Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dúnadan" data-source="post: 121748" data-attributes="member: 561">To all of those who despise or are simply bored by 'traditional' fantasy cliches, such as the forces of good vs. evil, loveable and mischievous side-kicks, brooding warriors, reluctant heroes, and deus-ex-machina, I cannot stress enough that Dragonlance is not the place to escape them. To me, it doesn't matter if they were original when first written, so much as what they are now. The biggest breath of fresh air in the genre now is in the form of George R.R. Martin's works, which take every fantasy cliche and throw them out the window. &nbsp;&nbsp; If you loved the 'world-building' of DL, if it can even be called that, then Martin will leave you breathless and gasping for more. In addition, he's an author who stares deus-ex-machina in the face and tells it to take a hike. No character has plot immunity or any hope of survival if logic does not dictate so. What's more, there is no real clear-cut black or white, good and evil in the series; everything is just shades of grey, allowing the reader to sympathize with two characters who have almost nothing in common. Dragonlance finds itself severely lacking in most of these categories, and those that it does have are poorly done at best.&nbsp;&nbsp; Getting back to the point of the thread, when you compare the writing and overall structure of the Dragonlance books to competant authors, you see that it is like comparing ambrosia to rat-poison. Martin is just an example (although a very good one) of superior writing that &quot;Holds on to you and doesn't let go,&quot; as Robert Jordan put it. This, unfortunately, is something that you cannot get with Dragonlance.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dúnadan, post: 121748, member: 561"] To all of those who despise or are simply bored by 'traditional' fantasy cliches, such as the forces of good vs. evil, loveable and mischievous side-kicks, brooding warriors, reluctant heroes, and deus-ex-machina, I cannot stress enough that Dragonlance is not the place to escape them. To me, it doesn't matter if they were original when first written, so much as what they are now. The biggest breath of fresh air in the genre now is in the form of George R.R. Martin's works, which take every fantasy cliche and throw them out the window. If you loved the 'world-building' of DL, if it can even be called that, then Martin will leave you breathless and gasping for more. In addition, he's an author who stares deus-ex-machina in the face and tells it to take a hike. No character has plot immunity or any hope of survival if logic does not dictate so. What's more, there is no [I]real[/I] clear-cut black or white, good and evil in the series; everything is just shades of grey, allowing the reader to sympathize with two characters who have almost nothing in common. Dragonlance finds itself severely lacking in most of these categories, and those that it does have are poorly done at best. Getting back to the point of the thread, when you compare the writing and overall structure of the Dragonlance books to competant authors, you see that it is like comparing ambrosia to rat-poison. Martin is just an example (although a very good one) of superior writing that "Holds on to you and doesn't let go," as Robert Jordan put it. This, unfortunately, is something that you cannot get with Dragonlance. [/QUOTE]

Verification