/lit/ - Literature

>>23467068
Assuming you're not a troll, I'm shocked you read that many without caring about the characters.
I read the earlier books more than a decade ago, and I can still remember off the top of my head Ganoes and Felisin Paran, Laseen, Whiskeyjack and Tattersail, the Bridgeburners, particularly Fiddler, Anomander Rake, Tehol and Bugg, and Sorry and Cotillion.
But what I adored about the books was the scale of the worldbuilding, especially the layered history. Definitely a place I would love to explore at my own pace, through another medium.
I'm aware that nostalgia plays a massive factor here, so I don't wholesale recommend it anymore, but I have fond memories of them. I've also taken some concepts from the books for my own work and it has been very well recieved, so perhaps I defend it due to obligation and collateral self-defense.

i.e. Grand scale, layered and deep history, multiple convergent character arcs, and a style that isn't maximum minimalism.

>>21781107

>Characters can die at any second
Yes.... But it should be said that in malazan there are several ways to return from death, however deaths in malazan always (so far) has meant the person is permanently changed.

>Seems more like ASOIAF
No unless the only thing you talk about here is that characters die. Malzan is high fantasy featuring things like: Flying castles,Shapeshifting,Multiple "dimensions",Big magic battles

>Clear cut good/evil
Nope. There are of course charachters that do evil and very little (if any) good. But they always have their own motivations and if you saw it from their pov they might not be evil at all.

As for WOT vs Malazan almost everyone online who says they have read both seem to agree that Malzan is the better series so there that aswell. But malazan is a harder read then WOT if that matters to you. (The difficulty of reading Malazan is severly overhyped however, its no harder then it is to read dune.)

Should I pick up The Gardens of the Moon?