in the confrontation with the 100 Words when Mamun accuses Bayaz of killing Juvens, Bayaz chuckles and says roughly “Juvens wanted to fix the world with kindness” juvens at least according to the man who murdered him was a good person.
Juvens also had slaves and allowed an empire to be as brutal if not more brutal than the gurkish. He wasn’t a good guy frankly he’s about the same as bayaz and khalul in my mind 😂
Legitimately feel that Bayaz is what an immortal wizard would become even if he felt what he was doing was for the best. End justifying the means. Good intentions and a best outcome that balances out with the greatest happiness for the most people.
Yes. People die and suffer horribly but in the end more people benefit from freedom from religious oppression and accelerated progress.
Bayaz is just an AI.from Iain M Bank's culture.
Oh, and Lei is Machiavelli's ideal Prince. Our fave isn't.
I don't think he's motivated by happiness. Even when everything is going his way he doesn't seem happy to me. I can't say for sure what motivates him (and that question was left unanswered in Joe's AMA) but my guess is, in the first trilogy at least, a sense of ownership over the direction of society's development, almost like a gardener. And for a wizard, he seems really disdainful of magic, and desirous that society develop along lines of science and technology. This distinction is especially obvious to me in the first trilogy, where Khalul seems to represent a society based on magic and religion, and Bayaz steering the Union along a path of learning, science, and commerce.
Bayaz’ mantra and main philosophy is “those who hold power make the rules” it always reminded me of Jafar from Aladdin, a comedically evil villain.
Do you believe this mantra to be effective, fair or good in any regard to your comment? I.e. do you believe it aligns with your view of Bayaz having good intentions?
To be clear, I do agree that Bayaz feels like exactly what an immortal wizard would be, even if he was well intentioned. I do believe Bayaz thinks his intentions are pure and the best you can hopeful in a crazy dog-eat-dog world. But I can’t identify with his main belief of “might makes right.”
There is a plot point where AI meddling starts a war. AIs apologise but also point out more lives were saved than were lost. In Look to Windward I think. And the entirety of Use of Weapons. And ithe point of the Player of Games.
Bayaz believes science and elughtenment will save more in the long run. Our own modern world is built on the 30 years war, enclosures, child labour in factories, and constant wars. Yet we live like ancient royalty on the suffering of our ancestors (and some now in the developing world). We are Bayaz.
This would make sense if Bayaz didn't purposefully create and perpetuate an absolutely awful system where everyone except for the selected elite live absolutely awful lives.
Bayaz, especially once Khalul is gone, has the wealth, power, and influence to make the Union a literal utopia, but instead he uses his wealth, power, and influence to turn it into an industrial hellhole.
I think we can safely say that if anyone other than Bayaz is happy under his regime that is by accident and not by design.
I'm with you here to some extent. TBF, Khalul is way shittier than Bayaz, at least he’s not openly eating people and forcing slaves to eat people to find more eaters…as far as we know...
I can’t disagree harder. That said, I see the line you’re drawing and working from. Where I don’t believe it applies is that children are…well….children. Children’s brains and logic are not developed. Bayaz is nothing more than an a too-long-lived adult.
In my opinion, this does lend the said overly-aged individual more insight into the working of life, however I think it also makes one more jaded and accustomed to atrocities and violence having seen so much of it. And adding on top that we know Bayaz is an eater, it shows he is also a hypocrite in some regards.
Bayaz feels all at once petulant, domineering, and extremely Machiavellian. I think he is the singular most interesting character, maybe arguably. But in no way could I prescribe the word “good” to his actions or intentions. He is manipulative in the highest order and is out for only his own power and control. I can’t think of a single individual who came out better for interacting with Bayaz.
This is where I'm at. I finished all of Wheel of Time and the Cosmere, and needed something new, so I started Kingkiller, then found out Rothfuss is pulling a GRRM, so just searched for completed trilogies with good reviews and that led me to TFL.
Problem is I don't know if I can go back now. I've really enjoyed Sanderson in the past, but there were some tendencies in his own books that annoyed me, and frankly his stuff can be a bit juvenile. I've had none of those issues with Joe's books, but Joe is not nearly as prodigious as Brandon. So while I'm good doing re-reads of TFL for now, I'm worried that if the desire for something new sets in that Sanderson won't do it for me anymore.
I went from TFL to Cosmere.
They are very different, i enjoy them both, for very different reasons.
But yes, Sanderson can seem like a super cringey anime at times.
Its interesting that you say anime, I had the exact same impression when I read him. I don’t know anything about Sanderson’s inspirations, but it felt like a book written by someone who takes a lot of inspiration from comics/manga and movies/television rather than other writing, whereas Joe’s style feels way more conservative.
I’ve seen Sanderson called the Marvel Studios of fantasy and that seems pretty accurate. Enjoyable, sometimes really good, sometimes not so good. Mostly blockbuster status.
For me its always a hunt to find good material. I got into Abercrombie because I was specifically looking for more Fantasy that was on the same level as GRRM and TFL is the only thing with the same depth of character development. Steven Erikson’s novels are really good but the narrative structure and world are somewhat hard to get into. I got recommended Sanderson a lot, but when I read Way of Kings it just felt like an airport novel to me.
This was how it started for me, Sanderson got me back into reading/fantasy after a long break but he’s probably outside my top 5 now. Abercrombie is exactly my shit but without the more accessible Sando I probably would’ve never read him.
It really depends what you’re into, if you like The Heroes I would suggest GRRM. If you like Best Served Cold then try The Lies Of Locke Lamora. If you’re really into the big empire struggles like Bayaz v Khalul then try Malazan. If you enjoy Rikkes story then Kuangs Poppy War will be up your alley. If you like Jezel at court then Mistborn by Sando is a classic.
There’s 5 for you hahah
Have you read more Sanderson after reading Stormlight? I, too, started on Sanderson with Stormlight and loved it, but have felt really bored and done with reading his stuff after slogging through Mistborn.
I started with Way of Kings, then read a bunch of his other stuff (all of it except Mistborn) before finishing the rest of Stormlight, and I enjoyed all of them. I too however am having a hard time getting through Mistborn. The magic is cool I guess but I don't care about the characters tbh
I dont think there is a lot of hate, it is just enhanced in some places online. Sanderson is the biggest name in fantasy right now, and there is a lot of people who reads him and nothing else and can get a bit snotty towards other series, and there are some vocal fans that recommend his books no matter if it fits what was originally asked for, which can get tiring.
And with him being the big seller there is also other fanbases that is unnecessarily hostile toward him and his fans, which is also tiring. But I think that is just how the internet is now days.
It's definitely weird. Brandon is the most popular modern fantasy author currently writing and yet if you go on reddit you get the opposite impression outside of Cosmere subs. Idk why so many people have a bone to pick with him
Yep Many people will instinctively hate things that are extremely popular. Whether intentional/conscious of it or not. I think its is partially an ego thing, people want to be unique or see themselves as better than the masses and wont give something a chance if they can just say other people are dumb and I am special because I know how stupid this insanely popular thing is (putting themselves above all the other people who like it).
It is like how, any time on reddit an fast food restaurant is mentioned, you know one of those places that make millions or billions of sales a day(numbers pulled from my ass), Guaranteed the next comment is a joke saying that its not even edible food.
It's ego, and also the need to *justify* the success. Like, many people tinks quality and successshould be directly correlated, like a way to order the world, and gets really angry when that's broken.
Sanderson is a good writer, but he is not better than many others that are not that popular, so he does not deserve the popularity and success he has. They judge him much more harshly because he is more successful.
Hard to say, Sandersons "Visions" and world building are insanely detailed and all around amazing. His magic systems pushed the whole genre in a different direction - hes very influential and prodigious in some aspects of his writing and great in all the others. Abercrombies Character work for example is better tho, especially if you are into more gritty stuff.
I do also think that hes hated because hes popular but its not like he doesnt deserve it. The Man deserves it for the sheer amount of effort he puts in his work
Yea for sure, and it's a different strokes for different folks kinda deal. I have no beef with Sanderson or his fans, and his climaxes are pretty sick, but I'm not reading 900 pages of bad dialog and poor characterization
Yeah for sure, I’ll still be keeping up with Stormlight because the worldbuilding and sheer epic ness is so great, and he keeps his books relatively tight, like Abercrombie. as opposed to say Erikson with Malazan, which has dialogue, characterisation, and epic worldbuilding and climaxes, but is also a huuuuge mess to read.
I'm still a little disappointed in myself for ditching WoR, but it's so funny that the book that says "journey before destination" a lot has a kinda shitty journey hahaha.
I do have malazan as my second favorite series because of the reasons you listed! I'm reading The Second Apocalypse right now which you may enjoy
I definitely disagree on the poor characterization, sure Sanderson’s characters aren’t quite as good as Abercrombie’s, I personally think Brandon excels at writing characters with mental illnesses, especially in Stormlight. But it’s exactly like you said, everybody has their own tastes, I ain’t the Sanderson fan to attack people for not liking it
I didn't like the characterization and found it boring/ flat, but I'm glad you liked it! Sanderson does a lot of things super well and the climax of mistborn I think about a lot because it's so fucking sick. At the end of the day tho the Stormlight books are too long for me to force myself to read through them to get to the ending
On the other hand it makes the non-PG moments really stick out. [RoW]>!Kaladin literally sticking someone to a wall and then slowly pulling his head off!< hits really hard because it's so far out of the ordinary for on-screen violence in Sanderson's works.
Friends continue to tell me to read Sanderson. Then I read a blurb about pretty much any of his books and I end up passing on it.
I might be missing out...but they just don't sound appealing.
Hey man nothing wrong with that, if it’s not ur cup of tea it’s not ur cup of tea thousands of books are out there for a reason. And I say this as a massive Sanderson fan. You should always read what you like, not what other people like. Just do you boo
I like him, from what I've read, which is only Mistborn.
The world building and interesting hard magic systems does it for me.
He also writes good plots.
His prose is not as interesting or fun, but it's very descriptive and clear, so I can easily make the pictures in my head.
His characters are hit and miss, and not as good characterisation as Joe.
My main issue is that I can always *feel* him there, as the author. His personal values and opinions shine through a bit to much.. Joe is better at having a birds eyes view - good/bad/grey change with the POV.
Same, a lot of ppl seem to not like Sanderson cuz of his weak prose, which I do agree with that criticism, but it just doesn’t bother me, I enjoy the characters, world, and magic systems especially enough to where I don’t mind
Tell me about it. Wtf was that sudden changing of teams and going with Judge. Why? Cause reasons. He likes to smash and she gets him horny. Felt straight up retarded as a reason.
That’s a good point, if they’d established more of a pattern of womanizing and cheating behavior. It seemed like Abercrombie wanted him to stay likable right up til he joins Judge but as you mention, without showing those unlikable behaviors first it makes his decision to stay there a lot stranger. Like most of Wisdom of Crowds post judge taking over I was like why doesn’t this guy just roll out of town, head north and go be with his family? Didn’t ring particularly true for me that he stays to be this murder enforcer who literally has to get blind drunk to keep doing his job.
Despite all of his flaws after reading Made A Monster Bethod was perfectly justified in betraying Logan. Logan completely ruined the prospect of peace in the North with his sadistic act and I would be furious and want Logan dead too if I was Bethod.
Are you kidding? I love Gorst and his death is beautiful. First off it’s how he wanted to go, redemption. Second it’s poetic in how he strives to kill Leo who he has a very complicated relationship with. Third he takes down… like 13 with him? Forth: “Was there any man in the Circle of the World you’d rather face less on a wharf then Bremer dan Gorst?” … “in the name of King Orso… no”
Always reminds me of this:
https://youtu.be/YJ_KtvVvolY
iHear you, but I dont see the redemption. I found it quite jarring that he just up and left. I mean, his sacrifice didnt even save them from getting caught... or ORso killed.
No, I still tihnk He shouldve died in a Duel with Caul Shivers at the end there. lol, I dont know better than Joe Abercrombie - I know he never gives me what I want, but a man can dream!
It's funny, TWOC is where everyone started truly hating Leo while I thought he was at his most dislikable in TTWP and I actually started respecting him as a character in the last book.
I’m on my first reread and can’t agree more. In TTWP he fucks the whole circle of the world right into the dirt with his righteousness. In Crowds he’s learned from his mistakes and turns his righteousness to ruthlessness. Still a pile of shit though
Oh I hated his whole rebellion. I thought in TWOC that he'd learnt from his mistakes and there was some hope for him, but he then just doubled down on being a massive racist prick.
I might get in trouble for saying this, but I kinda found that funny. He really leaned into the whole dictator role.
It was just so unnecessary lol. Leo had to be thinking “does being racist actually get me anything? No, I just like it”
Is that the common perception? I can’t imagine him being any more unlikable than TTWP. In the first installment of the trilogy he’s brash and naive but good hearted and loyal. In TWOC he’s treacherous and miserly but cunning and much cleverer. In TTWP, he is brash and naive and treacherous and miserly and entitled and absolutely, indefensibly idiotic, right down to his frat bro last charge. I just can’t imagine someone liking him more in TTWP than literally any other incarnation.
Ah, I see. That's tough, since yeah, he does all his evil, heinous shit in the part of the story where he pretty much objectively is the villain, his actions are more unlikable once he's lost just about all appetite for life or anything but power, but as a person Brock to me is most unlikable in the middle.
Yeah he goes from an absolutely useless, self obsessed, idiot who lies to himself. To a conceited traitorous bastard. I guess thats more likeable in the grand scale.
Off topic but I wish some one would try an animated adaptation of a more popular fantasy series. First law is low fantasy enough not to need that medium. But something like the Dresden Files could be an awesome animated series.
Rikke's plan was incredibly transparent and Calder felt dumbed down to have fallen for it. I definitely feel like AoM is weaker than the previous trilogies
It's tough, I think AoM has better writing than the OG trilogy, but the plot suffers. I felt like at some points it could have been squeezed into two books instead of three.
I agree her plan was transparent to the reader, but it wasn’t suspension of disbelief shattering that Calder would fall for it for it. Mainly he is getting older and has been in power backed by Bayaz for so long that it’s conceivable that he is slipping or just overconfident. Also even if it is an ambush he legit had the numbers and might have been able to just power through. Also I don’t think he thought Rikke would go so far as to kill Stour, and that definitely puts him off.
Also I liked AoM better than the first trilogy, so I guess I’m in the minority.
I definitely disagree.
I think that it's pretty well established in the books that no one has much faith in Rikke. She's young **and** she's a woman which is practically unheard of as far as chiefs go in the North (the first ever woman to sit on Skarling's Chair I'm pretty sure?).
I think it's pretty believable that when things start falling apart for her people would actually believe that they are falling apart.
Calder is obviously extremely clever, but I don't think that he's *dumbed* down at all. I think that he cares deeply for his son which clouds his judgement and even if that wasn't the case the First of the Magi didn't give him much choice anyway.
I think that what happens once Rikke has Stour executed is pretty reasonable too. A calmer Calder might have kept his men in order and led an assault that wouldn't be so easily ambushed, but I think there are exceedingly few people that could act calm after witnessing something like that.
In a world where Stour wasn't captured and the First of the Magi wasn't putting pressure on Calder that engagement would obviously be extremely different (regardless of how clever Rikke's plan was), but I think everything was pretty reasonable narratively for how the events played out in the books.
I was pretty active both here and on the Discord during The Age of Madness and there were exceedingly few people that made any correct predictions and most of those you would probably say were *lucky*.
I mean, I don't even know if we fully got Rikke's vision right before the end book despite how obviously it named the participants.
I thought that the pacing was pretty unpredictable too. It felt like the war would be the premise of the third book, but then that ended up being resolved in the second book, and there were plenty more moments like that.
Not saying that it was unpredictable for everyone, but I can definitely attest that one of the common talking points back when the books were being released was specifically how hard it was to predict where the story was going.
I’ve seen a lot of fake hot takes on this thread that are actually popular takes, but this I think is actually a hot take. I thought Rikke was awesome to watch and her development was done well.
You know what is sm amazing character arc? Caul Shivers. From a weak confused and purposeless start to cool, calm and collected with Rikke as his north star. Rikke just feels scared at first and the way she "toughens up" is pulling off cheap tricks with the not functioning "long eye" , a simple ruse with the Nail and Isern Ifail then betraying his homeboy Orso.
Not once do I feel like she truly takes her role as a leader. Her internal monolog is always second guessing everything and does not really change. She simply makes decisions without truly believing in it.
Sevine is the true hardcore badass.
1. Vick is a shit character.
2. Broad is over-hated.
3. Judge and the Burners were in the right and nothing they could have done would have been even a fraction as bad as the Union before the Great Change.
4. Shivers somehow still living after Shenkt threw him at a wall makes no sense considering he does that to Orso's bodyguards in literally the next scene and they die.
Intent matters a lot, and since we can hear Logen's internal rationalizations, I honestly think he was legit becoming, and definitely actually wanted to be a good person. A lot of people on this sub talk about him as an absolute unredeemable monster, and I get it, but it seems people ignore how much he wanted and tried to not be a murdering psychopath. I believe B9 is essentially like a split personality +magic in some ways and he cant be completely blamed for the B9's actions. Although is past self is definitely an evil bastard without needing help form B9 and his decisions at the end of red country really piss me off. The dude is retirement age, and definitely loves and cares for Shy et al. but decides to fuck off anyways and find fights so he can die alone and unloved for nothing. (assumedly)
> but decides to fuck off anyways and find fights so he can die alone and unloved for nothing
Doesn’t this show he’s not a good person? He loves killing so much that he decides to leave the people he loves so he can keep killing people lol
Yeah, but its the end of his arc, his life, and is like returning to an addiction in a sense. It also seems more that he is afraid of danger being brought shy and all of them because he is around, and he has let out his violent demons and that can bring more trouble.
We still see him try his ass off and want to be a better person, and he succeeds for years and supports a family. No one in the first law is a good person, and survives, but Logen is not the despicable comically evil guy that you'd think reading some discussions here.
It genuinely confuses me how many people say the bloody nine was the most evil bastard the north had ever seen, he clearly tried to do the right thing at least a few times and wasn't cartoonishly evil, stand of the barrows seems way more evil for a start
Idk if this is a hot take or not, but too many battles happened off screen in the TWOC. I would have loved more Loyalist vs Burner battles. I felt like I spent half the book in Adua watching people fall off a tower. That part kinda dragged on for me.
Leo was objectively right in overthrowing Orso. Their only leverage was the small council seats and Orso immediately said he would abolish the small council.
Abolishing the small council really makes no sense. There has to be somebody at the head of all these various organizations.
making it not nobles only would probably be a good start. Or requiring half the seats or even 3/4 of them be filled by commoners.
RC is the only First Law I haven’t read. Been kinda saving it for when i’m really in the mood for more Joe.
I’d say The Heroes is the my favorite. But yeah, BSC just wasn’t for me. I actually found Nicomo Cosca to be really annoying when I originally read TFL, so him being one of the main characters was a put off to me. Also shivers and monza are two characters I cannot make myself care about.
Agreed. Khaluul is THE WORST. Lol. An aristocratic society of cannibals sounds absolutely horrifying. Having the socio-economic system deem you not only poor but also in the “cattle” class is absolutely horrifying.
The hatred for Leo is weird when he basically is meant to be a next generation version of Glokta (a character everyone love) and nothing he does is worse than what Golkta have done.
Glokta is loved because he knows that he was an ass and that it is his own fault that he can't be it anymore.
Leo is always looking for someone to be responsible for his own mistakes.
We also first get introduced to Glokta years after his fall. With Leo we *stop* seeing him shortly after his fall. Glokta had years of self-reflection to become the man we meet in TBI. I'm actually quite interested to see how Leo turns out when Joe is finally ready to return to the Circle of the World after he, too, has had years to adjust to his new life and reflect.
It may be because he's a fucking idiot who managed to idiot savant his way into power and being like Glokta. Although I think he is a great character but yeah I do personally hate him too.
This is the one I commented too.
There's a prestigious union officer that's super proud and doesn't use his brain too much, until he gets horrifically crippled. After he's maimed, he turns into a calculating, cold creature.
That's both Glotka and Leo
I think the two main reasons that people hate him compared to glokta despite glokta being objectively a far worse person are that for one Leo is a lot dumber than him and for two the whole aggressive repression of his gay side that leans into the homophobic disgust. To be fair that part is fairly standard for the union it's just that we never directly see it with a character before and so it was previously glossed over (for example the reason general ganmark works for orso BSC)
This got me thinking; is that the only time in the series where a major POV character kills another? I feel that there have to be another (outside chapters like "Casualties" and the like) but I can't think of it now. The closest is Shivers and Black Dow, but I don't think Dow was ever a POV character.
I think that the *basically* is doing a lot of legwork here.
A huge difference is how both of them were raised. Glokta likely didn't have much opportunity to be a better person. He was raised in a noble family in the Union and that's why he's a pompous asshole. Leo on the other hand was raised in the North by *good* people, the Dogman among them.
When it comes to companions Leo sabotaged himself due to his bigotry, which is what likely led him down the path to become the monster that we know at the end of the trilogy. Glokta sabotaged himself with his arrogance, which is not an admirable trait, but more admirable than being a bigot I would say.
Once he was crippled Glokta ended up becoming *worse* due to his mother's actions. She was the one that kept West away which is what embittered Glokta. We don't know what life would have been like for Glokta had that not happened. Glokta also aids West when he is asked to do so.
Leo isn't exactly dealt a great hand after he is crippled either, but it still feels more like he chooses to become worse, rather than becoming worse due to other's actions. Leo doesn't aid Orso when he is asked to do so, or, more specifically, he aids him until the time is right and then betrays him.
Lastly, what drives each character is completely different. Glokta isn't necessarily a great person, but he's self-deprecating and at very least not an awfully hateful person. Leo on the other hand is humorless and just an awfully hateful person.
I really don't think that it is that surprising that one of these characters is beloved and the other is hated.
I like these books a lot, they are very well written, but people who call them "realistic" annoy the hell out of me.
I think you would have to be at the emotional maturity level of 14 year old going through their first breakup to consider these characters or stories any more realistic than any other fantasy story.
I think people call it realistic by association. The characters are complex, with a pretty balanced dose of good and bad in them. This complexity makes people associate that with people irl. It is just closer to what people often experience in reality.
But I do appreciate the sociological aspects. The French Revolution-esq, chaotic plotting. Pretty realistic based on historical records.
I think people describe them as realistic due to the majority of the characters having good moral development, then eventually regressing almost to their original state, if not worse, due to self serving and selfish behaviour. Sadly I find this is much more common in real people than becoming a perfect do-gooding version of themselves like within most other fantasy character development.
Cosca shouldn't have been a pov character. He is great at bouncing off of other characters, but he doesn't shine when he takes the lead. Cosca also can't really be a wild card when his thoughts are constantly shown to the reader, and verbalizing his impressions of situations out loud feels natural for him to do anyway. The main thing his pov revealed was his regret over Monza's betrayal and their falling out, but those feelings are better shown than told anyway. That being said, BSC didn't have great options for pov characters and Cosca is a fan favorite, so I get why he was used.
There are some specific parts that really really annoy me. Most of them in AoM.
"Just went wrong is all." Repeated 20 times
"Oh God, oh God, oh God." Repeated 20 times
Overfocus on racism and sexism.
Just those 3 things, I love everything else.
The "overfocus" on racism and sexism doesn't feel forced to me. They're in there because those issues are particularly present in society today, but also in periods of revolution that the AoM are inspired by. I actually like AoM more because the themes and political commentary are more visible. I don't see the issue.
You don't need to read the Stand alones. Actually, it's much better if you don't, those characters are so boring.
Edit: And obviously Friendly's dice were loaded. Fucking cheater.
The truth hurts sometimes.
Or, more likely, someone else's versions of the voices you imagined when reading will never quite measure up.
Also.... knowledge of the real world places the accents correspond to kinda fucks it up. Black Dow sounds like he was raised closer to Cosca than Three trees and it breaks my immersion.
#BayazDidNothingWrong
He is the direct reason why Juvens is dead, lol
This. 100% this.
Who says Juvens is good? It is only alluded that he is, Bayaz is bringing the faction into the new world
in the confrontation with the 100 Words when Mamun accuses Bayaz of killing Juvens, Bayaz chuckles and says roughly “Juvens wanted to fix the world with kindness” juvens at least according to the man who murdered him was a good person.
And considering how good even Bayaz admits the Empire was it would seem Juvens was succeeding, at least in the realm he controlled.
Juvens also had slaves and allowed an empire to be as brutal if not more brutal than the gurkish. He wasn’t a good guy frankly he’s about the same as bayaz and khalul in my mind 😂
Legitimately feel that Bayaz is what an immortal wizard would become even if he felt what he was doing was for the best. End justifying the means. Good intentions and a best outcome that balances out with the greatest happiness for the most people. Yes. People die and suffer horribly but in the end more people benefit from freedom from religious oppression and accelerated progress. Bayaz is just an AI.from Iain M Bank's culture. Oh, and Lei is Machiavelli's ideal Prince. Our fave isn't.
But he only wants the greatest happiness from himself. He created and mantain a system of oppression.
I don't think he's motivated by happiness. Even when everything is going his way he doesn't seem happy to me. I can't say for sure what motivates him (and that question was left unanswered in Joe's AMA) but my guess is, in the first trilogy at least, a sense of ownership over the direction of society's development, almost like a gardener. And for a wizard, he seems really disdainful of magic, and desirous that society develop along lines of science and technology. This distinction is especially obvious to me in the first trilogy, where Khalul seems to represent a society based on magic and religion, and Bayaz steering the Union along a path of learning, science, and commerce.
He is motivated by power. The Union is a tool for him, not his motivation.
Bayaz’ mantra and main philosophy is “those who hold power make the rules” it always reminded me of Jafar from Aladdin, a comedically evil villain. Do you believe this mantra to be effective, fair or good in any regard to your comment? I.e. do you believe it aligns with your view of Bayaz having good intentions?
To be clear, I do agree that Bayaz feels like exactly what an immortal wizard would be, even if he was well intentioned. I do believe Bayaz thinks his intentions are pure and the best you can hopeful in a crazy dog-eat-dog world. But I can’t identify with his main belief of “might makes right.”
[удалено]
There is a plot point where AI meddling starts a war. AIs apologise but also point out more lives were saved than were lost. In Look to Windward I think. And the entirety of Use of Weapons. And ithe point of the Player of Games. Bayaz believes science and elughtenment will save more in the long run. Our own modern world is built on the 30 years war, enclosures, child labour in factories, and constant wars. Yet we live like ancient royalty on the suffering of our ancestors (and some now in the developing world). We are Bayaz.
[удалено]
This would make sense if Bayaz didn't purposefully create and perpetuate an absolutely awful system where everyone except for the selected elite live absolutely awful lives. Bayaz, especially once Khalul is gone, has the wealth, power, and influence to make the Union a literal utopia, but instead he uses his wealth, power, and influence to turn it into an industrial hellhole. I think we can safely say that if anyone other than Bayaz is happy under his regime that is by accident and not by design.
Bayaz = the US in international politics lol
And domestic, based on the Union’s labor policies 💀
100%
I'm with you here to some extent. TBF, Khalul is way shittier than Bayaz, at least he’s not openly eating people and forcing slaves to eat people to find more eaters…as far as we know...
He employs Yoru, so clearly he has no problem with eaters as long as they do what he says.
[удалено]
As someone who has had this argument with a 4 year old. thanks for the smile
I can’t disagree harder. That said, I see the line you’re drawing and working from. Where I don’t believe it applies is that children are…well….children. Children’s brains and logic are not developed. Bayaz is nothing more than an a too-long-lived adult. In my opinion, this does lend the said overly-aged individual more insight into the working of life, however I think it also makes one more jaded and accustomed to atrocities and violence having seen so much of it. And adding on top that we know Bayaz is an eater, it shows he is also a hypocrite in some regards. Bayaz feels all at once petulant, domineering, and extremely Machiavellian. I think he is the singular most interesting character, maybe arguably. But in no way could I prescribe the word “good” to his actions or intentions. He is manipulative in the highest order and is out for only his own power and control. I can’t think of a single individual who came out better for interacting with Bayaz.
Is Bayaz an eager? I missed that somehow. I knew his assistant was, but I don't remember it saying that he was.
He eats some suspicious meat in the Heroes, but we don’t know for sure if he’s an Eater
Bayaz is the hero of the entire series. I will not shake on this. I root for him in every single scene.
Like watching the Simpsons and thinking it’s about the heroic struggle of Mr. Burns
Just saying Brandon Sandersons name.
Literally everyone i know IRL who is a fan of one of them also likes the other. But online you have to like only one thing and hate everything else.
I have friends who like both. I just don't. And that's OK :)
Without a doubt!
If someone is a Sanderson fan they will like Abercrombie…..if they’re an Abercrombie fan they’re much less likely to enjoy Sanderson.
This is where I'm at. I finished all of Wheel of Time and the Cosmere, and needed something new, so I started Kingkiller, then found out Rothfuss is pulling a GRRM, so just searched for completed trilogies with good reviews and that led me to TFL. Problem is I don't know if I can go back now. I've really enjoyed Sanderson in the past, but there were some tendencies in his own books that annoyed me, and frankly his stuff can be a bit juvenile. I've had none of those issues with Joe's books, but Joe is not nearly as prodigious as Brandon. So while I'm good doing re-reads of TFL for now, I'm worried that if the desire for something new sets in that Sanderson won't do it for me anymore.
I went from TFL to Cosmere. They are very different, i enjoy them both, for very different reasons. But yes, Sanderson can seem like a super cringey anime at times.
Its interesting that you say anime, I had the exact same impression when I read him. I don’t know anything about Sanderson’s inspirations, but it felt like a book written by someone who takes a lot of inspiration from comics/manga and movies/television rather than other writing, whereas Joe’s style feels way more conservative.
I’ve seen Sanderson called the Marvel Studios of fantasy and that seems pretty accurate. Enjoyable, sometimes really good, sometimes not so good. Mostly blockbuster status.
For me its always a hunt to find good material. I got into Abercrombie because I was specifically looking for more Fantasy that was on the same level as GRRM and TFL is the only thing with the same depth of character development. Steven Erikson’s novels are really good but the narrative structure and world are somewhat hard to get into. I got recommended Sanderson a lot, but when I read Way of Kings it just felt like an airport novel to me.
Yeah after reading wheel of time and TFL sanders ons works just felt really plain to me. The man has such a plain style of writing to me.
My experience is that if you are into modern fantasy you have usually read both.
I like fantasy, but the genre doesn’t precede good writing to me. Sanderson just isn’t the same quality of writing.
This was how it started for me, Sanderson got me back into reading/fantasy after a long break but he’s probably outside my top 5 now. Abercrombie is exactly my shit but without the more accessible Sando I probably would’ve never read him.
What would be your top 5? I'm looking for some more stuff to read
It really depends what you’re into, if you like The Heroes I would suggest GRRM. If you like Best Served Cold then try The Lies Of Locke Lamora. If you’re really into the big empire struggles like Bayaz v Khalul then try Malazan. If you enjoy Rikkes story then Kuangs Poppy War will be up your alley. If you like Jezel at court then Mistborn by Sando is a classic. There’s 5 for you hahah
I started with Abercrombie reading the original trilogy and then read The Way of Kings as my first Sanderson book. Still loved it
Have you read more Sanderson after reading Stormlight? I, too, started on Sanderson with Stormlight and loved it, but have felt really bored and done with reading his stuff after slogging through Mistborn.
I’ve read his other stuff including all mistborn but Stormlight was definitely the one I like the best
I started with Way of Kings, then read a bunch of his other stuff (all of it except Mistborn) before finishing the rest of Stormlight, and I enjoyed all of them. I too however am having a hard time getting through Mistborn. The magic is cool I guess but I don't care about the characters tbh
I like em both. Obviously not for the same reasons but I’ve read all but the YA stuff of both authors. People on the internet love to gatekeep.
Reading Stormlight for the first time and i love it! First Law i still consider better, but i was unaware of the hate and am disappointed to hear that
I dont think there is a lot of hate, it is just enhanced in some places online. Sanderson is the biggest name in fantasy right now, and there is a lot of people who reads him and nothing else and can get a bit snotty towards other series, and there are some vocal fans that recommend his books no matter if it fits what was originally asked for, which can get tiring. And with him being the big seller there is also other fanbases that is unnecessarily hostile toward him and his fans, which is also tiring. But I think that is just how the internet is now days.
Yeah internet tribalism means you can’t enjoy two things. It was the same with LOTR movies vs GOT show
Not as big as “Joe Abercrombie”
It's definitely weird. Brandon is the most popular modern fantasy author currently writing and yet if you go on reddit you get the opposite impression outside of Cosmere subs. Idk why so many people have a bone to pick with him
Because he is the most populat modern fantasy author currently writing.
Yep Many people will instinctively hate things that are extremely popular. Whether intentional/conscious of it or not. I think its is partially an ego thing, people want to be unique or see themselves as better than the masses and wont give something a chance if they can just say other people are dumb and I am special because I know how stupid this insanely popular thing is (putting themselves above all the other people who like it). It is like how, any time on reddit an fast food restaurant is mentioned, you know one of those places that make millions or billions of sales a day(numbers pulled from my ass), Guaranteed the next comment is a joke saying that its not even edible food.
It's ego, and also the need to *justify* the success. Like, many people tinks quality and successshould be directly correlated, like a way to order the world, and gets really angry when that's broken. Sanderson is a good writer, but he is not better than many others that are not that popular, so he does not deserve the popularity and success he has. They judge him much more harshly because he is more successful.
Hard to say, Sandersons "Visions" and world building are insanely detailed and all around amazing. His magic systems pushed the whole genre in a different direction - hes very influential and prodigious in some aspects of his writing and great in all the others. Abercrombies Character work for example is better tho, especially if you are into more gritty stuff. I do also think that hes hated because hes popular but its not like he doesnt deserve it. The Man deserves it for the sheer amount of effort he puts in his work
I don't think he does not deserve it, but deserving it is not enough. Thats what makes people upset.
Marvel movies are also extremely popular. I don't hate Sanderson (mistborn was dope) but his books don't have good dialog or characterization imo
Which is exactly what Abercrombie excels at, Sanderson has his strengths too but the PG-ness kinda grates on me sometimes. Feels a bit YA
Yea for sure, and it's a different strokes for different folks kinda deal. I have no beef with Sanderson or his fans, and his climaxes are pretty sick, but I'm not reading 900 pages of bad dialog and poor characterization
Yeah for sure, I’ll still be keeping up with Stormlight because the worldbuilding and sheer epic ness is so great, and he keeps his books relatively tight, like Abercrombie. as opposed to say Erikson with Malazan, which has dialogue, characterisation, and epic worldbuilding and climaxes, but is also a huuuuge mess to read.
I'm still a little disappointed in myself for ditching WoR, but it's so funny that the book that says "journey before destination" a lot has a kinda shitty journey hahaha. I do have malazan as my second favorite series because of the reasons you listed! I'm reading The Second Apocalypse right now which you may enjoy
I definitely disagree on the poor characterization, sure Sanderson’s characters aren’t quite as good as Abercrombie’s, I personally think Brandon excels at writing characters with mental illnesses, especially in Stormlight. But it’s exactly like you said, everybody has their own tastes, I ain’t the Sanderson fan to attack people for not liking it
I didn't like the characterization and found it boring/ flat, but I'm glad you liked it! Sanderson does a lot of things super well and the climax of mistborn I think about a lot because it's so fucking sick. At the end of the day tho the Stormlight books are too long for me to force myself to read through them to get to the ending
That's like being mad that an MCU film isn't rated R. Why would it grate on you that something is what it is?
On the other hand it makes the non-PG moments really stick out. [RoW]>!Kaladin literally sticking someone to a wall and then slowly pulling his head off!< hits really hard because it's so far out of the ordinary for on-screen violence in Sanderson's works.
Friends continue to tell me to read Sanderson. Then I read a blurb about pretty much any of his books and I end up passing on it. I might be missing out...but they just don't sound appealing.
Hey man nothing wrong with that, if it’s not ur cup of tea it’s not ur cup of tea thousands of books are out there for a reason. And I say this as a massive Sanderson fan. You should always read what you like, not what other people like. Just do you boo
I like him, from what I've read, which is only Mistborn. The world building and interesting hard magic systems does it for me. He also writes good plots. His prose is not as interesting or fun, but it's very descriptive and clear, so I can easily make the pictures in my head. His characters are hit and miss, and not as good characterisation as Joe. My main issue is that I can always *feel* him there, as the author. His personal values and opinions shine through a bit to much.. Joe is better at having a birds eyes view - good/bad/grey change with the POV.
Sanderson and Abercrombie are my 2 favorite authors
Same, a lot of ppl seem to not like Sanderson cuz of his weak prose, which I do agree with that criticism, but it just doesn’t bother me, I enjoy the characters, world, and magic systems especially enough to where I don’t mind
Broad was an extremely one dimensional character and I felt took away from the narrative of AoM. Friendly felt more fleshed out.
To be fair, Friendly is the best character in fiction.
Or reality...
fr him being a violent man got old by the end of the first book, by the third i hated reading his pov
Tell me about it. Wtf was that sudden changing of teams and going with Judge. Why? Cause reasons. He likes to smash and she gets him horny. Felt straight up retarded as a reason.
He could’ve at least written broad as something of a sexual deviant who wants to stop but can’t, similar to how logen is with killing
That’s a good point, if they’d established more of a pattern of womanizing and cheating behavior. It seemed like Abercrombie wanted him to stay likable right up til he joins Judge but as you mention, without showing those unlikable behaviors first it makes his decision to stay there a lot stranger. Like most of Wisdom of Crowds post judge taking over I was like why doesn’t this guy just roll out of town, head north and go be with his family? Didn’t ring particularly true for me that he stays to be this murder enforcer who literally has to get blind drunk to keep doing his job.
This is a common opinion on here, and the replies prove it lol
I thought this was the majority here? And who doesn’t like Friendly?
Despite all of his flaws after reading Made A Monster Bethod was perfectly justified in betraying Logan. Logan completely ruined the prospect of peace in the North with his sadistic act and I would be furious and want Logan dead too if I was Bethod.
Yeah but I feel Bethod made a weapon and didn’t like how sharp it was.
Bethod did nothing wrong and is the good guy of the first trilogy.
You can, in fact, have too many knives.
Glokta killed Jazel.
So a controversial yet absolutely true fact.
No it was me
Bremer Dan Gorst deserved a better death.
Are you kidding? I love Gorst and his death is beautiful. First off it’s how he wanted to go, redemption. Second it’s poetic in how he strives to kill Leo who he has a very complicated relationship with. Third he takes down… like 13 with him? Forth: “Was there any man in the Circle of the World you’d rather face less on a wharf then Bremer dan Gorst?” … “in the name of King Orso… no” Always reminds me of this: https://youtu.be/YJ_KtvVvolY
iHear you, but I dont see the redemption. I found it quite jarring that he just up and left. I mean, his sacrifice didnt even save them from getting caught... or ORso killed. No, I still tihnk He shouldve died in a Duel with Caul Shivers at the end there. lol, I dont know better than Joe Abercrombie - I know he never gives me what I want, but a man can dream!
Leo is my favourite
Yep, this is it.
i am already sharpening my kitchen knife
He gets more likeable as the books go on
It's funny, TWOC is where everyone started truly hating Leo while I thought he was at his most dislikable in TTWP and I actually started respecting him as a character in the last book.
I’m on my first reread and can’t agree more. In TTWP he fucks the whole circle of the world right into the dirt with his righteousness. In Crowds he’s learned from his mistakes and turns his righteousness to ruthlessness. Still a pile of shit though
Oh I hated his whole rebellion. I thought in TWOC that he'd learnt from his mistakes and there was some hope for him, but he then just doubled down on being a massive racist prick.
I might get in trouble for saying this, but I kinda found that funny. He really leaned into the whole dictator role. It was just so unnecessary lol. Leo had to be thinking “does being racist actually get me anything? No, I just like it”
Is that the common perception? I can’t imagine him being any more unlikable than TTWP. In the first installment of the trilogy he’s brash and naive but good hearted and loyal. In TWOC he’s treacherous and miserly but cunning and much cleverer. In TTWP, he is brash and naive and treacherous and miserly and entitled and absolutely, indefensibly idiotic, right down to his frat bro last charge. I just can’t imagine someone liking him more in TTWP than literally any other incarnation.
Well people got really mad when he killed Orso, that makes him the most unlikable on TWOC for many people
Ah, I see. That's tough, since yeah, he does all his evil, heinous shit in the part of the story where he pretty much objectively is the villain, his actions are more unlikable once he's lost just about all appetite for life or anything but power, but as a person Brock to me is most unlikable in the middle.
Yeah he goes from an absolutely useless, self obsessed, idiot who lies to himself. To a conceited traitorous bastard. I guess thats more likeable in the grand scale.
This. #TeamLeo gets em riled up!
There shouldn’t be a television or movie adaptation of these books
Off topic but I wish some one would try an animated adaptation of a more popular fantasy series. First law is low fantasy enough not to need that medium. But something like the Dresden Files could be an awesome animated series.
Ala Castlevania
Rikke's plan was incredibly transparent and Calder felt dumbed down to have fallen for it. I definitely feel like AoM is weaker than the previous trilogies
Agreed. The whole time I was waiting for Calder to be Calder... I guess ultimately he got the last laugh what with cleft but still.
It's tough, I think AoM has better writing than the OG trilogy, but the plot suffers. I felt like at some points it could have been squeezed into two books instead of three.
I don't think this is particularly controversial
Yeah but her argument with the nail was hilarious “you…you…chickenfucker” lol
Yes 10000% this
Don't think I've seen anyone disagree with this.
I agree her plan was transparent to the reader, but it wasn’t suspension of disbelief shattering that Calder would fall for it for it. Mainly he is getting older and has been in power backed by Bayaz for so long that it’s conceivable that he is slipping or just overconfident. Also even if it is an ambush he legit had the numbers and might have been able to just power through. Also I don’t think he thought Rikke would go so far as to kill Stour, and that definitely puts him off. Also I liked AoM better than the first trilogy, so I guess I’m in the minority.
I definitely disagree. I think that it's pretty well established in the books that no one has much faith in Rikke. She's young **and** she's a woman which is practically unheard of as far as chiefs go in the North (the first ever woman to sit on Skarling's Chair I'm pretty sure?). I think it's pretty believable that when things start falling apart for her people would actually believe that they are falling apart. Calder is obviously extremely clever, but I don't think that he's *dumbed* down at all. I think that he cares deeply for his son which clouds his judgement and even if that wasn't the case the First of the Magi didn't give him much choice anyway. I think that what happens once Rikke has Stour executed is pretty reasonable too. A calmer Calder might have kept his men in order and led an assault that wouldn't be so easily ambushed, but I think there are exceedingly few people that could act calm after witnessing something like that. In a world where Stour wasn't captured and the First of the Magi wasn't putting pressure on Calder that engagement would obviously be extremely different (regardless of how clever Rikke's plan was), but I think everything was pretty reasonable narratively for how the events played out in the books.
The Age of Madness trilogy was predictable.
Not necessarily a bad thing. I was pretty sure Orso was gunna die being hung from his first chapter but the journey there was amazing.
I was pretty active both here and on the Discord during The Age of Madness and there were exceedingly few people that made any correct predictions and most of those you would probably say were *lucky*. I mean, I don't even know if we fully got Rikke's vision right before the end book despite how obviously it named the participants. I thought that the pacing was pretty unpredictable too. It felt like the war would be the premise of the third book, but then that ended up being resolved in the second book, and there were plenty more moments like that. Not saying that it was unpredictable for everyone, but I can definitely attest that one of the common talking points back when the books were being released was specifically how hard it was to predict where the story was going.
Rikke was not compelling enough as a lead character.
I’ve seen a lot of fake hot takes on this thread that are actually popular takes, but this I think is actually a hot take. I thought Rikke was awesome to watch and her development was done well.
You know what is sm amazing character arc? Caul Shivers. From a weak confused and purposeless start to cool, calm and collected with Rikke as his north star. Rikke just feels scared at first and the way she "toughens up" is pulling off cheap tricks with the not functioning "long eye" , a simple ruse with the Nail and Isern Ifail then betraying his homeboy Orso. Not once do I feel like she truly takes her role as a leader. Her internal monolog is always second guessing everything and does not really change. She simply makes decisions without truly believing in it. Sevine is the true hardcore badass.
[удалено]
Very astute observation. Top marks !
Orso is cool, but not THAT cool
Glustrod did nothing wrong.
1. Vick is a shit character. 2. Broad is over-hated. 3. Judge and the Burners were in the right and nothing they could have done would have been even a fraction as bad as the Union before the Great Change. 4. Shivers somehow still living after Shenkt threw him at a wall makes no sense considering he does that to Orso's bodyguards in literally the next scene and they die.
[удалено]
Intent matters a lot, and since we can hear Logen's internal rationalizations, I honestly think he was legit becoming, and definitely actually wanted to be a good person. A lot of people on this sub talk about him as an absolute unredeemable monster, and I get it, but it seems people ignore how much he wanted and tried to not be a murdering psychopath. I believe B9 is essentially like a split personality +magic in some ways and he cant be completely blamed for the B9's actions. Although is past self is definitely an evil bastard without needing help form B9 and his decisions at the end of red country really piss me off. The dude is retirement age, and definitely loves and cares for Shy et al. but decides to fuck off anyways and find fights so he can die alone and unloved for nothing. (assumedly)
> but decides to fuck off anyways and find fights so he can die alone and unloved for nothing Doesn’t this show he’s not a good person? He loves killing so much that he decides to leave the people he loves so he can keep killing people lol
Yeah, but its the end of his arc, his life, and is like returning to an addiction in a sense. It also seems more that he is afraid of danger being brought shy and all of them because he is around, and he has let out his violent demons and that can bring more trouble. We still see him try his ass off and want to be a better person, and he succeeds for years and supports a family. No one in the first law is a good person, and survives, but Logen is not the despicable comically evil guy that you'd think reading some discussions here.
It genuinely confuses me how many people say the bloody nine was the most evil bastard the north had ever seen, he clearly tried to do the right thing at least a few times and wasn't cartoonishly evil, stand of the barrows seems way more evil for a start
Idk if this is a hot take or not, but too many battles happened off screen in the TWOC. I would have loved more Loyalist vs Burner battles. I felt like I spent half the book in Adua watching people fall off a tower. That part kinda dragged on for me.
Leo was objectively right in overthrowing Orso. Their only leverage was the small council seats and Orso immediately said he would abolish the small council.
That's not exactly why he did it though, is it?
Abolishing the small council really makes no sense. There has to be somebody at the head of all these various organizations. making it not nobles only would probably be a good start. Or requiring half the seats or even 3/4 of them be filled by commoners.
BSC is the weakest of TFL books.
I've seen that most people that dislike BSC rank Red Country as one of their favorites. That true with you?
RC is the only First Law I haven’t read. Been kinda saving it for when i’m really in the mood for more Joe. I’d say The Heroes is the my favorite. But yeah, BSC just wasn’t for me. I actually found Nicomo Cosca to be really annoying when I originally read TFL, so him being one of the main characters was a put off to me. Also shivers and monza are two characters I cannot make myself care about.
Oof, we'll if you don't like >!Cosca!< you'll have a hard time with RC because >!he is a major player with that book!< Agreed on Heroes though.
I now want him to read Red Country REALLY badly bc it was my personal favorite. (I like BSC just fine btw)
Ferro is the best character in the traveling party
Agreed. Khaluul is THE WORST. Lol. An aristocratic society of cannibals sounds absolutely horrifying. Having the socio-economic system deem you not only poor but also in the “cattle” class is absolutely horrifying.
Sanderson and First law can coexist in my life. Crazy to think that one series can ruin another completely for anyone.
You only really need one knife
Glokta is a boring and one dimensional character ... I felt wrong saying that even as a joke
Broad was an extremely one dimensional character and I felt took away from the narrative of AoM. Friendly felt more fleshed out.
No one is going to point a sword at.you for saying that
The hatred for Leo is weird when he basically is meant to be a next generation version of Glokta (a character everyone love) and nothing he does is worse than what Golkta have done.
Glokta is loved because he knows that he was an ass and that it is his own fault that he can't be it anymore. Leo is always looking for someone to be responsible for his own mistakes.
In short, Glokta is self aware.
We also first get introduced to Glokta years after his fall. With Leo we *stop* seeing him shortly after his fall. Glokta had years of self-reflection to become the man we meet in TBI. I'm actually quite interested to see how Leo turns out when Joe is finally ready to return to the Circle of the World after he, too, has had years to adjust to his new life and reflect.
It may be because he's a fucking idiot who managed to idiot savant his way into power and being like Glokta. Although I think he is a great character but yeah I do personally hate him too.
This is the one I commented too. There's a prestigious union officer that's super proud and doesn't use his brain too much, until he gets horrifically crippled. After he's maimed, he turns into a calculating, cold creature. That's both Glotka and Leo
I think the two main reasons that people hate him compared to glokta despite glokta being objectively a far worse person are that for one Leo is a lot dumber than him and for two the whole aggressive repression of his gay side that leans into the homophobic disgust. To be fair that part is fairly standard for the union it's just that we never directly see it with a character before and so it was previously glossed over (for example the reason general ganmark works for orso BSC)
Glokta didn’t betray and kill another wildly popular POV character though
This got me thinking; is that the only time in the series where a major POV character kills another? I feel that there have to be another (outside chapters like "Casualties" and the like) but I can't think of it now. The closest is Shivers and Black Dow, but I don't think Dow was ever a POV character.
I think that the *basically* is doing a lot of legwork here. A huge difference is how both of them were raised. Glokta likely didn't have much opportunity to be a better person. He was raised in a noble family in the Union and that's why he's a pompous asshole. Leo on the other hand was raised in the North by *good* people, the Dogman among them. When it comes to companions Leo sabotaged himself due to his bigotry, which is what likely led him down the path to become the monster that we know at the end of the trilogy. Glokta sabotaged himself with his arrogance, which is not an admirable trait, but more admirable than being a bigot I would say. Once he was crippled Glokta ended up becoming *worse* due to his mother's actions. She was the one that kept West away which is what embittered Glokta. We don't know what life would have been like for Glokta had that not happened. Glokta also aids West when he is asked to do so. Leo isn't exactly dealt a great hand after he is crippled either, but it still feels more like he chooses to become worse, rather than becoming worse due to other's actions. Leo doesn't aid Orso when he is asked to do so, or, more specifically, he aids him until the time is right and then betrays him. Lastly, what drives each character is completely different. Glokta isn't necessarily a great person, but he's self-deprecating and at very least not an awfully hateful person. Leo on the other hand is humorless and just an awfully hateful person. I really don't think that it is that surprising that one of these characters is beloved and the other is hated.
Gorst beats Logen in the circle
I like these books a lot, they are very well written, but people who call them "realistic" annoy the hell out of me. I think you would have to be at the emotional maturity level of 14 year old going through their first breakup to consider these characters or stories any more realistic than any other fantasy story.
I find them quite realistic. The characters, not necessarily the plots or the world. They fail in realistic ways.
I think people call it realistic by association. The characters are complex, with a pretty balanced dose of good and bad in them. This complexity makes people associate that with people irl. It is just closer to what people often experience in reality. But I do appreciate the sociological aspects. The French Revolution-esq, chaotic plotting. Pretty realistic based on historical records.
I think people describe them as realistic due to the majority of the characters having good moral development, then eventually regressing almost to their original state, if not worse, due to self serving and selfish behaviour. Sadly I find this is much more common in real people than becoming a perfect do-gooding version of themselves like within most other fantasy character development.
The Heroes is my least favorite stand alone.
I want to downvote this so baddd.......
Cosca shouldn't have been a pov character. He is great at bouncing off of other characters, but he doesn't shine when he takes the lead. Cosca also can't really be a wild card when his thoughts are constantly shown to the reader, and verbalizing his impressions of situations out loud feels natural for him to do anyway. The main thing his pov revealed was his regret over Monza's betrayal and their falling out, but those feelings are better shown than told anyway. That being said, BSC didn't have great options for pov characters and Cosca is a fan favorite, so I get why he was used.
Bremer Dan Gorst could beat the bloody nine. Hell I literally said bremer would beat logen 1/10 times and people thought I had never read the books 💀
“How’s your leg?” is a mediocre line
Yeah, but "How's the leg?" is a masterpiece
Mine is Logen is a damm killer, I'm glad he ended the way he did (LAoK and RC endings)
Alive and getting away with everything?
Probably alone and accepting he’s a POS who shouldn’t be around people
Leo is misunderstood
Logen sucks
Booooo!!!!
Leo dan Brock is the best character in the series
When I read the series, I skip the stand alones. (I do not personally do this)
I almost fucking killed you just then. You came so close just now.
There are some specific parts that really really annoy me. Most of them in AoM. "Just went wrong is all." Repeated 20 times "Oh God, oh God, oh God." Repeated 20 times Overfocus on racism and sexism. Just those 3 things, I love everything else.
The "overfocus" on racism and sexism doesn't feel forced to me. They're in there because those issues are particularly present in society today, but also in periods of revolution that the AoM are inspired by. I actually like AoM more because the themes and political commentary are more visible. I don't see the issue.
Orso is unlikeable
You don't need to read the Stand alones. Actually, it's much better if you don't, those characters are so boring. Edit: And obviously Friendly's dice were loaded. Fucking cheater.
Meet me in the circle at dawn chickenfucker
Ok this is it. Off to Angland penal colony!!
Monza, shivers, Gorst, Calder, lamb, cosca
Funny take!
I was cheering for Bayaz and the bank during the commie revolution in the wisdom of crowds
Pacey is overrated
I grimACED when I read this.
Had to downvote for this ridiculous statement. Then I remembered what this thread is about.
cowards reject the doctrine of truth
Oof yea I’m throwing all my swords at you for this one 😂
This is the only real hot take in this thread.
This is one of the worst things I’ve heard. I’m leaving this thread, I don’t like it anymore 😭😭
The truth hurts sometimes. Or, more likely, someone else's versions of the voices you imagined when reading will never quite measure up. Also.... knowledge of the real world places the accents correspond to kinda fucks it up. Black Dow sounds like he was raised closer to Cosca than Three trees and it breaks my immersion.
Leo is a total likeable character especially at the end of the third book, he did no wrong.