| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| RaVeN1463 |
Posted - 23 Jan 2004 : 01:58:32
ok ive played a few of the games and im going to try to read the books of the forgotton realms any idea on a good seires to start on? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Ezindir the dark |
Posted - 09 Feb 2004 : 10:25:23
HaHa!!  
Not always, but most of the times: Yes.
|
| The Sage |
Posted - 09 Feb 2004 : 10:20:42
quote:
Originally posted by Ezindir the dark
quote:
Originally posted by Lina
They're NOT what I would term a "GOOD STARTING POINT".
When you are 9-10 they are. Thats when I read them anyway, right after I had read "Lord of the rings".
And I wacht "Gilmore Girls" somtimes, and many of my friends think that is one of my strange habbits.
Strange habits go hand in hand with being a D&D gamer I'm afraid Ezindir...
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 09 Feb 2004 : 04:08:42
Heh. I think Lina's just poking fun at how widely this has gone off topic. |
| Ezindir the dark |
Posted - 08 Feb 2004 : 20:18:34
quote:
Originally posted by Lina
They're NOT what I would term a "GOOD STARTING POINT".
When you are 9-10 they are. Thats when I read them anyway, right after I had read "Lord of the rings".
And I wacht "Gilmore Girls" somtimes, and many of my friends think that is one of my strange habbits. |
| Lina |
Posted - 07 Feb 2004 : 10:09:16
They're NOT what I would term a "GOOD STARTING POINT". |
| Lina |
Posted - 07 Feb 2004 : 10:08:12
Nancy Drew? The Hardy Boys? D&D the movie? Are you serious! |
| lowtech |
Posted - 04 Feb 2004 : 16:27:39
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
Eh, I'm a funny sort of guy. I don't go into gender differences much. For instance, I enjoyed Notting Hill and IQ (though the latter probably doesn't count, what with all the lovely science refferences). I also read Nancy Drew as much as I did The Hardy Boys. A buch of kids in elementary school thought it was one of my more strange habbits, reading a "girl book." But a good story's a good story.
I'm with you on that one, Nancy Drew books had better stories and characters. |
| Shadowlord |
Posted - 04 Feb 2004 : 05:48:15
I can see why.... |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 04 Feb 2004 : 05:28:55
Yes, I left out the motion for decency's sake . . . . |
| Dracandos the Spellsage |
Posted - 04 Feb 2004 : 00:17:58
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
I also liked the dwarf's line, where he tells one of the thieves (who happens to be smitten with an elf) that he should go after a dwarf woman "with a beard you can really hang onto!"
aye Bookwyrm i saw the movie twice i believe...i love that line as well "u gotta get urself a 300 pound dwarf, with hair on her chin u can really hang on to!!!" he then acts out a "humping" motion while he says "hang on to" lol silly dwarves |
| Shadowlord |
Posted - 03 Feb 2004 : 21:51:00
Indeed. Thanks for the "positive" review. It makes me feel better about not seeing D&D the Movie. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 03 Feb 2004 : 21:43:32
Be glad. The dragons were cool, but the rest? Hardly. The plot was so weak it needed crutches, the acting was barely passable, and they tried for too many "wow" reactions.
It did have a few things I liked, such as the dragons I mentioned. I also liked the dwarf's line, where he tells one of the thieves (who happens to be smitten with an elf) that he should go after a dwarf woman "with a beard you can really hang onto!"
Also, it was interesting to see Tom Baker (aka the Fourth Doctor) as an elven healer. My brother and I were trying to figure out why this guy looked so familiar, and then when he smiled, we got it. They'd given him all-white hair, cut close to his head (unlike the untidy black curls we were used to), but they left his teeth and slightly silly smile the same. Tom Baker was always wasted on too-serious roles like that small cameo -- he's got such a flair for light lines. He was the best of all the Doctors. |
| Shadowlord |
Posted - 03 Feb 2004 : 21:09:17
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
<Snip>
Seriously, the prequels don't hold much continuity with the original. Lucas would have done better if he'd not concentrated on trying to win back his title as "director with the best new special effects." Before, he used the effects to complement the story, yet now it's to actually tell the story. Sort of like the Dungeons & Dragons movie.
<Snip>
Ugh, I didn't even see that, how was it? |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 03 Feb 2004 : 19:57:18
Eh, I'm a funny sort of guy. I don't go into gender differences much. For instance, I enjoyed Notting Hill and IQ (though the latter probably doesn't count, what with all the lovely science refferences). I also read Nancy Drew as much as I did The Hardy Boys. A buch of kids in elementary school thought it was one of my more strange habbits, reading a "girl book." But a good story's a good story. |
| lowtech |
Posted - 03 Feb 2004 : 17:40:16
quote:
Oh, and Lowtech: I'm a guy, and I prefer [i]Polgara the Sorceress. It's funnier.
You are only the second guy I've heard from who thinks that. All of my sisters agree with you, I don't understand why. Oh well, both are great books. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 03 Feb 2004 : 05:30:11
Permanently destroyed? I can imagine you thinking the Sith was, but the Empire? What with all the Imperial officers and their battleships? Hardly. It would be chaos, but the Rebels didn't just simply win the entire galaxy with that one battle.
::sigh:: But now, even I have to admit this is getting way off topic. Before I could tenuously claim that general "starting places" were valid, but not this, however much I want to argue it. If you don't like Zhan's books, fine, your loss. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 02 Feb 2004 : 17:54:38
In a generation or two we'll barely remember the 15-year gap between Star Wars IV and I. The only differences between IV-VI and I-III are that the technology exists now to show what was always imagined, and that nostalgia exists for one and not yet for the other. The 'too much special effects' screeds we hear now are almost verbatim the same as in 1977.
George Lucas can't make VII-IX because he doesn't know what happens after the eucastrophe, when the hero's boon is reintegrated into the cosmos. Our culture doesn't, and Tim Zahn surely does not -- he didn't even understand that the Empire and the Sith are permanently destroyed at the end of Episode VI. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 02 Feb 2004 : 17:10:33
Ack! There are only three Star Wars movies! Lucas has turned to the Dark Side and become Darth Digitalgeekus!  
Seriously, the prequels don't hold much continuity with the original. Lucas would have done better if he'd not concentrated on trying to win back his title as "director with the best new special effects." Before, he used the effects to complement the story, yet now it's to actually tell the story. Sort of like the Dungeons & Dragons movie.
Anyway, I still hold "order of publication" true in the Star Wars sense. Movies, anyway. The novels (Lucas should have done the Thrawn Trilogy, but he'd probably mess that up anyway) do a very good job of keeping continuity, though I still say that the Thrawn trilogy should be read before the rest, even though it takes place after RotJ. After all, it was what shaped everything else.
Oh, and Lowtech: I'm a guy, and I prefer Polgara the Sorceress. It's funnier. |
| lowtech |
Posted - 02 Feb 2004 : 16:40:40
The David Eddings books should definitly be read in order of publication. And this is coming from somebody who usually prefers to read things in chronological order.
The Belgarath and Polgara books are interesting in that most men prefer the Belgarath book, while most women prefer the Polgara book.
(proceeds to hide from Alaundo for contributing to this tangent) |
| Faraer |
Posted - 02 Feb 2004 : 14:39:17
Star Wars is certainly intended to be watched in order of Episodes I-VI; the episodes other than IV are not sequels or 'prequels' but simply installments of the whole -- Star Wars is the work, not the individual films, just as The Lord of the Rings isn't a trilogy. (It amazes me that Lucasfilm itself uses the term 'prequel', which I'm quite sure costs them money each time.) |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 02 Feb 2004 : 07:06:02
Actually, as exhibit A for the prosecution (no, I haven't been watching Law & Order ), I present my sister. When she was eight, she got curious about the character of Polgara, both from the hero-pose on the cover and from what I'd mentioned to her. She insisted that she wanted to read it, but I told her it was actually the end of a twelve-book series. This was before her alignment switched from Chaotic Good to Chaotic Evil, though, and while she was still reading in the way I consider to be healthy, she didn't have the dedication to start reading twelve books to get to what she wanted.
So I gave her a compromise. I let her read Belgarath the Sorcerer first. She got a bit confused at the prologue (which takes place after the end of Book Ten), but it wasn't much -- just the characters convincing Belgarath, the oldest (and perhaps the crankiest) man in the world to write his autobiography. Then it goes back seven thousand years and starts from there.
My sister devoured it, even with the odd comments Belgarath makes in his naration. Then the book stops right before the first book in the series. So she goes on to Polgara the Sorceress, where Belgarath's daughter tells her side of the story, at least over the past three thousand years. She quite enjoyed that one -- I'm certain that Mrs. Eddings had considerable input on that one. But then she gets to the end. And it stops right before Book One.
"But I want to read about when Garion kills Torak!" she said, like she was accusing me of hiding something from her.
I have others, but that's the one that most sticks out in my mind. She admitted she would have been happier reading it from the beginning.
I suppose I should mention Anne McCaffery's Dragonriders of Pern series. It has a rather disorganized order; first one trilogy, then another that takes place between Book Two and Three, then one takes place centuries before, then another that takes place in the middle of the previous, then one that details the colonization of the planet . . . . Yet the author askes you to read them in order. And it's worth it, because that way the information is revealed in the proper order.
The Drizzt books aren't as obvious that way, especially if you're the type to skip over Drizzt's jounal entries -- which are written after the main events of The Halfling's Gem. But until R. A. Salvatore says different, I'm going to be insisting they be read in publication order. |
| Shadowlord |
Posted - 30 Jan 2004 : 03:13:21
Sage, I know that, but the art of acting has a certain hold over me lately..... |
| The Sage |
Posted - 30 Jan 2004 : 03:08:38
This isn't a 'battle' over who is right about which order or method to read FR novels Shadowlord, every scribe here has his/her individual tastes when it comes to these types of novel topics. I was merely stating that to understand the full story completely from beginning to end, it makes sense to read the story in plot-progress order.
I have on occassion, read novels in publishing order, The Belgariad quintet being an example, but that was only because I hadn't purchased the prequels before I read the quintet.
|
| Shadowlord |
Posted - 30 Jan 2004 : 02:50:21
Haha, even the Almighty Sage of Perth, errr, I mean Sage, agrees with me! Give up, Bookwyrm. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 30 Jan 2004 : 02:44:23
quote:
Originally posted by Rad
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
Not starting with Homeland. It's book four, not book one!
It's like starting with the newer Star Wars movies, or reading Belgarath the Sorcerer and Polgara the Sorceress before starting The Belgariad quintet. 
must....resist.....age...old...argument! ::gritting teeth::
Bah, its no good.......ill have to say to read the Dark Elf trilogy BEFORE Icewind Dale trilogy
Oof!  I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one, Bookwyrm
Rad has the right idea, even given the Bookwyrm's threat of Dragon's Rage. If you want to read the full and complete story of any series, it makes 'logical' sense to start at the story's, rather than the publishing date's, beginning.... If you are still stuck on the other method, try reading the series in publishing date order next time...See which method you prefer.
|
| Shadowlord |
Posted - 30 Jan 2004 : 01:16:46
Haha, Bookwyrm! Vhaeraunites triumph over Mithril Dragon! I can see it on all the headlines..... |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 29 Jan 2004 : 23:54:33
Or at least shut up before I come under the sway of this Dragon Rage I keep hearing about . . . . |
| Lord Rad |
Posted - 29 Jan 2004 : 23:07:16
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
Not starting with Homeland. It's book four, not book one!
It's like starting with the newer Star Wars movies, or reading Belgarath the Sorcerer and Polgara the Sorceress before starting The Belgariad quintet.
must....resist.....age...old...argument! ::gritting teeth::
Bah, its no good.......ill have to say to read the Dark Elf trilogy BEFORE Icewind Dale trilogy
Oof! I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one, Bookwyrm |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 29 Jan 2004 : 23:02:21
Not starting with Homeland. It's book four, not book one!
It's like starting with the newer Star Wars movies, or reading Belgarath the Sorcerer and Polgara the Sorceress before starting The Belgariad quintet. |
| Dracandos the Spellsage |
Posted - 28 Jan 2004 : 20:14:06
what did u recomend Bookwyrm? |
