Timewaster's Guide Archive
Departments => Books => Topic started by: swaindaddy on June 04, 2009, 09:21:40 PM
-
Wondering if I should invest in this series.
I love WoT, Night Angel Trilogy, Warded Man, Eddings, Feist, and Runelords.
My skepticism comes from the critics at amazon and the like. They all keep mentioning that the books are to scatter-brained and hard to follow.
Can anyone here compare them to WoT or other fantasy staples?
If you have read the MBotF let me know if I should.
-
The tone is very different from the serie you mentioned. "Ericksen" has said that he likes to take the classic fantasy roles and turn them on there ear. He and his collaborator are both history types (anthropologists and archeologists) so they use a style of narrative that "tastes" more like translations of Greek and Mesopotamian god myths. If you liked Gilgamesh you'll love The Book of the Fallen.
The early novels are far more conventional, but as the world expands there is some confusion as Ericksen chases down threads and tries to tie them together. It's fun but he isn't shy about building a major character then hacking him or her to bits before getting to a tidy conclusion in the character's goals and life.
Think about what it would have been like if after all he'd been through Rand had stumbled, cracked his head and died of concussion on the way back from the Aiel Waste. Anticlimactic elements like that are integral to the Malazan stories. But they are good despite being a bit alien. Must be a Canadian thing. ;P
-
its "Erikson." :P
To be fair, characters don't trip and crack their heads open and die. That isn't an Erikson convention at all. Mostly all of the deaths that occur are pretty dramatic (though you many not understand the meaning of the deaths for a novel or two). I also disagree with the first few books being conventional.
However, Erikson IS very history minded. He almost didn't get published because his first book makes you feel like you missed 3 books worth of material - he doesn't start at the "beginning" of the story like the stereotypical chapter 1's for Eddings, Feist, Jordan, Brooks, etc... His puts a lot of effort into races and their history, as well as kingdoms and their history...and them all being hacked to bloody bits. His endings are spectacular.
In my opinion, the reason they are good is because of strong characterization (which you don't really get till book 2), and BECAUSE it ISN'T like other fantasy staples. He is perhaps one of the most popular authors in Europe, but the US has done a terrible job of marketing him (which is why he isn't more popular here).
-
I only meant more conventional as compared to the later novels. Not with regard to the world at large. And yeah the actual cause of death is usually a bit more dramatic. I was taking the poet's privilege. I just meant he's not shy about offing the character you've invested in as the protagonist and taking off in a different direction entirely.
as for the spelling, I stand corrected. :)
Otherwise I think we agree.
-
oh yes. book 3's ending was more gut-wrenching than the deaths in, say, a Martin novel.
I once read one person's take on the body-counts in Erikson novels - he said what makes it so good is that the death count doesnt seem over-the-top. He said, in fact, that it is a miracle that the PoV characters even survive until the end of the novel!
It's that sense of extreme danger to the characters that i LOVE.
-
I was/am not really a fan of the Game of Thrones - so what impact would that have on me trying out this series - I am very interested but also very skittish.
Once I commit I will launch in full force so any input would be helpful. Thanks.
-
I like them quite a bit better than martin. In fact, if I had to pick a favorite series that I've read so far, it would probably be this one. You have to be prepared to not know everything, and it helps if you go into it understanding that you'll be fairly confused for a good portion of the first book. Once you figure out what is going on however, which didn't take as long as it seemed like it would, the books take off. I had trouble getting into the first one, and the first half of the second one was slow. After that, I've just read them straight through.
Erikson is great with characters. Even when they die, it doesn't feel like a cheap plot resolution or a quick twist just to pull out emotional response from readers. Instead, it's usually satisfying, yet still sad. Based on the other books you've said you liked, I'd say try the first and second, and if you're not hooked, don't get the rest. If you don't like it by the end of the second, you probably won't like the rest, although the third is, in my opinion, the best book in the series so far. I'm kind of rambling, but basically what I'm saying is that you should try it. And if you get terribly confused, wikipedia can be your friend, although don't look too far because there are spoilers. I had to use wiki to figure out what the heck warrens were, but that was about the extent of my usage. Anyway....
-
I would wait until books 9 and 10 are published before starting them up. I finished through book 8 and the lack of finality to alot of the storylines has me rather perturbed.
-
well, then you dont have to wait long since book 9 comes out in the UK in July, and then book 10 next year. Not to mention you have the Esselmont novels in the Malazan series (the 3rd one coming soon) and the 3 short stories in the series done by Erikson. If you ask me, this is a great time to start the series.
-
I guess, before saying "yes or no" we should ask how long it normally takes you to read a book? The Malazan series clocks out at 700+ pages per book (hard cover) or over 1000 softcover. If youread slowly, then I would say bookstore guy may be right. I read the whole series in about 6 weeks, so I have a long wait now. I wish I had know, i would have waited and read something else instead. Something finished lol
-
I started in late may and am a third of the way through bonehunters...ignoring other books i have already bought to go buy and read these... and as stingy as i am that IS SAYING SOMETHING!!!
-
I've definitely been considering this series. I saw it recently on a list of "Best Fantasy Series." Heh. Well, there's got to be some way I find new books. :p
After I finish The Baker's Boy and its two sequels, I might give it a try.
-
I've been reading the first book for about six months now. It's fantastic, but - and I don't know about anyone else - I need to take frequent breaks while reading it. This is probably not such a good thing, as I tend to forget stuff after I go a month without reading it...
Utterly fantastic, but at the moment, a bit hard for me to read too much in one go.
-
It's complexity can be a turn off for some, but in my opinion Memories of Ice (the third book) is one of the top 10 books in the genre hands down. I finished the series in about a month.... that being said I wasn't gainfully employed at the time and half that time was summer break.
-
A lot of people have trouble getting into the first book, but the series is definitely worth it.
-
I'm about a third of the way through book 2 and enjoying it. I don't have as much time to read anymore, so it is slow going which is frustrating because I don't always remember where I was in the plot thread. It's worth reading though. I remember finishing book one and being more excited about an ending than I had been in a long, long time. I have books 3-5 sitting on my shelf waiting for the day I finally get around to reading them. After reading the first book, I had faith that they would be worth the buy.
-
I think it's up to you if you want to take the gamble. The ominous warnings ppl have left in their reviews whether it be on amazon or goodreads should indicate what you have to look forward to.
-
oh yes. book 3's ending was more gut-wrenching than the deaths in, say, a Martin novel.
Oh no! lol! I just started on the first book in this series, but Martin managed some deaths that almost made me want to stop reading. That was so not what I wanted to hear, haha! :)
-
I like how martin kills off main characters. I think it is probably alot harder to write a book this way, but it adds alot more tension.
He has posted on his blog a few times in the last 2 weeks. It appears that he is making progress... He is up to 1200 manuscript pages and still going.
-
I really really don't see why everyone makes such a HUGE deal about Martin killing off one of his main characters in book 1. Yes he killed of Stark, although quite frankly I didn't care whether he lived or died to be honest, but aside from him has Martin killed off anyone else of real significance to anyone? Every POV character is basically still alive and kicking unless I've completely missed something. Everyone needs to get a grip for godsakes. Martin killed off one of his characters in his first book. He didn't invent the wheel.
-
Martin has killed off other important starks and several others important POV characters.
-
I really really don't see why everyone makes such a HUGE deal about Martin killing off one of his main characters in book 1. Yes he killed of Stark, although quite frankly I didn't care whether he lived or died to be honest, but aside from him has Martin killed off anyone else of real significance to anyone? Every POV character is basically still alive and kicking unless I've completely missed something. Everyone needs to get a grip for godsakes. Martin killed off one of his characters in his first book. He didn't invent the wheel.
Martin has killed off other PoVs, as well as other important side characters. But really, I think you are missing the point. Martin will either kill off a character or do some other horrible thing to them to give the readers a real sense of danger. At any time, Martin could kill off any character. This is a very different feel than what readers generally receive in the fantasy genre. Take Jordan, for example. I have yet to worry about any of his characters, because I know that they will live through any situation. With Martin? I dread those tough situations, because I know that interesting characters are going to die.
Erikson does this as well. Especially by the end of the 3rd novel, you have a sense that no character is safe. It isn't the body-count that matters, but what the deaths do to impact the rest of the story.
-
Take Jordan, for example. I have yet to worry about any of his characters, because I know that they will live through any situation.
That is mostly true, but heading into the last book, I get the sense that Rand's head is on the chopping block. I wouldn't put it past Sanderson/Jordan to let a few other heads roll as well, although Matt and Perrin are probably safe, as are most of the other POVs who've been in the story from the beginning.
-
Take Jordan, for example. I have yet to worry about any of his characters, because I know that they will live through any situation.
That is mostly true, but heading into the last book, I get the sense that Rand's head is on the chopping block. I wouldn't put it past Sanderson/Jordan to let a few other heads roll as well, although Matt and Perrin are probably safe, as are most of the other POVs who've been in the story from the beginning.
You think, that maybe, perhaps, if Jordan/Sanderson decide to go against 12 novels of expectations, that some characters might die. Though, it probably won't be permanent.
This is exactly what I mean. There is no sense of danger while I read those stories. The novels I have enjoyed the most really relay a sense of danger. I worry if a character is going to live through the events of a novel. This what many authors are doing now--giving us that danger.
-
Yeah, the perpetual resurrections area little annoying.
-
Jordan definitely should have whacked more characters. Moiraine is coming back in book 11 (I find this annoying). She should be dead. We should not have to wait for the last book before people die. Plot lines should end before t he last book. I feel like with Jordan's books that I can read the first few, skip 5-7 books in the middle and read the last few and then get the story. That is a flaw.
I have to say one thing. Anyone else notice that alot of authors can start a series really well and then not end it well? See Stephen King and the Dark Tower and Robert Jordan. This tells me is that it is easier to have a good idea and a sense of mystery than it is to actually continue the story and have an end.
I think the key to writing a good long series is to outline extensively. So you know where you are going before the first book is published (yes I know Jordan knows the ending, but he didn't know the middle). So you have outlines of the overall story arch in detail.
you also need to
1. whack main characters. create new ones. whack them again
2. end plot lines mid-series. if you want until the last book, then people can skip the middle books
3. I don't like excessive plot twists. it is bad writing. I don't like to get the feeling that the author just wham changed direction. I like to see it set up with for shadowing (Jordan forshadows incredibly well). This is my beef with the TV show 24. Anyone can just wham go in a new direction.
4. avoid Dues Ex Machina. ie... we have these big problems, than wham some magic way to solve it out of no where. See the last dark tower book with the kid who drew the picture and erased it. I prefer to see this stuff set up in advance.
5. ending really complex problems in 25 pages. I HATE that. you have a lot of really complex issues, then wham you solve it in 25 pages.
People won't like this, but I felt like Brandon did this at the end of Well of Ascension (yes I still liked the book, but not the ending).
6. whack some more main characters
-
Killing a main character (or any character) just to kill them, as you seem to be suggesting, doesn't work for me. The death has to have a significant impact on the plot, preferably to make things harder for the survivors. At the same time, you kill off too many, and you run the risk of what Martin's done (at least for me). His first few deaths shocked me, but after a while my reaction was more along the lines of "Okay, I can cross him off the list."
Kill off too many, and you have to get the readers to become attached to completely new characters. The deaths don't mean anything if you don't care about who's dying, and at the same time, if you start killing everyone, why should I care about a character I know is going to die? Near-death and just-escaping-certain-death is far more exciting for me, plus is an excellent opportunity for character development. There's no character development if the character is dead.
And sometimes I like my heroes to live.
-
"And sometimes I like my heroes to live."
well in 95% of fantasy novels you will get this. so a small sub-set of novels that whack people like crazy would be cool. Since it is different.
I would like to see a novel written from the perspective of the bad guy(and possibly have the bad guy actually win). Just to be different. I don't know if that would sell. The bottom line is fantasy readers want to read about a hero saving the day and I don't know if there is a market for doing stuff significantly differently.
-
The deaths don't mean anything if you don't care about who's dying, and at the same time, if you start killing everyone, why should I care about a character I know is going to die? Near-death and just-escaping-certain-death is far more exciting for me, plus is an excellent opportunity for character development. There's no character development if the character is dead.
LOL, unless you happen to be reading Terry Pratchett. Some of his characters only get more interesting after they die, e.g. Reg Shoe.
-
The deaths don't mean anything if you don't care about who's dying, and at the same time, if you start killing everyone, why should I care about a character I know is going to die? Near-death and just-escaping-certain-death is far more exciting for me, plus is an excellent opportunity for character development. There's no character development if the character is dead.
LOL, unless you happen to be reading Terry Pratchett. Some of his characters only get more interesting after they die, e.g. Reg Shoe.
XD Well, obviously there are some exceptions. Come to think of it, some of my favourite stories and shows involve characters that are already dead. Dead Like Me, for example, is still a big favourite. In those cases, the deaths are important because they start the character arc. That just doesn't happen often...
-
I really really don't see why everyone makes such a HUGE deal about Martin killing off one of his main characters in book 1. Yes he killed of Stark, although quite frankly I didn't care whether he lived or died to be honest, but aside from him has Martin killed off anyone else of real significance to anyone? Every POV character is basically still alive and kicking unless I've completely missed something. Everyone needs to get a grip for godsakes. Martin killed off one of his characters in his first book. He didn't invent the wheel.
Martin has killed off other PoVs, as well as other important side characters. But really, I think you are missing the point. Martin will either kill off a character or do some other horrible thing to them to give the readers a real sense of danger. At any time, Martin could kill off any character. This is a very different feel than what readers generally receive in the fantasy genre. Take Jordan, for example. I have yet to worry about any of his characters, because I know that they will live through any situation. With Martin? I dread those tough situations, because I know that interesting characters are going to die.
Erikson does this as well. Especially by the end of the 3rd novel, you have a sense that no character is safe. It isn't the body-count that matters, but what the deaths do to impact the rest of the story.
Get back to me when he kills off any combination of Jon, Arya, Sansa and Tyrion. He's got alot of characters but how many are significant enough to care whether they live or die? Stark was the only one and I didn't even care about him, but that's just me. Quite frankly his death is actually more of a plot device than anything else. Rob was the second most significant but he was mostly a peripheral type character without even a POV. His death did somewhat suprise me a little but I wasn't shocked that it happened. It was more the context it happened in that surprised me. Then there are characters like the Hound, Joffrey and Bart, but the deaths of these characters are literally expected. I have absolutely no fear in the least that Martin will suddenly kill off Arya or any of the other Starks or Tyrion until it's time. If he offs anyone else then who cares?
-
Because he HAS killed off important characters, he has set a precedent to kill off whomever he likes. It seems like what you are saying is that Martin's storytelling technique only is valid when it suit your own personal preference. You may not think certain characters are significant, but that is your personal interpretation. Why do people make a huge deal about Martin killing off his PoV in book one? Because at the time it WAS shocking. At the time it FELT fresh. There are so many characters in his novel, that different readers place different importance on them--whether minor or major, to a point, is debatable. That is the cool thing about Martin's work, it strikes different chords.
You weren't shocked when Robb was killed. Neither was I. Because the precedent had been set. With this in motion, I now look to see who WON'T die--who can manage to survive through the awfulness of the world they live in. Martin can do far worse things than kill people off. And he has. It's all about your connection to the characters. Obviously you didn't have the same reaction to the characters that a majority did. Doesn't make you right or wrong. But seriously, don't berate people by telling them they need to "get a grip." They could say the same thing to you.
-
@Moggle: Your preference for books is the hero character you care about. That is not what Martin is doing. He is telling a story a different way. It is different, fresh, and unique.
I remember being surprised when Robb died. I figured that when Ned died that Robb was going to be the new hero character. For now I expect Dany and John Snow to be a couple. I wouldn't surprise me if John Snow dies(but I don't think he will atleast not until the very end), but I would be really surprised in Dany dies.
GRRMs style is the kind of style where its nice to read that type of book every few years. I am not sure many other authors can do it well. Has anyone else copied his style? I think it is very hard to do well and requires more time to write a book like this than other ways to write a book (not only because of how long it takes GRRM to produce a book).
i like books that are different. I would like to see Fantasy novels that scrap the whole hero/epic arch and just do stuff about every day life. Like a mainstream author in a fantasy world. Just for something different. I think I posted this elsewhere, how about one from the perspective of the main bad guy where the bad guy wins. That is a tough sell. I think Moggle would hate it so would many other fantasy readers.
-
Because he HAS killed off important characters, he has set a precedent to kill off whomever he likes. It seems like what you are saying is that Martin's storytelling technique only is valid when it suit your own personal preference. You may not think certain characters are significant, but that is your personal interpretation. Why do people make a huge deal about Martin killing off his PoV in book one? Because at the time it WAS shocking. At the time it FELT fresh. There are so many characters in his novel, that different readers place different importance on them--whether minor or major, to a point, is debatable. That is the cool thing about Martin's work, it strikes different chords.
If you say it's fresh then it must be. I have no idea what's been going on in fantasy the last 20 years and beyond. All I know is that the character of Ned was a fairly humorless, dry, one dimensional character. These are the type of characters authors are never afraid to get rid of. I'm sure you would admit that Martin was not writing the standard hero adventure story so why attach the typical storytelling style of those books to his? In those books main characters can't die because they're needed to complete some quest, but GRRM wasn't writing that type of story, correct?
You weren't shocked when Robb was killed. Neither was I. Because the precedent had been set. With this in motion, I now look to see who WON'T die--who can manage to survive through the awfulness of the world they live in. Martin can do far worse things than kill people off. And he has. It's all about your connection to the characters.
But I wasn't even shocked when they killed Ned so how I can be for his son who never even had a voice in the books? That alone was clue enough that he could killed without remorse by Martin. Those who do have a voice and are written sympathetically will most likely live. Although alot of them are so one dimensional it's hard to imagine them being not being expendable except for the fact that Martin still needs at least a few of them to finish out his series.
Obviously you didn't have the same reaction to the characters that a majority did. Doesn't make you right or wrong. But seriously, don't berate people by telling them they need to "get a grip." They could say the same thing to you.
I didn't make a connection because the characters were not written in a way to allow me to make a connection. What can anyone really say about Ned and Robb to say they really felt a great sense of satisfaction and joy every time they read them? Has it occurred to anyone that Martin in all likelyhood decided not to build these characters up because he knew he would kill them off?
In any case I think what I said needed to be said, because I'm grown sick of ppl constantly praising Martin even in non GRRM related threads whether it be here or on other boards or even on review sites that are reviewing other books! It's ridiculous.
@Moggle: Your preference for books is the hero character you care about. That is not what Martin is doing. He is telling a story a different way. It is different, fresh, and unique.
I remember being surprised when Robb died. I figured that when Ned died that Robb was going to be the new hero character. For now I expect Dany and John Snow to be a couple. I wouldn't surprise me if John Snow dies(but I don't think he will atleast not until the very end), but I would be really surprised in Dany dies.
Well that's kind of my point. If he creates a bunch of dull and lifeless characters that you can't even decide if you like or not, why should anyone make a big deal over their deaths?
-
Your refusal to make a connection with a character is a fault within you not in the writing, and it is a fault that everyone has with certain characters. Samuel Clemens once said "I never knew a man I didn't like" and he is 100% correct. If you know someone, really know them which requires you to go out of your way to understand them (an acquaintanceship isn't knowing someone), you will like them. I have met people who are like Ned... he is meant to be a distant, dutiful figure much like how a father SHOULD treat his children (what's up with people befriending their kids now a days... they need parents they have enough friends) that is the role he is intended to play, he merely extends his paternal nature to all those of a lower station.
-
XD Well, obviously there are some exceptions. Come to think of it, some of my favourite stories and shows involve characters that are already dead. Dead Like Me, for example, is still a big favourite. In those cases, the deaths are important because they start the character arc. That just doesn't happen often...
I loved Dead Like Me. Not so much the Direct-to-video movie they made, but the show was awesome. Could have been a little grittier maybe, but I was very sad when it ended.
-
I loved Dead Like Me. Not so much the Direct-to-video movie they made, but the show was awesome. Could have been a little grittier maybe, but I was very sad when it ended.
My thoughts exactly on the series and the "movie". Though the "level of grittiness" I thought was pretty much spot-on. I was really sad when it ended...though it always bothered me how rail-thin George was.
-
I loved Dead Like Me. Not so much the Direct-to-video movie they made, but the show was awesome. Could have been a little grittier maybe, but I was very sad when it ended.
My thoughts exactly on the series and the "movie". Though the "level of grittiness" I thought was pretty much spot-on. I was really sad when it ended...though it always bothered me how rail-thin George was.
I've only seen a bit of the movie in passing. It's never been on when I had a chance to watch it, and based on what I've heard, I'm not certain I want to. I thought the show itself was perfect, and I'd rather not ruin it with a less-than-stellar movie.
-
I just started the first one. It is pretty dense for a sci-fi/fantasy novel. Haldeman has a compact writing style, this is far more than that. It is interesting.
Do the 2 Malazan writers overlap their stories at all? In location or characters? I get the impression that Erickson is the better writer since he is the one everyone talks about.
-
I just started the first one. It is pretty dense for a sci-fi/fantasy novel. Haldeman has a compact writing style, this is far more than that. It is interesting.
Do the 2 Malazan writers overlap their stories at all? In location or characters? I get the impression that Erickson is the better writer since he is the one everyone talks about.
They created the world together, and their stories all tie in together. Erikson is a very good writer, so so is Esslemont. Many people feel Esslemont's 2nd book, RETURN OF THE CRIMSON GUARD, is on par with the best Erikson stuff. Lately, people have been using Esslemont's first novel, NIGHT OF KNIVES as a starting point to the series rather than GARDENS OF THE MOON. So, I wouldn't say that Erikson is the better writer, he is just the more visible one of the pair. When I met them both as World Fantasy, they treated their individual works as one complete work. Awesome fellows.
-
I need to get a copy of Night of Knives......
-
Night of knives is a great read I cant find ICE'S Crimson Gaurds at a good price ....
-
Whoah, I heard about this series four times today only, in four different places on the Internet. Either it's a big coincidence or an omen, but either way, I think I am getting the first book as soon as I see it in any bookshop or library.
-
Night of knives is a great read I cant find ICE'S Crimson Gaurds at a good price ....
Just wait a bit, it is being released int the US later this year. Otherwise you have to go the import route.
-
amazon will have it in a couple of weeks.
http://www.amazon.com/Return-Crimson-Guard-Malazan-Empire/dp/0765323702/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1269959517&sr=8-2
-
Thanks I bought the other novlleas by import 50 dollars a pop but now I'm on a college budget and married ..And I think kids would rather have fun then me spend 50 dollars on a book...
-
that is an awful lot to spend on a novella. they are out soon in the US.
-
You realize that Return of the Crimson Guard isn't a novella right? It is a full length novel. It is quite large. I'm not quite sure what "novella" you are talking about (since there aren't any) that cost you $50 to import, but whatever it was, you got ripped off. I import all of the Erikson/Esslemont novels, and I don't pay near $50. You should import from Book Depository.
-
I take it the books come out in england first. what is the gap in release time.
-
For Erikson, lately the gap is around 6-8 months. It used to be longer. For Esslemont? About a year and a half. Hence why I import. Esslemont has a new novel being released at the end of this year in the UK. I'll import it for about $14--yeah, cheaper than the US version when it is released.
-
I am about 100 pages from finishing Gardens of the Moon. It has not been a page turner for me. I started it like 2 months ago (been busy too). I don't know what to think of it. I am still fairly confused. I understand the characters, but the interactions with the gods are wierd. From what I read on here and on the Elitist review site and others, you don't really know what is going on for a few books. Book 3 is supposedly the break through book.
If not for the good reviews on this board and from Elitist reviews, I would probably not be finishing. It may be me. I just went through about 16 fantasy books and I generally get bored with the same thing after a while.
I don't really Grok the whole god interaction with people thing yet. I did read that he is basing his gods on babylonian myths. I get that.
-
the first 2 books of this series I found to be especially difficult to read. It took me until the middle of teh 3rd book before I really grasped what was going on and the characters. I like the story, I like the books and it was interesting the whole time, if you didnt try to understand it too much right away.
-
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
As far as I can tell this is the current deck of dragons and the persons occupying the positions (if you can help me fill the blanks):
High House Life
King- Brys Beddict
Queen- Queen of Dreams
Champion- Lostara Yil
Priest-
Herald- Ubala Pung
Soldier-
Weaver-
High House Death
King- formerly Hood now unoccupied
Queen-
Knight- Baudin
Magi-
Herald- Toc the Younger
Soldier- Second Seguleh
Spinner-
Mason- Hedge
Virgin- Sinn
High House Light
King-
Queen-
Champion- Osserc
Priest-
Captain-
Soldier- Kyle
Seamstress-
Builder-
Maiden-
High House Dark
King-
Queen- Sndalath Drukorlat
Knight- Anomander Rake
Magi- Quick Ben
Captain-
Soldier-
Weaver-
Mason-
Wife-
High House Shadow
King- Ammanas
Queen-
Assassin- Cotillion
Magi-
Hound-
Knight-
High House Chains
King- Skinner
Consort- Poliel
Reaver- Kallor
Knight- Toblakai
The Seven Unbound- The Unbound
Cripple-
Lepper-
Fool- Banaschar
High House War
King- Togg
Queen- Fanerday
Hunter- Treach
Herald- Toc the Younger
Army- Bonehunters
Guardians of the Dead- Bridgeburners
Unaligned
Oponn- Oponn
Obelisk- Bottle
Crown-
Scepter- Grubb
Orb- Gesler
Throne- Stormy
Chain-
Master of the Deck- Ganoes Paran
-
what do you mean by deck of dragons?
-
what do you mean by deck of dragons?
It is one of the main elements of the series. As Robert Jordan used to say, "Read and find out!"
-
Dude, Kaz, flag your list with a massive *SPOILERS* warning. I'm on book three, and just seeing how the deck has shifted spoiled some minor plot twists for me. Luckily I have a little self control and stopped reading after I saw that Hood no longer sat on Death's throne.
-
Ditto everything that Cynic said.
-
Sorry I thought the CURRENT deck of dragons bit would be understood as up till Dust of Dreams. Oh and Steve when does the Return of The Crimson Guard take place b/c it seems to me to take place before and after Dust of Dreams from giveaways from things like the elder gods conversations about Mael's High Priest and his post in Malaz in DoD.
-
You should all know this, but over at Tor.com they are doing an in-depth read-through of the series. So far it has been terrific.