Best book of all time

[Anonymous No.23503355]

This is the most underrated book of all time.

The writing is clear, well written.
The plot with Rachel is truly amazing.
The author focuses on telling a story with words rather than thumbing through a thesaurus to sound smart.

Inb4 mary sue
> He said Richard is not a Mary Sue he wrote a character he could look up to, its not a self insert.
Inb4 he plagiarized.
> he was inspired by some things but so is everyone else. In stone of tears he inspired hatty potter with his wizardry school in a castle. This book came out first

This book is so good but so hated for political reasons.

[Anonymous No.23503370]

I forgot to mention another critiscism. The mud people.
People say Richard is a white savior trope. But the mud people are never described as non white. They are only described as covering their bodies in mud. People who say this is problematic are idiots.

The mud people are some of the most honorable and respectable people ive ever read about. Their backstory and cultural origins are so anti-naive and based. I love how he tricked the reader into disliking a mean mid person just to flip the script and make him one of the most honorable people in fiction in the stone of tears.

These books deserve respect

[Anonymous No.23503627]

I don't really know, man, I read it at a time when I was a big fan of fantasy, I had just swallowed the Wheel of Time, Earthsea, and the Royal Assassin, and the Sword of Truth seemed quite cliché, a bit cookie-cutter. Maybe I should have read it before the rest, but I didn't find anything really worth reading in this series.

[Anonymous No.23504399]

>>23503355
Dropped it after 200 pages.

The dialogue was really bad, even by fantasy standards, a lot of the characters' actions didn't make sense either, it felt like it was written by an edgy teenager who had never had a girlfriend.

[Anonymous No.23505683]

>>23504399
Case in point. Underrated. The author writes men of action not men of words. The dialogue is short like a spartan. Most of the writing is describing events, motivations. Its a book technically but its really a story. An amazing one. I dont read to hear people ramble about something in too many words. This is the problem. Too many degenerate thesaurus thumpers read this but it isnt for them. Its for the intellectual introverts.

Midwits dislike this since they think bigger words and rambling nothings make them smarter.

[Anonymous No.23505722]

I learned to read English with this book series at 15. I remember thinking it was stupid by the time I was done. Don't mean I didn't enjoy it or that I think it's all bad. Most underrated though? I wouldn't say that.

[Anonymous No.23505825]

>>23503355
I agree but the sequels are mostly shit, Goodkind fucked himself over by trying to turn it into a franchise.

[Anonymous No.23505837]

>>23505722
Its definitely not stupid. Its just easy to understand. Like a spartan. But i will respect your opinion otherwise.

Some of the smartest people i know in prison who read all the time highly recommend this book. The skill required to make something this immersive takes a keen intellect to spot. Its easy to see exotic vocabulary and think the author is smart. But storycraft and immersion are subtle, but exponentiallt harder to pull off.

[Anonymous No.23505858]

>>23505722
Its definitely not stupid. Its just easy to understand. Like a spartan. But i will respect your opinion otherwise.

Some of the smartest people i know in prison who read all the time highly recommend this book. The skill required to make something this immersive takes a keen intellect to spot. Its easy to see exotic vocabulary and think the author is smart. But storycraft and immersion are subtle, but exponentially harder to pull off.

>>23505825
Thank you, I respect your opinion. Do you also find it weird that so many people seem to hate this book and they formed their opinion before they read it, if they even read it? An enjoyer of this book has it rough.

I get that there are a few oversocialized people who will never like this book because they enjoy long winded dialogue and hate men of action. But i bet most people would enjoy it especially as an escape, or an immersive experience. If they just gave it a chance.

So many people are missijg out since they only read highest rated books, or top ten book lists. Because books are such a time commitment and there are so many available too many will miss out on this classic.

[Anonymous No.23505874]

Gav thorpe, and R.A Salvatore are pretty good too if you like the sort of immersive storytelling without too much simpleminded thesaurus wielding, pointless,modern art tier dialogue

[Anonymous No.23505899]

>>23505858
>Do you also find it weird that so many people seem to hate this book and they formed their opinion before they read it, if they even read it?
Lots of people do that with any book related to politics desu.
It's interesting though, I remember back in the olden days (talking pre-2010 here) most people in online discussions would at least admit they liked the first book even if they hated how aggressively political and melodramatic later ones got. There was a definite turning point some time within the last decade, people just got a serious hate boner over Goodkind. Did Terry ever endorse Trump before he died? That might explain it.

[Anonymous No.23505905]

>>23505874
>R.A Salvatore
I've heard that Bob's latest stuff is extremely pozzed due to being buck broken by WotC's DEI department, is there any truth to this? Haven't read any of his books since Hunter's Blade trilogy I think.

[Anonymous No.23505919]

>>23505899
Yeah, i know what you mean. It started out where people would admit they hated him personally and the script flipped to "he is a bad writer" around the time you said. Which is absurd. Their only evidence is his use of concise to the point dialogue and clear writing style. He is a master at immersion. And that requires innate skill and diligence in writing.

I do not think he endorsed Trump. But he was a libertarian. Which i assume made him problematic. He was probably seen as a threat if anyone acknowledged his work as some of the best storytelling.

Tolkien was the master world builder of fantasy. Goodkind is just as much a master of immersive storytelling as Tolkien was to worldbuilding.

I hope Wizards First Rule gets another look one day now that hes no longer a threat for his personal beliefs

[Anonymous No.23505934]

>>23505905
I stopped reading after The Orc king. There might be truth to what you say. But that doesnt take away from the legend of drizzt books before that.

Gav Thorpes best hidden gem is a book called "Grudge Bearer" Its the most immersive book ive ever read about Dwarves. If you want to transport youself into a Dwarf story i recommend it.

[Anonymous No.23505938]

big barbed namble cock

[Anonymous No.23507344]

>>23505919
He wasn't a libertarian, he was an objectivist.
So, just like the do with Ayn Rand, globohomo goes out of their way to shit on him.

[Anonymous No.23508920]

>>23503355
>want to read the series
>already dropped two fantasy series this year (the Shannara series and the Magican series)
>found both badly written, despite both being more critically acclaimed than the Wizards series

[Anonymous No.23509190]

>>23507344
Interesting, and i didn't know that he was an objectivist. Thanks for the correction.

>>23508920
The thing about Wizards first rule is it starts out good from the first chapter. It gets better too as it goes on that's for sure.
Why not go read the first chapter (or two) and report back what you think? Im curious.

Anyways i found shannarah series hard to immerse myself in. I never tried magician series though.

[Anonymous No.23509229]

Man I remembered reading it as a YA, a long time ago, and quite enjoyed the books. Still have fond memories of plenty of events that transpired, like that training castle he ran from. Or those forest people. I read maybe the first 4 or 5 books, in the series. And gave up but only because back then I couldn't follow through with any long series and wanted variation. Maybe I should go back to rereading it from the first book

[Anonymous No.23509812]

>Soon after, Richard is captured by a beautiful, skin-tight red leather catsuit wearing Mord-Sith named Denna, who tortures him for a month

lol

[Anonymous No.23510232]

Richard Rhal was based, especially in the 2nd half of the series. Based af. Probably my first instinct that something was wrong with lefties was when they said his righteousness's were "problematic" while they praised those "morally grey" characters by the fatty.I wouldn't read the Sword Of Truth series now I'm not a teenager anymore but it was a fucking excellent time and I had some serious adrenaline every time Richard killed someone and was 100% right for it.

[Anonymous No.23510255]

>>23503627
It's not a series for fantasy geeks (no offence). It's a series for good psychopaths with a lot of intense energy bottled up. Every time Richard slaughters a pathetic crab-in-a-bucket character or an evil character, it's a beautiful release valve.

[Anonymous No.23510258]

>>23503355
Is there some meme or something about this I've slept on?

[Anonymous No.23510278]

>>23510258
>>23505938

[Anonymous No.23510281]

>>23503355
>This book is so good but so hated for political reasons.
what political reasons?