I heard the Malazan books are good

[Blaine]

Different strokes, I suppose. To me Abercrombie is little more than a pessimistic, R-rated R.A. Salvatore. I can still enjoy his writing when I'm in the mood for that sort of thing, but throughout the entire First Law I could never escape the feeling that all the characters and the setting were pretty much caricatures that never felt as developed or "real" as what I experience with better writers.

Yeah, Abercrombie's not exactly Hemmingway - but I found his goofy-named characters to be far better realized than any of Erikson's. The other difference being that Abercrombie's books generally get better with each volume. A much smaller scale story, but one with more believable and identifiable players.

You do realize that referring to Abercrombie as a R-rated R.A. Salvatore begs the Erikson as a somewhat more ambitious Gary Gygax or Ed Greenwood comparison. :P

[The Evil Hat]

I finished Gardens of the Moon yesterday, but didn't get a chance to post then. Overall, i liked it quite a bit. The extremely intricate plot lines were a definite plus, and i never got nearly as confused as i expected. My only problem is one that lasted throughout:

SPOILER: The Mages

The mages. I just never understood the magic system at all, nor the limits of their power. the god-demon thing that Lorn released at the end came as a complete, 'she can do that?' moment. The Jaghut tyrant, also, was a bit underwhelming when, after wantonly destroying mountains and killing dragons, it was defeated by a...tree? or something along those lines that i certainly missed. If thousands of soldiers died as collateral damage in a mage battle (using the one against Rake in the beginning as a point of reference) what on earth is the point of said regular soldiers? Tattersail thinks that they normally protect HER, but how on earth could they do that when she massacre divisions at will? Along those lines, why bother with all the detailed plans and maneuvers? What would stop them from simply opening a warren-gateway thingy in the middle of the city and just pop out? Hopefully all this will be answered in Deadhouse Gates (which i, unfortunately, will be most likely unable to get until October or so, due to a severe lack of cash).

[Kalbear]

The Evil Hat: NONE of that is answered in DHG. Really, none is answered anywhere, other than the idiotic "Power attracts Power"; the only real balance that Malazan has is that people won't go wantonly using tons of power because it might make other people who can kick their ass come on over.

But no, there's no foil for magic users. There's no reason for soldiers to exist.

[Warden of the MidWest]

There need to be regular soldiers at battles, because the mages on either side can cancel eachother out. You see a bit of this in later stories and will see it in Deadhouse Gates with the Wickan warlocks. And as they say, most intricate battle plans don't survive contact with the enemy.

[Kalbear]

Eh. They say that the mages can cancel each other out, but more often than not we don't see that in the stories. The only times you do is when you have two precisely matched mage groups. If one side has an advantage, that's it - they're done for. You see that in GotM & MT to name a couple places.

[polishgenius]

Only very few mages have that kind of power and they can't do it all the time.

SPOILER: GotM

Tays and Rake are two of the greatest magical practitioners of the age, and the battle between them at Pale is regarded as unusual even by Malaz-world standards.

We see later on (in Midnight Tides) what happens when

SPOILER: vague Midnight Tide spoilers

that kind of power is available to most mages

and the point of soldiers in such an environment is specifically raised then.

You'll slowly find out more about the Azath as the series unfolds- it's one of the main plot-points of the book.

[Zach H]

You do realize that referring to Abercrombie as a R-rated R.A. Salvatore begs the Erikson as a somewhat more ambitious Gary Gygax or Ed Greenwood comparison. :P

Go for it. I can't comment too much on this given that I don't know much of anything about Gygax, and my experience with Greenwood is limited to one novel that does indeed make Before They Are Hanged look like a modern day For Whom the Bell Tolls.

All I know that is that I everything I've read of Erikson thus far (five novels) makes me want to continue working my way through his stuff. Can't the same thing about a fair number of current epic writers I've tried out.

[Warden of the MidWest]

Eh. They say that the mages can cancel each other out, but more often than not we don't see that in the stories. The only times you do is when you have two precisely matched mage groups. If one side has an advantage, that's it - they're done for. You see that in GotM & MT to name a couple places.

We see it in DHG and MOI, with QB holding off a Pannion cadre, but I agree that a lot of the time one side over powers the other. It can get kind of anticlimatic when a huge battle is about to happen when all of a sudden an entire army is devastated by magic.

[Nerdanel]

I think the Malazan world has a rock-paper-scissors thing going on.

A few powerful mages can kill armies of soldiers. A relatively small number of skilled assassins can kill all of those mages when they least expect it and don't have the time to react. Ordinary soldiers can beat the assassins with their combat effectiveness and numbers big enough to render individual assassinations meaningless.

Mages can be powerful, sure, but a mage is only a well-placed dagger away from being a mage corpse.

[Kalbear]

Mages can be powerful, sure, but a mage is only a well-placed dagger away from being a mage corpse.

And if this was ever an actually important part of battles, that might matter.

It almost never does.

I mean, who is the assassin that's going to handle Rake?

Plus, assassins aren't particularly hindered by armies, either; there are a couple of times when assassins take out whole armies by themselves. So it's more like rock/paper/AWESOME PAPER OF AWESOMENESS.

Rock kinda sucks. Unless they have grenades. Grenades apparently beat paper and everything else.

[Blaine]

All I know that is that I everything I've read of Erikson thus far (five novels) makes me want to continue working my way through his stuff. Can't the same thing about a fair number of current epic writers I've tried out.

I hope you continue to enjoy them. God knows I sure didn't.

[polishgenius]

Plus, assassins aren't particularly hindered by armies, either; there are a couple of times when assassins take out whole armies by themselves. So it's more like rock/paper/AWESOME PAPER OF AWESOMENESS.

When? The closest I can think of is when

SPOILER: Bonehunters

Apsalar slaughters all of the Claw in Malaz City, but that's about 100 at the max, all fellow assassins and not soldiers, she's using magic most can't, she doesn't take them on en masse, and Shadowthrone says she's just outdone the patron god of assassins. Kalam's probably the third-best assassin we see in the series and he hates taking on even individual soldiers in a fair fight, and rarely does so.

[Nerdanel]

We've learned that in the beginning the Malazan empire used to have lots of battle mages in their ranks, but there's been heavy attrition going on over the years, especially for the High Mages. It's even stated to have gone to the point where potential High Mages hid their talents for fear of promotion.

During the series most of the attrition has already happened. Also, even during the story many of the military mages end up corpses just like their non-magical fellow soldiers.

[Kalbear]

SPOILER: other assassins

Kalam ends up wiping the floor with two different armies (once in DHG, another time in Bonehunters). Then there's Lady Envy and the sword guys who destroy whole armies by themselves, Karsa Orlong who can wipe out whole armies by himself, etc.

If you could show just once where a mage without an army gets destroyed, that'd be awesome. I can't think of a single time where an army makes a difference other than because Erikson wanted it to be so.

[Eurytus]

You don't have the time to read a book yet you've got the time to complain about a book you've not read on the internet?

Er no. As I believe I made clear I have time to read books. Good books.

Not crap ones.

[polishgenius]

SPOILER: other assassins

Kalam ends up wiping the floor with two different armies (once in DHG, another time in Bonehunters). Then there's Lady Envy and the sword guys who destroy whole armies by themselves, Karsa Orlong who can wipe out whole armies by himself, etc.

If you could show just once where a mage without an army gets destroyed, that'd be awesome. I can't think of a single time where an army makes a difference other than because Erikson wanted it to be so.

Both occasions with Kalam involve

SPOILER: series

him fighting Claw, and in neither case does he kill all that many - maybe fifteen-twenty each time, and he has help the second.

As for mages without an army getting destroyed:

SPOILER: series

The Ceda in Midnight Tides gets killed because he's got no protection from a casual throw of a spear, despite being at the time wielding power capable of killing every Edur on the continent. Karsa also kills the odd mage, although he does have immunity. The Semk mage/godling/thing in DHG gets beaten by the marine squads, iirc.

[Nerdanel]

Kalbear, I think you need to brush up your definitions of "army" and "assassin".

Most importantly, someone being able to kill a whole lot of people doesn't make one an assassin. You know, they could just be a really good with the soldier skillset. In a series full of demigods and actual gods it's only to be expected that the most powerful characters can wipe the floor with the ordinary humans.

[RedEyedGhost]

I :love: this thread. It's got everything you could possibly want in a thread.

[Kalbear]

Most importantly, someone being able to kill a whole lot of people doesn't make one an assassin. You know, they could just be a really good with the soldier skillset. In a series full of demigods and actual gods it's only to be expected that the most powerful characters can wipe the floor with the ordinary humans.

Okay, so is an assassin only one that kills from stealth and with knives? Cause if that's the case I can't think of any situations where assassins mattered at all from a mage vs. assassin scenario, nor where assassins were thwarted by an army from killing said mages. I was trying to give you some leeway and show there are cases where single fighters beat armies and that armies were useful for...something. But they're not.

SPOILER: polish

The Ceda in Midnight Tides gets killed because he's got no protection from a casual throw of a spear, despite being at the time wielding power capable of killing every Edur on the continent. Karsa also kills the odd mage, although he does have immunity. The Semk mage/godling/thing in DHG gets beaten by the marine squads, iirc.

The godling thing in DHG gets killed by sappers. Sappers are the 'beats everything'. They're not normal soldiers any more than Karsa is.

And the casual spear throw I had forgotten; but would that have been prevented by an army or even a bodyguard? I mean, in DHG we have assassins wipe out the Whirlwind despite her having soldiery fellows around her. It's not like the armies sit around and form shield walls around mages; more often than not they're nowhere near the mages.

[polishgenius]

Well, an army

SPOILER: series

not being currently destroyed by the Edur Mage hordes would have prevented Trull from getting close enough to throw it. In DHG, again if I recall correctly, Sha'ik's army is otherwise occupied, she only has a few bodyguards with her.

There's also the generic magery that gets killed in attrition before and during the series- they're not specific enough for me to give examples offhand, but they are there.

Thing is, there aren't that many occasions where the mages aren't fighting other magic-users, and less many where magicians fight armies on their own either, so it's a difficult one to really argue either way. There aren't many situations where a magician slaughters an army en masse, although more than the vice-versa.