| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Ozzalum |
Posted - 02 Dec 2010 : 13:00:59
I'll continue procrastinating on actually writing by asking everyone on their opinion of low level main characters.
I was trying to think of FR novels I've read that involve low level characters and it was a short list. Smedman's serpent trilogy came to mind, at least for the first book. I guess 10 year old Catti Brie couldn't have been too high level. Of course, I haven't read them all by a long shot and maybe there is some selection bias on my part.
So, what do people think of novels set at levels 1-5? Too boring without the high level spells and spectacular martial feats? How many of you tend to skip the low levels in your gaming? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Faraer |
Posted - 07 Dec 2010 : 21:39:33
Thread seems to have missed the Knights of Myth Drannor novels!
I like low levels lots; people's people. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 07 Dec 2010 : 19:15:27
That's easy. Find tales and writing you like and try to emulate their style while adding in your own ideas. There's plenty of tales about young/apprentice spellcasters (usually male, oddly, maybe nice to see some feminine casters); books, movies, television. |
| Ozzalum |
Posted - 07 Dec 2010 : 12:49:42
While not directly applicable to my concept, I'm wondering how you write about a 1st or 2nd level mage. With fighters, thieves, and priests, the character can at least fall back on some martial prowess. For fighters and thieves especially, their abilities are a matter of relative skill level. With clerics and mages, they either can or can't cast a given spell. It seems like it is tougher to fudge them.
Which is why Drizzt can be a badass for book after book. In earlier books he's a badass because he can take on three female drow fighters and prevail, in later books he's a badass because he can take on a undead dragon infused with artifact power. Fighters are readily scalable that way. Not sure you can do the same thing with a mage. They don't really become potent until they have at least a few levels under their belts. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 07 Dec 2010 : 00:40:00
@ Arik: TW= Twilight War
@Alystra: Pug is the Black Sorcerer, a Great One, an archmage who appeared in almost all of Raymond E. Feist's novels. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 18:27:56
A story about young Szass assassinating his way through the ranks in old Thay would be interesting. As would a story about Mirt's youth (if it ever existed). |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 17:54:42
Well, it worked for Drizzt and Raistlin.... |
| Ozzalum |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 17:50:13
Of course, it is easier to have that sense of "this could really be the end" if you don't already know that three books were written about the character chronicling his adventures after the events you are currently reading. That's the question for me, whether "people" actually want to read about nobodies on their way up... or on their way to a violent end, as opposed to reading prequels about established characters. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 17:41:01
In the case of Homeland, it was actually the FOURTH Drizzt book, which many people seem to forget, since it comes before the rest, chronologically. So he already had made a name for himself. but that was the very reason RAS wrote it- because people wanted to see where this guy came from.
@ dennis. Missed Pug? I'm not familiar with him, so if I missed him, it's due to lack of having read the book(s) he's in.... I'm sort of finicky in my fantasy reading, and often find that many books that get recommended to me just don't hold my interest, usually due to overly-descriptive prose. I like description, just not in the Dean Koontz sort of way. I'm more of a middle-of-the-road gal when it comes to descriptions. Less is often more, IMO. I think it comes down to a balance- magic or horde-slaying is best done in ways that help tell a really good story, particularly if done by high-level type characters. But I'm also less interested in hacking or blasting one's way through scores or more of foes, than with good old fashioned ingenuity and cleverness. I'd rather see a hero who finds a way to defeat the bad guy WITHOUT having to resort to battle after battle with unnamed minions or monsters, and who does so with panache and perhaps an occasional snarky comment to his companions. Leave the big flashy battles for the final showdown, and make every fight count for something. And it helps if the protagonist doesn't always appear to get out unscathed. One thing I try to do in my own writing is to nake the danger very real, and give a sense that yes, this IS possibly the end of the hero. Fighting a dragon is no fun if you don't get a little singed!!! |
| Ozzalum |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 14:58:47
I wonder how popular Homeland and Elminster: Making of a Mage would have been if they had been published before they had made names for themselves. I may be mistaken in which books are the most popular, but it seems to me that WotC probably knows its audience pretty well. You'll also note that when people are asked to recommend books, you'll get a lot of recommendations for the big guns.
Of course, I'll be writing for the fine folks here, and you don't necessarily represent the typical FR book readers.
|
| Ayrik |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 14:11:37
Yes. There's plenty of examples of no-magic writing which violate my sense of proprietary "fairness". Heroes who happily wade into battle and slaughter impossibly vast hordes armed with only a sharp toothpick and bad attitude. On the opposite extreme, a first level wizard who gets a nosebleed and needs to lie down for a few hours after casting his one Magic Missile for the day isn't all that interesting to read about, he becomes little more than a talking musket which the other characters drag around and shoot (hopefully without a misfire) in scary moments, becoming somewhat useless until he's reloaded.
Perversely, there are examples (even in FR titles) where I want to see more magic. PSK's Twilight trilogy comes to mind, I'm left feeling almost mildly disappointed when Rivalen "simply" shifts through shadows and backstabs somebody with a pigsticker, I want to see him cast some kind of Chain Disintegrate or Thermonuclear Fireball instead - the books are written in a way that makes heavy use of blatantly high-level characters while somehow engaging me with the desire to see more "cheating" explosions and eye-candy, I want to see the characters do things that are "impossible". I was enthralled by Raistlin for years, he just couldn't possibly cast spells fast enough for my tastes. Another fine example is the Wizzard Rincewind, who suffers from particularly horrible consequences whenever he uses magic, yet I want to see more and more of his tales (though of course even the author maintains Discworld is by no means "any kind of literature", it's just "pulpy entertainment"). The magic in itself isn't bad at all; entertaining, thoughtful, and skilled writing inspires a constant taste for more magic - that's what fantasy is all about. Of course nothing good is added to the story if mundane needs (like cooking dinner) are constantly addressed by magic, aside from times when such elements are somehow central to the tale or used to sneak in tidbits about the setting.
So yea, 'tis all about the author's ability to spin and weave a tale. High-level characters can be as compelling as lower-level characters. But the accomplishments of lower-level characters are "easier" to portray in a "fair" manner (because lowly wimps don't have much magic), so books written about them tend to be (for me) more satisfying. I can't presume to speak for every author, but I'd suspect many are as attracted to high-level characters as we are (as I am), so given a choice they'd probably be inclined to write about known high-level characters before writing about low-level nobodies. My comments are more about books wherein authors frequently resort to "cheap magic" instead of doing things the "right way".
Sorry dennis - "TW"?
We still need more good books about dwarves mumblegrumblegrrr |
| Dennis |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 04:17:56
quote:
Originally posted by Alystra Illianniis
Arik, this is all the better reason for you to read Elminster: Making of a /mage, and Homeland, because those books show just how a low-level character can go through lots of blood, sweat, and tears to get the job done. You don't even need a dwarf with an axe to do a job- just a VERY determined hero (of any stripe) willing to get his hands dirty once in a while. And not all mages (ab)use their magic to do EVERYTHING. Some use it only when they absolutely must.
I say it all depends on how the author "handles" the characters. Besides, Arik, didn't you say you like the TW? There's plenty of magical blasting in there.
quote:
Originally posted by Alystra Illianniis
These are the wise few who realize that always taking the easy way is the path to corruption. Gandalf, Elminster, Dumbledore... See the connection?
You missed Pug.  |
| Laerrigan |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 03:52:35
....hence my personal gripe against spells like wish being available at all except perhaps in the form of an extremely powerful artifact that's hard to get hold of and can only be used once in a lifetime by a given individual, or some such (see, there's STORY in that, not just choosing to sacrifice XP on the spot and oh look, you have what you so desperately needed all boxed up and gift-wrapped)....I don't even have it in my gaming. It's just not fun, and it's way too un-dramatic. I don't even like teleports, generally. For a long time I played an epic-level wizard in the game I DM, and I threw things at him and his family that really weren't solvable with a few spells. I'd be just as happy if he were low-level again (in fact we recently went back to an earlier point in the the timeline so he's bumped back now), or if magic in general did nothing more dramatic than Gandalf's. It's the interpersonal tensions and resolutions that I find interesting---perception, priorities, and problem-solving---whether they involve the use of swords or magic or neither. Actually, his magic gets used more often these days for conjuring up fresh fruits and veggies for cooking in winter than for clearing battlefields, because I don't go for blatantly-obvious threats.... |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 03:28:52
Arik, this is all the better reason for you to read Elminster: Making of a /mage, and Homeland, because those books show just how a low-level character can go through lots of blood, sweat, and tears to get the job done. You don't even need a dwarf with an axe to do a job- just a VERY determined hero (of any stripe) willing to get his hands dirty once in a while. And not all mages (ab)use their magic to do EVERYTHING. Some use it only when they absolutely must. These are the wise few who realize that always taking the easy way is the path to corruption. Gandalf, Elminster, Dumbledore... See the connection? |
| Laerrigan |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 03:27:22
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
I should just stop reading fantasy fiction, it wasn't meant for me. 
Not necessarily. Sounds like your tastes just run toward low-magic fantasy, or at least stories in which the main characters aren't tied in with whatever magic those weird mages or snooty priests do way in the background. The OP was about low-level versus high-level, which applies to sweaty fighters as well as mages. I'd rather read about lower-level anyone, regardless of what tools they use in their exploits, unless the author is just THAT GOOD at handling high-powered characters without losing any of the gritty realism, resourcefulness, character interaction/development, story-crafting, etc. I'm no more interested in reading lengthy descriptions of how a superpowered fighter takes down twenty assailants with an axe than I am in reading lengthy descriptions of how a superpowered mage takes down a hundred assailants with a flashy spell. Honestly, I tend to skim over blow-by-blow accounts of combat. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 01:51:53
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
...it's more of a poor treatment in popular expectations ... "magic" is the catchall panacea used to simplify and move things along when (I would like to see) characters really need to get dirty and spill more blood, sweat, toil and tears to get their jobs done.
I've seen a fair number of wizards and archwizards doing mundane, “dirty” jobs. But as they say, “Why use a bicycle (and sweat profusely) to get to your destination when there are plenty of cars available?!” It's not a “panacea.” It's just the stuff of fantasy. Maybe you're reading the wrong genre?
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
If heroing was as easy as just babbling and waving your hands around then everybody would be doing it.
With the very few exceptions (like Karsus, who was born with it---the demented archwizard was able to cast his first spell at age two), wizards and archmages toil, study, experiment, and often die in the process before they become who they are. It's not that easy. I tried it myself.
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
Or maybe I'm just a magic-hater. I'm a tool-user. I like to read about people who do things the "right way" instead of the "easy way". Fair enough. I should just stop reading fantasy fiction, it wasn't meant for me.
Hah! My thoughts exactly. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 00:58:04
Well, that is a valid counterpoint, dennis. Another one of my excellently flawed generalizations.
Magic itself is not cheap; it's just cheapened by the way most fantasy fiction abuses it. Almost all fantasy, few exceptions. It's not poor treatment by FR authors (since they largely use the magic exactly as it's established in the setting), it's more of a poor treatment in popular expectations ... "magic" is the catchall panacea used to simplify and move things along when (I would like to see) characters really need to get dirty and spill more blood, sweat, toil and tears to get their jobs done. If heroing was as easy as just babbling and waving your hands around then everybody would be doing it. The Realms (and other D&D settings) are somewhat "locked" into a system of magic which encourages the easy path (so the best D&D books don't really focus on the magic, it's just part of the "background", they instead focus on the characters and events). Authors who create their own settings from scratch sometimes implement magic in ways that I consider very "fair" and original, though many of them (these days) seem be little more than cosmetic overhauls of Vancian/D&D magic styles.
Or maybe I'm just a magic-hater. I'm a tool-user. I like to read about people who do things the "right way" instead of the "easy way". Fair enough. I should just stop reading fantasy fiction, it wasn't meant for me.
We need more books about dwarves. Not dwarven kings. Not dwarven master armourers. Just regular run-of-the-mine dirty-fightin' Klang Kneeslayer the dwarf (and his clan drinking buddies) going about the important business of dependable battleaxe heroism, doing what's needed to keep the mud of the Realms free from scum and villainy one orc at a time. Magic won't stop a dwarf. Giants won't stop a dwarf. Elves and undrinkable toxic grog won't stop a dwarf. So a dwarf should be able to chop his way through lengthy narrative without getting very stinky at all. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 00:18:54
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
Magic is a cheap cheat.
Nah, you must have based that notion on some cheap novels, which I myself have encountered sometimes. But to say that it applies to all is just plain baseless. There are a number of authors, specially those that I respect for their sheer ingenuity, who use magic with sophistication, complexity, believability, and viability so effectively. The characters weren't just born with it, they also work hard to be best at it---hence, your "real sweat" argument.
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
Bah - gimme a sturdy axe and a sturdier dwarf and put some real sweat into the story.
I don't want to read a book that stinks. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 11:21:30
Magic is a cheap cheat. Just another symptom of our lazy society. People want to be spoonfed, and get the instant cure, and basically live in comfort without expending any effort. Wave your hand around and say the words, aha, something for nothing, no problem at all, it's magic! Bah - gimme a sturdy axe and a sturdier dwarf and put some real sweat into the story. If the magic isn't something you have to really work for then it's just a copout. Epic-level characters don't work for a living, they're just jaded dilettantes looking for some fresh experience.
High level characters, all types, have access to all sorts of magic. Entirely expected, and yet also completely boring. There's no real "accomplishment" or "challenge" in succeeding at something you've already had a successful career doing all your life, so there's little interest in the tale either. Unless you escalate the scope of the plot and setting to match the power of the characters, which just invites all the criticism that a world-altering disaster would cause. Low level victims make much better narrative; a sequence of tales describing their progression into higher levels is better still.
I almost wore out my left hand typing "successful". Almost as terrible as "stewardesses". Er, not that I actually have much opportunity to type the latter. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 06:43:01
It depends on my mood. Often I like the 'blast them all' approach, and sometimes I prefer the 'toning down.' For the former, it is important for me to see several struggles by the hero with little to no magical aid first, before seeing him do the inevitable, like what happened in The Author's Preferred Edition of Feist's Magician. Also, it's very important that the transition from the hero's being nobody to a great somebody is presented smoothly and convincingly. There's nothing worse than seeing a hero instantly transform from a nobody on one page and a force of nature on the next. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 05:53:10
I absolutely agree, Laerrigan. I usually prefer a more simple and resourceful approach by heroes in storytelling over the "let's just find some uber-powerful way to blast 'em to the Nine Hells" way of defeating baddies. I try to incorporate that kind of feel of the hero truly being the underdog in my own writing. It's why my mutant hero usually wins through out-witting his foes rather than just beating them six ways to Sunday, or my young bard often wins fights through sheer ingenuity over pure brawn. (Playing "Excalibur" while riding rodeo on the back of a cave fisher, anyone?) |
| Laerrigan |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 01:05:58
I have to agree with Arik's take on the interesting quality of low-level characters. Powerful ones can certainly be intriguing and fun, but it's less common in my experience. I'd much rather read about resourceful and surprising solutions that sneak right under the big bad guy's expectations using relatively simple means, perhaps with an element of humor and/or sacrifice.
All right, it was rather cathartic and impressive when Mazrim Taim had his students unleash the invisible meat-blender ring around them in the middle of battle (sorry for the non-D&D reference), but only because of the LONG buildup to it and especially all the subtler issues going on behind it and tied into it. The climactic battle of David B. Coe's Winds of the Forelands series was another example of that kind of catharsis and battle-field-blasting impressive quality with a long buildup, artistry, significance, and economy of description, all with strong threads of characters and their lives and development woven through it. I just infinitely prefer rich character interaction, personal development, and gritty intrigues over blowing chunks out of planets DBZ-style, to use a bit of hyperbole for emphasis...
And yes, I enjoyed Homeland the most out of the Dark Elf trilogy, and never could get myself more than halfway through the Icewind Dale trilogy. Obviously plenty of readers do like higher-level, bigger-magic books, lol, but there is a distinct audience for the lower-level ones. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 03 Dec 2010 : 06:13:41
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
Succumb to temptation, dennis. You know you want to. Perhaps these novels won't earn a scathing book report.
I ALREADY read them ALL long ago. And true, my reviews of them are HIT. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 03 Dec 2010 : 06:03:16
Succumb to temptation, dennis. You know you want to. Perhaps these novels won't earn a scathing book report. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 03 Dec 2010 : 05:53:54
It is indeed. I've seen all of them at one time or another. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 03 Dec 2010 : 04:38:23
I also saw ELMISTER IN HELL and THE TEMPTATION OF ELMINSTER in one of our bookstores. So maybe it's safe to assume WotC reprinted all the 5 books in the series. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 03 Dec 2010 : 04:27:06
Well in that case, Arik, you're in luck. Both Making of a Mage and Homeland series are all fully available.... |
| Dennis |
Posted - 03 Dec 2010 : 04:20:33
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
Fair enough. I doubt I'll get that one because it blows my budget and I already have some of that material. I also refuse to buy into trilogies/sets (books or movies) until the pieces are all simultaneously available, yeah, I'm a bad boy that way.
Not really. Sometimes, I'm like that, too. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 03 Dec 2010 : 04:16:16
Fair enough. I doubt I'll get that one because it blows my budget and I already have some of that material. I also refuse to buy into trilogies/sets (books or movies) until the pieces are all simultaneously available, yeah, I'm a bad boy that way. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 03 Dec 2010 : 03:31:25
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
Making of a Mage hath been added to my next shopping trip, which will be on Friday afternoon actually. Although I already had other plans for reading order, this one has conceptually grabbed me so it's gonna jump the line. I should be ready to comment somewhen on Saturday.
I suggest you buy The Annotated Elminster instead. It includes the first three books in the Elminster saga and some very 'informative' and interesting notes by Ed himself. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 03 Dec 2010 : 03:18:24
Do add Homeland that list. It's the BEST of the Drizzit books. And it really shows why so many people like him. Though I'm inclined to think that Zaknafain is probably one of the best characters in it. |
|
|
