Golden Deer Pub Community Forums

I...often want to write fantasy, but I have read so little of it, and I mean tiny amounts. I wouldn't dare try anything seriously without even seeing what has been done. Only stuff I've read is really just the first couple Sword of Truth books :<

Scifi, however, I've read tons of. I've read Asimov, Clarke, Heinlein, Card, and a shitload of Bradbury. And as a kid I devoured Animorphs, which played with pretty much every concept in the genre.

j-just ignore the TV show

Yeah, I'm about 250 pages into Wizard's First Rule, and I can't say I'm liking it that much. I just can't get into it.

Oh, and spoilers, I suppose, concerning Richard's heritage:
[spoiler]While nonchalantly browsing TV Tropes, I came upon a section that gave Richard's full name as Richard Rahl. So he's [s]Penis[/s] Panis Rahl's son? When does this spoiler appear in the series, and will it ruin the series for me? I read something about some nun, too. I believe this was in the "Knight Templar" page.[/spoiler]

As for why I don't like the book, it's Goodkind's writing style. For example:

[spoiler]Darken Rahl is having his first cameo. He's in his dad's tomb. Okay. His right hand man, Demmin is with him. Okay.

In the first paragraph Demmin is introduced, he is explicitly stated to be a pedophile. That's fine. But then Rahl is talking to Demmin about a boy he was examining and says something along the lines of, "How did it feel to not be able to touch him? Mwahaha..." This is where I get frustrated.

If you want to say that a guy's a pedophile, go ahead. But to then have dialogue immediately afterward that could've told us the exact same thing. What was the point of having the whole "Hey here's Demmin and he likes boys" line if, on the next page, there's a whole other line to that effect. The first line was unnecessary. Basically, he gets wordy.

And sometimes his writing style unpleasantly contrasts his characters' actions. Kahlan is acting like Richard's her man-whore, for example, and while this is an obvious out-of-character moment for her (she's acting, but still), Goodkind acts dead serious the entire time. He just feel so rigid.[/spoiler]

So...does it get better? I understand this is the first book of a huge fantasy series, so it's possible Wizard's First Rule is just one long, long, LONG, prologue, so does the series get better? I have Stone of Tears, too, so I want to know if it's worth reading.

I'd say THAT book gets better, yes. As for whether the series gets better, I've only read the first two, but supposedly the first several are the best.

Regarding the heritage of Richard:
[spoiler]It is revealed in the latter part of the first book, if not the last few pages. I'm pretty sure Darken Rahl is is father in the books, and Panis is the father in the TV show.[/spoiler]

I love Goodkind's writing style. Those lines give the characters life. I don't think that line in your second spoiler

[spoiler]is reconfirming that the guy is a pedo. You are missing the point. Dark Rahl is enjoying his friend's suffering. He knows the guy's hobbies and uses it as a chain for the guy - giving him presents and denying him all the time, but still keeping the guy under perfect control by whispering in his ear.

Darken Rahl is a demon. That is what that line was trying to tell you. He's not re-confirming the guy's disgusting interests. He's laying out the master-servant relationship and Darken's power of control and the way the bastard operates. He turns your most divine pleasures against you.

As evidence by the red apples, and the quads that rape confessors. Oh, but you're just learning some of the other ways Rahl uses this.[/spoiler]

As for "prologue" - no, not really. The next book in the series always starts roughly an hour after the events in the previous book. In short, when you pick up Stone of Tears you are going to feel like you didn't put the first book down. However, the "events" do end and it starts a new story. Hard to explain. Seriously though, Wizard's First Rule was second best in the series for me. Temple of the Winds is my favorite so far. <3
Honestly, though, the only problem I have with the books is that the endings can be a little anti-climatic. He managed to nail it with Temple of the Winds but most of the time I reach the end and think "meh, that was... meh.... oh well - NEXT BOOK!!"


I don't know how you think his writing style contrasts the character's actions. <_< I disagree wholeheartedly with that. It's not a dwarves play with fairies book. It's a very adult book and it's got some lessons in it that not only apply to the Goodkind's world but to our world as well. ^_^ The Wizard's First Rule is one that I keep close to my heart <3 *snicker*

Each book has a different moral/rule to it.


Oh and... PLEASE LEAVE THE FUCKING MOVIE OUT OF THIS!! It should just die. DIE!! *kills the tv series*

Yes your first spoiler could dampen one of the *gasp* moments in the series but, no, it's not so big that it would crush your enjoyment. .... It's actually one of those things that deepens my appreciation for the character of Zedd. -_-

I'm probably biased in all of this, though. Goodkind is my god. I will never be able to write as he does but I admire him. He's fantastic. ^_^ I've never regretted picking this book up off the shelf. But, I liked the book the whole way through. :\ So if it's not hitting it for you so far... I dunno what to tell you.

Maxine.
[spoiler]Sampson isn't criticizing Goodkind's characterization of Rahl, he's criticizing Goodkind outright stating something that is later demonstrated. It's a pretty basic writing fault.[/spoiler]