyes looked at Richard. "There stands my beloved brother!" Richard tried to shrink. "My beloved brother who shares with me" - he pounded a fist to his chest - "the tragedy of losing our own mother to fire! Fire took our mother from us when we were young, and left us to grow up alone, without her love and care, without her guidance. It was not some imagined enemy from accross a boundary that took her, but an enemy of fire! She couldn't be there to comfort us when we hurt, when we cried in the night. And the thing that wounds the most is that it didn't have to be."

Tears, glistening in the sunlight, ran down Michael's cheeks. "I am sorry, friends, please forgive me." He wiped the tears with a handkerchief he had handy. "It's just that only this morning I heard of another fire that took a fine young mother and father, and left their daughter an orphan. It brought my own pain back to me and I couldn't remain silent." Everyone was now solidly back with him. Their tears flowed freely. A woman put her arm around Richard's shouldder as he stood numb. She whispered how sorry she was.

"I wonder how many of you have shared the pain my brother and I live with every day. Please, those of you who have aloved one, or a friend, who has been hurt, or even killed, by fire, please, hold up your hands." Quite a few hands went up, and there was wailing from some in the crowd.

"There, my friends," he said hoarsely, spreading his arms wid, "there is the suffering among us. We need look no further than this room."

Richard tried to swallow the lump in his throat as the memory of that horror came back to him. A man who had imagined their father had cheated him lost his temper and knocked a lamp off the table as Richard and his brother slept in the back bedroom. While the man dragged his father outside, beating him, his mother pulled Richard and his brother from the burning house, then ran back inside to save something, they never knew what, and was burned alive. Her screams brought the man to his senses, and he and their father tried to save her, but couldn't. Filled with guilt and revulsion at what he had caused, the man ran off crying and yelling that he was sorry.

That, his father had told them a thousand times, was the result of a man losing his temper. Michael shrugged it off; Richard took it to heart. It had instilled in him a dread of his own anger, and whenever it threatened to come out, he choked it off.

Michael was wrong. Fire had not killed their mother; anger had.

Arms hanging limply at his side, head bowed, Michael spoke softly again. "What can we do about the danger to our families from fire?" He shook his head sadly. "I do not know, my friends.

"But, I am forming a commission on the problem, and I urge any concerned citizen to come forward with suggestions. My door always stands open. Together we can do something. together we will do something."



This to me is why the "earlier books are better" kind of falls flat as a critique. They are in sheer relative terms I guess, but there still full of stuff like this. It's just easier to see what he's about when he keep driving it home with even greater hyperbole and far more regularity.

[Anteros]

It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to form a committee for dealing with the dangers of fire in a city. That's something that every city ever does. The craziest part of that passage is the fact that the protagonist is against it. Does the character go on to actually try to ban fire itself or something?

Of course the passage itself is ham-fisted and awful though. That's par for the course from what I remember from these books.

[Kitten Champion]

It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to form a committee for dealing with the dangers of fire in a city. That's something that every city ever does. The craziest part of that passage is the fact that the protagonist is against it. Does the character go on to actually try to ban fire itself or something?

Of course the passage itself is ham-fisted and awful though. That's par for the course from what I remember from these books.

Yes, he does. It's supposed to be foreshadowing.for the actual villain - Darken Rahl - who hates fire because of a childhood trauma and whose influence is spreading throughout the world. It's just another lame thinly veiled strawman allusion at the end of the day, only this is prior to the reader realizing that that's his whole bag.

[Talar]

Stormlight Archive is dark but not gritty, especially by the end of book two when the big time powers start getting thrown around in earnest. The state of the world is awful and the various superheroes are all deeply flawed, but they're still superheroes.

That's fair. I would say that parts of it are definitely gritty, most of Kaladin's story up through the first 2 books when he is struggling as a slave and bridgeman. Following Shallan and others is definitely not gritty though, and Kaladin moves on from grittiness by the end of book 2.

[GrayDeath]

This to me is why the "earlier books are better" kind of falls flat as a critique. They are in sheer relative terms I guess, but there still full of stuff like this. It's just easier to see what he's about when he keep driving it home with even greater hyperbole and far more regularity.


The quotes made my skin crawl.
Honestly, this is the absolute first time prose got BETTER after a translation (read the books in my native language as back in the day I did not have the money/Access to get everything in English)....

Wow. Learned something.


It did get better as the first book went along, but the middle parts were pretty bad. I think it's exacerbated by the fact that the Isana/Kord plot line really has almost nothing to do with the main plot and doesn't really advance it in any meaningful way. I'm sure they will be an important character going forward, but it was a chore to read in this book.

It did lose a bit of the ADD nature as it went along though, and it was good enough that I'm going to give the rest of the series a try. It helps that the books are pretty short, so I can get through one in a few days while I'm off since I normally work numerous 12 hour shifts in a row.

The Subplot is important, and will ahve ramifications through the later books, with 2 having parts of the things developing from it as one of the central focus points.
And these seemingly disconected plotlines keep happening, but with less obvious disconnectedness, in the later books.

And yeah, they read really fast, especially books 4 and 5 if youa sk me.

Enjoy. :)

[Eldan]

Actual Sword of Truth excerpts.

No war! No war! No war!" the people shouted as Richard led the men up the street at a dead run.

"Out of the way!" Richard yelled as he closed the distance. This was no time for subtlety or discussions: the success of their attack depended in large part on speed. "Get out of the way! This is your only warning! Get out of the way or die!"

"Stop the hate! Stop the hate!" the people chanted as they locked arms.

They had no idea how much hate was raging through Richard. He drew the Sword of Truth. The wrath of its magic didn't come out with it, but he had enough of his own. He slowed to a trot.

"Move!" Richard called as he bore down on the people.

A plump, curly-haired woman took a step out from the others. Her round face was red with anger as she screamed. "Stop the hate! No war! Stop the hate! No war!"

"Move or die!" Richard yelled as he picked up speed.

The red-faced woman shook her fleshy fist at Richard and his men, leading an angry chant. "Murderers! Murderers! Murderers!"

On his way past her, gritting his teeth as he screamed with the fury of the attack begun, Richard took a powerful swing, lopping off the woman's head and upraised arm. Strings of blood and gore splashed across the faces behind her even as some still chanted their empty words. The head and loose arm tumbled through the crowd. A man mad the mistake of reaching for Richard's weapon, and took the full weight of a charging thrust.

Men behind Richard hit the line of evil's guardians with unrestrained violence. People armed only with their hatred for moral clarity fell bloodied, terribly injured, and dead. The line of people collapsed before the merciless charge. Some of the people, screaming their contempt, used their fists to attack Richard's men. They were met with swift and deadly steel.

At the realization that their defense of the Imperial Order's brutality would actually result in consequences to themselves, the crowd began scattering in fright, screaming curses back at Richard and his men.

The bird let out a slow chicken cackle. It sounded like a chicken, but in her heart she knew it wasn't. In that instant, she completely understood the concept of a chicken that was not a chicken. This looked like a chicken, like most of the Mud People's chickens. But this was no chicken.

This was evil manifest.

As Six and the commander were talking, Richard turned a little, feigning a stretch. In an instant, his hand was on the sword. In another instant the blade was free.

Having a weapon, a sword, in his hand, instantly flooded Richard with memories, forms, and skills he had spent long hours learning. The lessons might have in part come from otherworldly sources, but the knowledge was not magic. It was the experience of countless Seekers before Richard. Even though he didnt have that weapon with him, he still had that knowledge. […]

He knew where Kahlan was, and he had to get to her.

These men were in his way.

Richard swung, taking off an arm wielding an axe. The cry, the spray of blood, made the men nearby flinch. In that sliver of an instant, Richard made his move. He brought his sword up through another man lifting his sword. The man died before he even had his arm fully cocked back. Richard spun out of the way of weapons coming for him.

Despite the sudden cacophony of metal clanging, of men yelling, Richard was already in a silent world of purpose. He was in control. These men might have thought that they had an army against him, but in a way that was his advantage. He didn't fight an army. He fought individuals. They thought like a collective mass, a collective element, allowing one another to move, as if the soldiers were trying to be one big fighting centipede.

That was a mistake. Richard used it to cut into them. While they hesitated waiting for others to act, waiting for an opening, Richard was already moving through their lines, cutting them down. He let them swing and lunge, using strength and effort, while he floated through the onslaught of steel. Every time he thrust, he made contact. Every time he swung his weapon, he cut. It was like going through thick brush, slashing aside the branches that reached out at him. He let the momentum of the sword power the next strike, keeping it in continuous motion rather than using effort, and precious time, to draw it back. If he brought the blade down, slicing through the side of a man's neck, he continued the movement, bringing the weapon up behind to run a man through as he rushed in, and then, as he pulled the blade out, he spun away as swords, axes, and flails came down where he had been only a moment before. It was a fluid dance, moving through the grunting, diving, jumping men. Slice, slice, slice, letting the screams fill the morning air, letting the alarm of not being able to stop him cause others to hesitate in fear of what could be happening.

Jennsen gestured vaguely back at the men and the town behind her. "Since I've been with them, they have come to see that I'm not a witch, and Betty is not a spirit guide - although for a time there I was afraid they might be right about Betty."

Richard peered down at the goat. Betty cocked her head. "I guess none of us but Betty knew the truth of what Nicholas was up to." At the sound of her name, Betty's ears pricked forward and her tail went into a fit of expectant wagging.

<<snip>>

After Richard picked up his pack and slipped his arms through the straps, Owen gripped Richard's hand. "Thank you, Lord Rahl, for showing me that my life is worth living."

Marilee stepped forward and hugged him. "Thank you for teaching Owen to be worthy of me."

Richard laughed. Owen laughed. Cara gave Marilee an approving clap on the back. And then all the men laughed.

Betty pushed in and with a flurry of tail wagging got the point across that she didn't want to be left out.

Richard knelt down and scratched Betty's ears. "And you, my friend, from now on I don't want you letting any Slides using you to spy on people."

Betty pushed her head against his chest as he scratched her ears, and bleated as if to say she was sorry.

"Go away!" He threw his arms out and pointed again. "I want you to go away and never come back!" Gratch tried to put his arms around Richard again. Richard pushed them away again. Gratch's ears lay down against his head.

"Grrratch luuug Raaach aaarg." Richard wanted more than anything to hold his friend and tell him that he loved him, too. But he couldn't. He had to make him go in order to save his life.

"Well I don't love you! Go away and never come back!"

Gratch looked to the hill Pasha had run down. He looked back at Richard. his green eyes were filling with tears. He reached out for Richard.

Richard shoved him away. Gratch stood with his arms out. Richard remembered the first time he had held the furry beast. He had been so little then. He was so big now. But as he had grown, his friendship, and his love, had grown, too.

He was Richard's only friend, and only Richard could save him. If Richard really loved him, he had to do this.

"Go away! I don't want you around anymore! I don't want you to ever come back! You're just a big dumb bag of fur! Go away! If you really love me, then you'll do as I ask, and go away!"

Richard wanted to keep yelling, but the lump in his throat caught the words. He backed away. Gratch seemed to wither in the cool night air. His arms came out again with a pitiful, forlorn wail. He called with a plaintive, keening cry.

Richard took another step back. Gratch took a step toward him. Richard picked up a rock and heaved it at the gar. It bounced off his huge chest.

"Go away!" Richard cried. He threw another rock. "I don't want you around anymore! Go away! I don't ever want to see you again!"

Tears ran from the glowing green eyes, over the wrinkles of his cheeks. "Grrratch luuug Raaaach aaarg."

"If you really love me then you will do this! Go!"

The gar looked again to the hill Pasha had run down, turned, and spread his wings. With a last look over his shoulder, he bounded into the air and flew off into the night.

When he could no longer see the dark shape against the stars, or hear the sweep of wings, Richard crumpled to the ground. His only friend was gone.

"I love you, too, Gratch."

He cried in racking sobs. "Dear spirits, why have you done this to me? He was all I had. I hate you. Every last one of you."

Nicci's gaze rose up the legs, the robes, the arms, the bodies of the two people, up to their faces. She felt as if a giant fist squeezed her heart to a stop.

This was what was in Richard's eyes, brought into existence in glowing white marble. To see it fully realized was like being struck by lightning.

In that instant, her entire life, everything that had ever happened to her, everything she had ever seen, heard, or done, seemed to come together in one flash of emotional violence. Nicci cried out in pain at the beauty of it, and more so at the beauty of what it represented.

Her eyes fell on the name carved in the stone base.

LIFE

Nicci collapsed to the floor in tears, in abject shame, in horror, in revulsion, in sudden blinding comprehension.

...In pure joy.

<snip>

The two figures in the center posed in a state of harmonious balance. The man's body displayed a proud masculinity. Though the woman was clothed, there was no doubt as to her femininity. They both reflected a love of the human form as sensuous, noble, and pure. The evil all around seemed as if it was recoiling in terror of that noble purity.

More than that, though, Richard's statue existed without conflict; the figures showed awareness, rationality, and purpose. This was a manifestation of human power, ability, intent. This was life lived for its own sake. This was mankind standing proudly of his own free will.

This was exactly what the single word at the bottom named it:

LIFE

That it existed was proof of the validity of the concept.

this was life as it should be lived--proud, reasoned, and a slave to no other man. This was the rightful exaltation of the individual, the nobility of the human spirit.

Everything on the walls all around offered death as its answer.

This offered life.

Victor and Ishaq were on their knees, weeping.

<snip>

"You are ruled," Richard said in a voice that rang out over the multitude, "By mean little men."

The people gasped as one. To speak against a brother was treason, most likely, and heresy for sure.

"My crime?" Richard asked aloud. "I have given you something beautiful to see, daring to hold the conviction that you have a right to see it if you wish. Worse...I have said that your lives are your own to live."

A rolling murmur swept out through the multitude. Richard's voice rose in power, demanding in its clarity to be heard above the whispering.

"Evil is not one large entity, but a collection of countless, small depravities brought up from the muck by petty men. Living under the Order, you have traded the enrichment of vision for a gray fog of mediocrity -- the fertile inspiration of striving and growth, for mindless stagnation and slow decay -- the brave new ground of the attempt, for the timid quagmire of apathy."

With gazes riveted and lips still, the crowd listened. Richard gestured out over their heads with his sledgehammer, wielded with the effortless grace of a royal sword.

"You have traded freedom not even for a bowl of soup, but worse, for the spoken empty feelings of others who say that you deserve to have a full bowl of soup provided by someone else.

"Happiness, joy, accomplishment, achievement...are not finite commodities to be divided up. Is a child's laughter to be divided up and allotted? No! Simply make more laughter!"

Laughter, pleased laughter, rippled through the crowd.

Brother Narev's scowl grew. "We've heard enough of your extremist rambling! Destroy your profane statue. Now."

Richard cocked his head. "Oh? The collective assembly of the Order, and of brothers, fears to hear what one insignificant man could say? You fear mere words that much, Brother Narev?"

Dark eyes stole a quick glance at the crowd as they leaned forward, eager to hear his answer.

"We fear no words. Virtue is on our side, and will prevail. Speak you blasphemy, so all may understand why moral people will side against you."

And now, to the other part," Michael continued, "to the real suffering around us. While we have worried about the boundaries that have not harmed a single one of us, many of our families, friends, and neighbors have suffered, and died. Tragic and needless deaths, in accidents with fire. Yes, that is what I said. Fire."

People mumbled in confusion. Michael was starting to lose his bond with the crowd. He seemed to expect it; he looked from face to face, letting the confusion build, and then dramatically he thrust his hand out, his finger pointing.

At Richard.

"There!" he screamed. Everyone turned as one. Hundreds of eyes looked at Richard. "There stands my beloved brother!" Richard tried to shrink. "My beloved brother who shares with me" - he pounded a fist to his chest - "the tragedy of losing our own mother to fire! Fire took our mother from us when we were young, and left us to grow up alone, without her love and care, without her guidance. It was not some imagined enemy from accross a boundary that took her, but an enemy of fire! She couldn't be there to comfort us when we hurt, when we cried in the night. And the thing that wounds the most is that it didn't have to be."

Tears, glistening in the sunlight, ran down Michael's cheeks. "I am sorry, friends, please forgive me." He wiped the tears with a handkerchief he had handy. "It's just that only this morning I heard of another fire that took a fine young mother and father, and left their daughter an orphan. It brought my own pain back to me and I couldn't remain silent." Everyone was now solidly back with him. Their tears flowed freely. A woman put her arm around Richard's shouldder as he stood numb. She whispered how sorry she was.

"I wonder how many of you have shared the pain my brother and I live with every day. Please, those of you who have aloved one, or a friend, who has been hurt, or even killed, by fire, please, hold up your hands." Quite a few hands went up, and there was wailing from some in the crowd.

"There, my friends," he said hoarsely, spreading his arms wid, "there is the suffering among us. We need look no further than this room."

Richard tried to swallow the lump in his throat as the memory of that horror came back to him. A man who had imagined their father had cheated him lost his temper and knocked a lamp off the table as Richard and his brother slept in the back bedroom. While the man dragged his father outside, beating him, his mother pulled Richard and his brother from the burning house, then ran back inside to save something, they never knew what, and was burned alive. Her screams brought the man to his senses, and he and their father tried to save her, but couldn't. Filled with guilt and revulsion at what he had caused, the man ran off crying and yelling that he was sorry.

That, his father had told them a thousand times, was the result of a man losing his temper. Michael shrugged it off; Richard took it to heart. It had instilled in him a dread of his own anger, and whenever it threatened to come out, he choked it off.

Michael was wrong. Fire had not killed their mother; anger had.

Arms hanging limply at his side, head bowed, Michael spoke softly again. "What can we do about the danger to our families from fire?" He shook his head sadly. "I do not know, my friends.

"But, I am forming a commission on the problem, and I urge any concerned citizen to come forward with suggestions. My door always stands open. Together we can do something. together we will do something."

The rage in Drefan's eyes was nothing to match the rage thundering into Richard's heart.

"Drop the sword, drefan, now. Or I will kill you."

Drefan swept the sword around. "How? With your bare hands?"

Richard vividly remembered what Zedd had told him when first giving him the Sword of Truth: the sword was only a tool: the Seeker was the weapon. a true seeker didn't need the sword.

Richard started forward. "And with hate in my heart."

"I will enjoy killing you, at last, Richard. even if you don't have a weapon."

"I am the weapon."

Richard was running. The distance between them shrank at an alarming rate. Kahlan screamed for him to get away. He hardly heard her. Richard was committed.

Drefan lifted the sword overhead, pulling a breath in preparation to cleave Richard.

That was the opening. Richard knew that a thrust was faster than a cut.

He was in the iron grip of deadly determination.

Richard was lost in the dance with death.

Drefan bellowed in rage as the sword started down.

Richard dropped to his left knee, through the opening, using his forward momentum and a twist of his torso to add force to his strike. Fingers straight and stiff, he drove his arm ahead with all his might.

Before the sword could touch him, Richard struck like lightning, driving his hand through Drefan's soft middle. In the blink of an eye, he had seized Drefan's spinal column and yanked it back out, ripping it apart.

Drefan pitched backward, crashing against the sliph's well, slumping down in a spreading, crimson flood.

<snip>

Drefan, leaning up against the well of the sliph where he had fallen, somehow still hanging to a thread of life, was holding up the sword. Richard was lying right there, on the floor, within reach. Drefan was going to kill him.

"No!" Kahlan screamed.

But the sword was already sweeping down. Faint, maniacal laughter drifted on the air.

Kahlan threw her fist up, calling the blue lightning to protect Richard. It didn't come. She was blocked from her power.

Cara was already diving toward Drefan, but she was too far away. She wasn't going to make it. The sword was halfway there.

A silver arm swept down and seized Drefan' arm, holding it tight. Kahlan held her breath.

Another liquid silver arm enveloped Drefan's head. "Breathe," the sliph cooed, a voice promising the sating of bestial lust, a voice promising rapture. "I wish you to please me. Breathe."

Drefan's chest rose as he inhaled the sliph.

He went still, holding the sliph in his lungs. The sliph freed him, and he slumped to the side. His breath left him, releasing the sliph he had inhaled.

It drained from his mouth and nose, not silver, but red.

Genocide: The Moral Choice! Kill Every Last Child! Moral Clarity! We're the Good Guys! (https://books.google.com/books?id=8V4jEcSlcCcC&pg=PA448&lpg=PA448&dq=sword+of+truth+jocopo&source=bl&ots=VqSvi-wYiH&sig=o6XSTF_OCWkOmk4wJt1-toA7_TY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj7_sDq5KbaAhUCKqwKHffODwwQ6AEIkgEwEQ#v= onepage&q=sword%20of%20truth%20jocopo&f=false)

This is but a taste of what these books hold.

You really should have posted more about the chicken that isn't a chicken. Someone showed me a two-page excerpt once and every sentence is pure gold.

[Mechalich]

{Scrubbed}

[Douglas]

It is difficult to discuss the Sword of Truth in any depth without talking about {Scrubbed}, just as it would be difficult to talk about The Chronicles of Narnia without discussing {Scrubbed}
The Mod Radiant: Difficult or not, it's what you have to do if you want to discuss these books on this forum without breaking the forum rules.

[Ibrinar]

viodraeth just so you know if your goal is defending the books it isn't working. Well on me at least you are just strengthening the negative perception.

[ThunderCat]

There usually are pragmatic reasons to apply rules to war. But when the enemy is applying none (as Jagang does, and Kahlan does in response) what choice do you have?A big issue with SoT is that Goodkind sets up the story to justify all these actions to begin with, similarly to how 24, from what I've heard, came up with these convoluted scenarios to put Jack Bauer in a situation where he would have to use torture, the torture would always work, the torture subject would always be deserving, and there would be no negative social/political consequences of the torture. This drastically conflicts with what we know of the use of torture in real life, but the if we only go by the examples put forth in the show and forget reality, of course it will come across as justified.

Goodkind operates according to a simple premise: There are good people and evil people. Good people should allowed to do whatever they please, because they're good and will therefore always have a just reason for their actions, while evil people should have no rights or compassion extended to them, because they're evil and will always misuse it. And he writes the story in such a way as to always justify whatever atrocities his protagonists commit.

So when Richard kicks an 8 year old girl in the face hard enough to shatter her jaw, the setup is such that it comes across as justified, the least bad alternative, and a sign that Richard's noble spirit hasn't been broken yet. Also, she totally deserved it.

When Kahlan orders her soldiers to kill everyone in the area, acknowledging that it will mean the death of innocent civilians, but claiming that it's a necessary precaution nonetheless, the narrative rewards her for it, even in a situation where this strategy is highly likely to backfire.

When Richard slaughters peace protesters in their own country, it's after a 300 page setup about how their pacifism would mean the end of the world if allowed to continue, and when he decides to lead his army into enemy territory to massacre civilians, it works wonders, even if it's actually a very tactically unsound strategy in real life, because the narrative bends and twists around him to make it work.

When Richard enslaves the people of several nations, and have them spend 2 hours every day genuflecting towards his palace while groveling about how they only live to serve him, it's because of magic in his bloodline that will protect them from evil, but only as long as they acknowledge him as their overlord, so it's really a good and necessary thing.

Yes, if you take the books' words for it, it had to be done, it was necessary, there was no other way. But that's because the story was set up specifically to allow no other way, and have every alternative fail. As a reader, I could buy it once or twice (I've never had a problem with stories of anti-heroes getting **** done, even if it means not being nice), but at some point, it just stopped working because, while the justifications for the atrocities make perfect sense in the reality of the book, that reality is just far too removed from actual reality for the story to make sense.

[Forum Explorer]

You are so far the only poster on this thread that is anti-SOT that actually makes sense. I agree that Goodkind does exactly what you say he does. I don't agree that 24 and SOT are the only stories in which this happens though. Every story is set up to accomplish what the author wants. All stories include the writers views and their ways of looking at the world. If you can't imagine Lewis or Tolkein or any other writer writing the same things Gookind does, then you see my point. Some don't do it as narrowly or as openly as Goodkind, and if that's not your thing, that's Ok with me. I'm not here to justify the books or Goodkind. Mainly I started posting because of the slander some of the posts had. By slander I mean intentionally or unintentionally miss-reading lines and drawing false conclusions.

The one thing I would say I totally disagree with what you said is once again the issue with whether Richard slaughtered the innocent civilians that are peaceful. Here's my point: If a bully hits you repeatedly, do you have a right to stop him? You try reasoning with him, you try begging, you try everything you can to get him to stop. When that fails, are you aloud to hit him back? If a teacher sees you attempting to hit the bully and they stop you, were they right to do so? The teacher either A) had no idea about the bully and didn't care about your reasons, she just stopped you because violence is wrong, or B) knew about the bully and stopped you because you doing violence is wrong.

In this example, the 'peaceful protesters' are the B type teachers. They know perfectly well how the bullies are murdering, abusing, and rapping their own people, but when someone (Richard) puts an end to it he is the bad guy. And in this case Richard did in fact try to put a stop to it in every way he could before bringing violence. And finally the peaceful protesters threatened violence against Richard and Owen (and their army) and fulfilled that threat. So how can you see them as peaceful, innocent or civilians?

This of course is an example of what you already said: Goodkind won't allow the bully or the protesters to back down before they are slaughtered. Whether that is close to real life or not is a discussion for another forum and by my reasoning irrelevant...it's a fictional story. So it seems that most people don't like the books not for the books themselves but for how they compare to the way they view the real world, and by the way I do not view the real world the way you do. But like I said, at least your arguments mostly stick to the point and make sense.

Goodkind stresses one final point that may be up for debate, but in the context of the book it is not: No army can march without the support of the people at home. So this means that in the books there is no such thing as an innocent civilian. If a nation "Order of the Fellowship" wages war on another nation "D'Haran Empire" it does so with the knowing consent and support of the people of that nation. If this premise is correct (and in the books we have to assume it is) then Richard cannot win the war by fighting only those holding physical weapons. Instead he must fight the real threat, the ideas (non-physical weapons) of the order, of which all of the order have in their possession. Richard succeeds in fighting these ideas at one point using not a sword, but a speech and a stone-carving. He fails at other times. In the end he wins but not by killing all of the enemy, because Goodkind allows him the ability to do so. If Goodkind had wanted to, he could have had Richard wipe out the enemy as some on this thread have said he did do.

Tolkien and CK Lewis both had their stories reflect their beliefs but they did so in a much more skillful way. And more importantly they made sure to make the world and characters were logical and true to themselves first, rather then blatantly making them a mouthpiece or scarecrow. Though CK Lewis dropped that a little bit in the final book, though I'll admit I didn't catch onto what the dwarfs were representing until later.

If the teacher is someone who repeatedly espoused a philosophy of equality and peace between the children, and had proven they were willing to risk their career over it, and then turned out to be B), then it would be jarring and make for a poor story.

There is a difference between attacking supply lines, military production facilities, and the like, and attacking mostly unrelated civilians. There is also a difference between using propaganda to sway the enemy, and slaughtering their civilians as a political statement.

Also that stupid stone statue scene. That whole book was bad, but that scene in particular. Really very little context was lost for that scene in the example given. Richard creates a statue that is so beautiful that everyone is basically weeping with joy (not withstanding that Richard hadn't carved stone at all before this book), gets to make a speech directly in front of the head evil guy's father figure who does nothing to stop him, and then he breaks the statue which causes the entire crowd starts rioting and working for him.

[ThunderCat]

You are so far the only poster on this thread that is anti-SOT that actually makes sense. I agree that Goodkind does exactly what you say he does. I don't agree that 24 and SOT are the only stories in which this happens though. Every story is set up to accomplish what the author wants. All stories include the writers views and their ways of looking at the world. If you can't imagine Lewis or Tolkein or any other writer writing the same things Gookind does, then you see my point. Some don't do it as narrowly or as openly as Goodkind, and if that's not your thing, that's Ok with me. I'm not here to justify the books or Goodkind. Mainly I started posting because of the slander some of the posts had. By slander I mean intentionally or unintentionally miss-reading lines and drawing false conclusions.

I didn't say they were the only ones, but they are among the most blatant, one-sided, and stupid. Many other works have the heroes do morally questionable things, but they often temper it by showing the good with the bad. Mistborn (a much better fantasy series) shows the evils of tyranny, but also have the heroes fail when they try to skip straight into democracy during a crisis. It makes the an anti-democratic despot have good points, even though it's openly pro-democracy. Old Man's War (sci-fi) has an American style straw-liberal diplomat give a lecture about how waging war against hostile space aliens is wrong and how there's always a peaceful solution, only to have him be killed by his own stupidity. But afterwards, a war veteran who knows a lot about failed diplomacy firsthand admits that the diplomat is actually right in many of his criticisms of the army, he's just being a massive jerk about it.

In the first example, the author has characters he disagree with (tyrants) have good sides to them and make good points, while in the second, the author shows a character he agrees with (the peace-loving diplomat) being deeply flawed and unsympathetic, not to mention idiotic. Goodkind, in contrast, has Richard try to reason with people to have them join him voluntarily, only to have them reject him, not because his approach is flawed or it was unrealistic to expect them to make the right decision based on the information they have access to, but because they're all stupid and evil and ugly and irresponsible and hate freedom. He then starts giving every nation an ultimatum: Unconditional surrender or total annihilation, and again, everyone who objects is shown to be completely in the wrong and Richard is shown to be flawless.

Some stories acknowledge that in war, there are often no good choices, only varying degrees of bad, and they leave certain questions open to interpretation. Maybe the heroes did something they thought was a necessary evil, but other characters cast doubt as to whether it was really necessary. Or the heroes stick to their principles at any cost, but someone wonders if maybe the cost was too high. SoT has moral clarity.


The one thing I would say I totally disagree with what you said is once again the issue with whether Richard slaughtered the innocent civilians that are peaceful. Here's my point: If a bully hits you repeatedly, do you have a right to stop him? You try reasoning with him, you try begging, you try everything you can to get him to stop. When that fails, are you aloud to hit him back? If a teacher sees you attempting to hit the bully and they stop you, were they right to do so? The teacher either A) had no idea about the bully and didn't care about your reasons, she just stopped you because violence is wrong, or B) knew about the bully and stopped you because you doing violence is wrong.

They were "armed only with their hatred of moral clarity[sic]". Not exactly a serious threat and Richard could just go around them and fight his enemies somewhere else. But in Goodkind's world, every person or nation who claims neutrality always inevitably ends up joining whole-heartedly with the evil empire, and so everyone who's not 100% in agreement with Richard has to die because they're inevitably a threat. There's no nuance at all, no room for anyone who's not a Richard fanboy to have a point at all, or even be slightly not-awful. They either repent and submit, or they're slaughtered, full stop.


Goodkind stresses one final point that may be up for debate, but in the context of the book it is not: No army can march without the support of the people at home. So this means that in the books there is no such thing as an innocent civilian. If a nation "Order of the Fellowship" wages war on another nation "D'Haran Empire" it does so with the knowing consent and support of the people of that nation. If this premise is correct (and in the books we have to assume it is) then Richard cannot win the war by fighting only those holding physical weapons. Instead he must fight the real threat, the ideas (non-physical weapons) of the order, of which all of the order have in their possession.

The premise is BS, but even if it wasn't, it's just bad strategy. Goodkind is thinking like an American, but trying to portray a European situation. He wants to show that a powerful empire should be allowed to massacre civilians without consequences as long as it's for the greater good, but he doesn't make that point by portraying the leadership of a hyper-powerful super-empire getting involved in other countries' war, to show why this is right and why not interfering is morally and politically damaging (which I wouldn't mind at all), he falls back on the old stereotype of a band of plucky underdogs defending their freedom from an invading army, a situation that has nothing to do with the actions he's trying to defend.

When a hostile army is at your doorstep, you fight on your own turf. It's the only way you can win. You might fantasize about slaughtering all the enemy soldiers' families back home and all the civilians you see as supporting the hostile army, but you wait to indulge yourself until after the war is over. The army of Finland successfully repelled several Russian invasions by exploiting their greater familiarity with the local terrain and shorter supply lines provided by a friendly local population. If the Fins had ever abandoned that advantage in favor of traveling to Russia to slaughter civilians, Russia would have won in a heartbeat. Because it takes a much bigger army to conquer Russia than Finland, and Russia has the biggest army. All the Russians would need to do would be to split up their army and have one half go after the smaller Finnish army who're now fighting on enemy turf without the backup of local civilians, while the other half would steamroll over undefended Finland much faster than the Finnish army could ever eliminate the Russian civilians.

SoT is not just bad morality, it's bad strategy.

[ThunderCat]

The TL;DR version of my above post:

Killing civilians is for SoT what torture is for 24 and friendship is for My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic. It's not just that they're promoting a particular ideology, it's that they treat it like magic.

24: Hurt a suspect and you instantly get reliable and vital information to stop terror.

SoT: Kill unarmed civilians and your enemy is immediately left without a counter.

MLP:FiM: Offer friendship and every bully gets redeemed.

Except FiM actually treats it subject with nuance, and even breaks the formula once in a while to show villains who aren't redeemed. Also, it doesn't promote human rights violations.

So in conclusion: Watch My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic :smallbiggrin:

[Sapphire Guard]

While I do not like Goodkind's work and never finished the series, those examples need context.

What are those protestors in the way of? What is 'the attack'

The chicken is an evil spirit currently in the form of a chicken, that kills people. It's not just Kahlan being afraid of a random chicken.

Fire appears to be a serious problem in that crowd, given how many hands go up when he asks for injuries/deaths from fire. He just organises a commission to look at the problem, he doesn't actually say anything about banning fire. If that happens, why not quote that part?

Drefan isn't stated to be standing in your quote, just somehow still alive, which is probably attributable to him being a healing mage.

[Xyril]

While I do not like Goodkind's work and never finished the series, those examples need context.



The chicken is an evil spirit currently in the form of a chicken, that kills people. It's not just Kahlan being afraid of a random chicken.


I'll agree with you on some points, but the context of the chicken was completely unnecessary. For the quotes that were meant to demonstrate Goodkind's unreasonable Mary Sue style, I agree that context is necessary. For the quotes, like this one, which was more meant to convey Goodkind's terrible prose, the context doesn't help. Actually, having looked up some of the text around the quoted bit, context hurts Goodkind's case.

[Xyril]

You don't provide evidence for your conclusions. May i ask why you say Goodkind is a terrible writer? Is it his character's? Is it his descriptive abilities? Is it his setting's? Is it his drama? His grammar? His dialogue? Seems to me that Goodkind is an excellent writer, it is only what he writes about that people don't like. What makes Goodkind's writing sloppy?


For one thing, it was becoming increasingly self-indulgent when I finally stopped reading the series. To me, good writing is subtle, and if you're trying to sway people to one position or another, subtlety is even more important. Also, while I think few rules are truly absolute, I do agree that in general it's better to show than to tell in writing. J.K. Rowling never had Hermione go on a multi-page monologue about the importance of due process and the danger of abuse when a single person essentially embodies both the executive and the judiciary and has no meaningful accountability. Instead, she created Deloris Umbradge, and simply let us watch her act. Students complained, of course--IIRC, there were times their complaints almost resembled sophisticated political critiques, probably from Hermione--but what characters said about Umbradge had little to no impact on how I felt about her or what she represented. Instead, it was all about her--how she acted, what she said, how her actions (failed to) align with her stated principles. Actually, Umbradge was about as a subtle as a brick, but still stands in stark contrast to how Goodkind tries to make a moral point.

By a purely technical metric, Goodkind isn't a bad writer. I mean, he doesn't end up with numerous typos or mistakenly use apostrophes to denote the plural rather than the possessive, IIRC he generally knew the correct definitions (and more subtly, understood the proper connotations) of the words he uses, so that's better than most folks, right? The main problem to me--and this is of course a matter of taste--is that his style just doesn't excite me. To me, it vacillated between overly serious and unintentionally campy and cheese, to the point that after book 1, I was reading only because I felt some attachment to the main characters, and not because I loved the experience of reading his work. To me, great writing does one of two things. It can, like Nabokov's work or a lot of great poetry, make you extremely conscious of the fact that you're reading the written word and then demonstrate just how amazing the written word can be when done well. Literature can also be great when it makes you forget that you're reading text on paper--when it immerses you so fully in the story that medium almost doesn't matter. When I read Harry Turtledove or Anne McCaffrey, I almost forget that I'm reading a book after the first page. I honestly couldn't tell you what about their writing does that for me. All I know is that when I read Goodkind, or Phillip K. ****, or a lot of others, I keep seeing "Okay, Shannon Michaels, off with those panties"--some bit of prose that's so stilted, incongruous, or just plain weird that it knocks me out of the story and makes me think for a moment about how odd the prose is.


You say that Richard's introspection is insincere, perhaps it is because you don't like his reasoning (Richard's I mean). ie because you don't think the way he does, his way of thinking is insincere?


I could ask the same question of you. I notice later in the thread you level a personal attack on everyone who disagrees with you (saying that all of them, except one, doesn't make sense), but do they not make sense because they don't agree with you?

I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I am starting to wonder these are sincere questions or if you're in fact "evidence trolling" me. I say that because, if you had read my previous post, you'll note that I specifically stated that I actually agree with many of the arguments of Objectivism, which to me seemed to jive pretty closely to Goodkind's (and thus Richard's) in the early SoT series. As I also mentioned in a previous post, I stopped reading before the end of the series, so I can't really speak to how closely Objectivism matches what I've seen others describe as "Richard-centered" or "Goodkind-centered" morality in the later books, but at least for what I read early on, my reasoning actually matches Richard's a lot.

I find Richard's reasoning insincere because to me, scenes in which he questions himself are rather poorly written, they seem more than anything else focused on conveying to the reader that Richard is a good guy who is above the questionable actions that circumstances are forcing him to take, and once he's questioned whether the ends justify the means a few times, he throws himself wholeheartedly into the ugly means. What also influences my reading is that I've read enough about Goodkind to realize that Richard is--most likely--a writer stand-in. That is, what I've seen of Goodkind's morality is so close to Richard's morality that I strongly believe that the similarity is deliberate. So in addition to Richard's in universe dialogue being unconvincing, I am further confronted with the fact that Goodkind paints Richard as this good guy who doesn't approve of (let's just call it "evil" for shorthand), but is forced to commit evil, but then Goodkind writes the rest of the book in such a way that almost pornographically glorifies that evil.

Think of it this way: Imagine a movie that featured a protagonist who was a strict pacifist. Circumstances force him to come to terms with the fact that violence may be necessary to prevent an even greater evil. Near the beginning of the movie, he has a five minute soliloquy about what a good guy he is, how much he believes in peace above all else, and he would gladly die adhering to his pacifist beliefs, but he can't sit back and watch others die for his beliefs. The rest of the movie is a collaborative effort between Quentin Tarantino and John Woo that glorifies violence and sees our protagonist cutting through his enemies in a beautiful ballet and blood and severed limbs, while occasionally looking at the audience and saying, "Sorry, this isn't me."



You also say that Richard's moments of doubt are rare. I really don't think so. More than any other character in the books Richard doubts himself and his decisions.


This is another reason I think the writing is generally terrible--the moral depth of the supporting cast is lacking. Like you say, they don't really doubt themselves or their decisions: They have a position, they question Richard's, they're eventually proven wrong by events, at which point they either quickly realize they're wrong and realign their thinking, or they don't and they're promptly punished for it. The fact that Richard doubts himself more than other characters doesn't say anything good about Richard--it says something rather bad about the other characters and the work as a whole.



I think that Richard observes, thinks, decides and then acts. Rarely does he have reason to question his decisions, but when he does have a reason to he does indeed question himself. In this model, Richard's actions are based on what he observes. Where is their an example of Richard observing something as evil and him not being correct? That is what it all boils down to.


Once again, I suspect you didn't carefully read the posts you're now criticizing. The whole criticism is that Richard is always right, because Richard is the author's stand-in, and the author writes the story in such a way that Richard always turns out to be right.



When I made the statement that he always fights evil I was replying to a different post, taking my reply out of that context by not showing the whole post is exactly the kind of fallacies I have seen in every argument against Goodkind.


Respectfully, you don't seem to know what the word "fallacy" means. I ignored the context because the context was irrelevant, since I wasn't addressing your specific exchange with whoever, and that point wasn't relevant to the point I was making. I used that specific quote because it had strong resonance and it could be turned around to illustrate a flaw in your thinking--sort of my humble attempt to replicate Marc Antony's "Brutus is an honorable man" speech.

More importantly, I note that you fail to actually address the points I raised, instead insistently arguing that the context can't be ignored. It's like I overheard you stating that "All [racial slur]s are criminals, that's the problem" while arguing with someone else about the problem of crime in the city, and I use that quote to illustrate a point I wanted to make about the problem of racial stereotyping, at which point you respond that I'm dishonest for failing to engage you in a full debate about crime prevention.

[Sapphire Guard]

I'll agree with you on some points, but the context of the chicken was completely unnecessary. For the quotes that were meant to demonstrate Goodkind's unreasonable Mary Sue style, I agree that context is necessary. For the quotes, like this one, which was more meant to convey Goodkind's terrible prose, the context doesn't help. Actually, having looked up some of the text around the quoted bit, context hurts Goodkind's case.

I don't know, I think why the chicken is 'evil manifest' is relevant, the quote by itself makes it sound like Kahlan's just afraid of a random chicken. I think the way it's written is an intentional joke, for whatever that's worth.

[FrankWhite]

That is a weird one lol

[Tvtyrant]

It has been a while since I read the books, the chicken is one of the angry spirits from magic bell land correct?

[lord_khaine]

That's fair. I would say that parts of it are definitely gritty, most of Kaladin's story up through the first 2 books when he is struggling as a slave and bridgeman. Following Shallan and others is definitely not gritty though, and Kaladin moves on from grittiness by the end of book 2.

And in book 3 i think Shallan did a good job taking over the gritty bit.
All in all im surprised more people has not suggested The Way of Kings / Stormlight Archive

[JeenLeen]

I decided not to get it, but I was at the library today and saw there's a new Goodkind book set in the Sword of Truth setting. It seems that it's the first of a series where it follows Nicci as she travels after the conclusion of the series.

[Anteros]

Well, I finished up Codex Alera based on this thread's recommendation. It was...decent. I never really did get the impression that anything the side characters did was very important. Considering they compose the majority of the viewpoints in the books, it's definitely a major drawback. The chapters from the main character's POV were pretty good though. It's a bit of a strange series due to the fact that the middle books are easily the strongest.

Since this is basically a recommendation request thread I thought I'd post another request here. I recently played the new Shadowrun games and found myself wanting more of the setting. The associated books though....to call them terrible would be too kind. Does anyone recommend any solid books with a similar setting?

[comicshorse]

Since this is basically a recommendation request thread I thought I'd post another request here. I recently played the new Shadowrun games and found myself wanting more of the setting. The associated books though....to call them terrible would be too kind. Does anyone recommend any solid books with a similar setting?

A few of the Shadowrun novels are good. I've only read those of the FASA era but I really liked '2XS' , 'Streets of Blood' and 'Nights Pawn' (4.8 and 10 respectively).

[Anteros]

A few of the Shadowrun novels are good. I've only read those of the FASA era but I really liked '2XS' , 'Streets of Blood' and 'Nights Pawn' (4.8 and 10 respectively).

Thanks, I'll try to check these out if I can find them.

[GrayDeath]

Seconding the Fasa Era Stuff, has some Gems.

The "Intro Trilogy" (DOnt trust an Elf, be Wary of Dragons, Find your own Truth) are still good books for the feel of the world, if not the ones with the broadest or coolest setups. ;)


As for Codex Alera: It depends. if you only rate the Story as important Stuff for plot happens then no, the other PoV Chapters are usually not that great. But then, you could also remove half of SoIaF`s chapters under that view ^^

[Flying Turtle]

I just generally recommend Brandon Sanderson's Cosmere books. For those who don't know all his adult fantasy books take place in the same universe with different series taking place on different planet. Some of the series are definitely better than other, with the above mentioned Stormlight Archives probably being the best although they all get a lot better once you can start catching the tiny little connections between them.

Additionally, if you want grim and gritty fantasy I cannot say enough good things about the Red Rising Trilogies. The premise is this: in order to help terraform and colonize the various planets and moons of our solar system human kind as has genetically and cybernetically spliced the entire human race into new species called Colors. Different Colors are built for different things, for example Blues, the Color who pilot and navigate space ships, have cybernetic tattoos that allow them to directly interface with computers and ships. However over the years these Colors have stratified into a brutal caste system, with Golds at the top and Reds at the bottom. The main character, being a Red takes umbrage with this and undergoes surgery to turn himself into something of a Red/Gold hybrid so he can infiltrate the government a bring it down from the inside.

I tend to think of it as Ender's Game of Thrones but with a more forward thinking set of protagonists. They do horrible things but only after genuinely arguing amongst themselves about whether it is worth it. It makes the protagonists a lot more likable in my eyes.

[Liquor Box]

I just wanted to say thanks again for the recommendations in this thread. I have finished the first book in The First Law Trilogy and am into the second book. I'm enjoying it very much.