Will I like Dragonlance books?

[Mallus]

...anyone that reads fantasy must have a certain patience because fantasy novels are often plodding affairs...

QFT!

...but Bakker really stretched my tolerance...

See, I found them exhilarating.

It doesn't help that he peppers the books with tepid discussions of "philosophy" that assure me why he is writing novels now rather than utilizing his PhD for more intellectual pursuits.

Would you have liked it better if Kellhaus explained the concept of a priori knowledge while punching the sh*t out of alien homunculi? Wait, didn't he?

 

[Mallus]

I think I have decided to read something else instead.

You have chosen well, Grasshopper.

 

[Storm Raven]

I was joking.

I am sure they are good books, I just have not gotten around to reading them yet.

If you have not read at least one book each of these authors -

George R.R. Martin
Ursula K. LeGuin
C.S. Lewis
Patricia McKillip
Gene Wolfe
Lloyd Alexander
Susan Cooper
Andre Norton
H. Warner Munn
Fritz Lieber
Michael Moocock
Guy Gavriel Kay
Larry Niven
Orson Scott Card
Poul Anderson
Lois McMaster Bujold
Edgar Rice Burroughs
Lin Carter
C.J. Cherryh
China Mieville
Piers Anthony
Roger Zelazny
Jack Vance
Fred Saberhagen
Robert Silverberg

and

Terry Pratchett

(and probably a few others, like Diana Wynne Jones and Tanith Lee) . . .

. . . then I just don't see how you can be a reasonably well-read fantasy fan (I didn't list Tolkien, but he sort of goes without saying).

 

[Bayushi Seikuro]

I've only ever read the first trilogy.

I did, and still do, enjoy them. I agree also that it's not word-heavy, but there is a flow to it.

I think the objections people have about the way the kender Tasslehoff Burrfoot is written is because of the way it's shaped halflings in D&D sessions, much the same way people dislike any dual-weapon wielding drow

One thing I really enjoyed is that the characters do all change during the course of the novels. Some might be heavy changes, like the deaths, both pointless and heroic; others are more about growing into accepting who you are. There is one part that always brings tears to m' eyes, even now -- the part discussing about a certain woodcarver sitting under a tree, waiting for his friend to show up and irritate him. Kind of really shaped how I visualize people being dead.

But, I digress. I agree with the sentiment of: the only way you'll know if you'll like them is to read them. They're not terribly long or complicated, so I don't see it as a heavy time investment.

 

[Tinker Gnome]

You have chosen well, Grasshopper.

I hope he reconsiders.

Sorry Mallus and Storm Raven, I mean no offense to both of yall, I am just reccomending what I think are good books.

 

[Mallus]

Sorry Mallus

This is all in good fun. Unless, of course, the OP reads Dragonlance.

 

[Crothian]

The books are fine. I found therm to be better then some of the authors that got listed and worse then others. I think Dragonlance is important for D&D gamers to read since it is a good look at a D&D campaign might be.

 

[Mallus]

I think Dragonlance is important for D&D gamers to read since it is a good look at a D&D campaign might be.

You mean like, bad?

Raymond Feist does a better job in the Midkemia/Kelewan novels, and his prose style causes less cancer.

 

[jonesy]

You mean like, bad?

Raymond Feist does a better job in the Midkemia/Kelewan novels, and his prose style causes less cancer.

Yes yes, everyone gets it already. You don't like Dragonlance.

It's just so ridiculous when you lump 200 novels (that's about how many there are now) into the category "bad" just because you disliked the first three.

And having read 171 of them I have to tell you that I rank the Chronicles very low. The only reason nowadays for me to place them in any must read DL books list is because it's always good to know how things began.

Over 200 books. 50 something authors. Do you really believe that there can't be good stories, or capable writers, in a selection that massive? And what amazes me most is how anyone can judge something after having sampled less than 1.5% of it?

 

[Storm Raven]

Over 200 books. 50 something authors. Do you really believe that there can't be good stories, or capable writers, in a selection that massive? And what amazes me most is how anyone can judge something after having sampled less than 1.5% of it?

Yes. Licensed fiction is almost entirely crap. Authors who are good when writing their own stuff almost always produce crap when constrained to write licensed material. The Dragonlance books range from mediocre to downright awful. I would suggest someone read Jordan or Modesitt before they delve into Dragonlance, and their books are turgidly long and slow. Norman's books are better than the bulk of Dragonlance books (and, for that matter, the bulk of D&D tie in books too), and he is scraping the bottom of the barrel.