Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Fantasy and Scifi Books.


jayboogieman
 Share

Recommended Posts

I know there used to be a fantasy book recommendations thread, but it is archived now.

If anyone is looking for a good scifi series, Nathan Lowell's Tales from the Golden Age of the Solar Clipper series is worth a read. No galaxy or world saving, but a good series none the less. Here is a link for the first three in an omnibus.

Nevernight is a good fantasy read about assassins. 

Skyward and its sequel, Starsight by Brandon Sanderson are a pretty good coming of age scifi series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jayboogieman said:

I've never read any of the Warhammer books. Are they any good?

Not fantasy or scifi, but Barry Eisler's books are great.

 

Short answer: No.

Long answer: No. By and large they're pulp fiction that's written like the authors are paid by the word and are writing against a deadline with a gun to their heads. They're pure plot progression with only a hint of characterization or world-building. Most novels are really just lore or fluff that accompany and enhance the tabletop gaming experience.

BUT there are exceptions to the rule, which is great. Because the 40k universe is so terrifying, nihilistic and bleak, that it's an incredibly fun setting for sci-fi. And in particular, the books about Chaos are probably the best. Those authors, and John French in particular, play very well in the world where technology is incredibly advanced, but almost everyone has forgotten how to achieve it, so all the mighty spaceships are basically derelict, rusting and dripping with caustic, radioactive fluids, and there are malevolent gods and that exist in the immaterial plane that humanity uses for space travel, waiting for the fields that repel them to flicker for a microsecond so they can come spilling into our reality and fug everyone up.

General rule, the darker the subject matter, the better the book will be.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Captroop said:

 

Short answer: No.

Long answer: No. By and large they're pulp fiction that's written like the authors are paid by the word and are writing against a deadline with a gun to their heads. They're pure plot progression with only a hint of characterization or world-building. Most novels are really just lore or fluff that accompany and enhance the tabletop gaming experience.

BUT there are exceptions to the rule, which is great. Because the 40k universe is so terrifying, nihilistic and bleak, that it's an incredibly fun setting for sci-fi. And in particular, the books about Chaos are probably the best. Those authors, and John French in particular, play very well in the world where technology is incredibly advanced, but almost everyone has forgotten how to achieve it, so all the mighty spaceships are basically derelict, rusting and dripping with caustic, radioactive fluids, and there are malevolent gods and that exist in the immaterial plane that humanity uses for space travel, waiting for the fields that repel them to flicker for a microsecond so they can come spilling into our reality and fug everyone up.

General rule, the darker the subject matter, the better the book will be.

Thanks for the info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • First, am I wrong? I looked back over all his posts here and I didn't see anything positive other than Shough. Second, pretty sure if you had read the post I was responding to, you would have seen CRA made poo personal as well . You just choose to address me instead of him. Not sure why?????
    • I wanted XL but I felt he should have been a 2nd rounder but I understand the logic trading up just to get the option. A safety net for your gamble.    Certainly disappointed with his receivers development but i like his down field blocking and I imagine that's what's keeping him on the field. 
    • Pretty sure it is a given Young lacks typical QB size and strength and he is here simply because his other attributes more than make up for it. My point is not to indicate anyone "settled" for him but rather to remind people that there have been plenty of big, strong QB's that have not lived up to expectations. Jamis Winston, Anthony Richardson, Trey Lance, JaMarcus Russel are a few examples. They all have the physical attributes coveted by teams and yet none have had sustained success in the NFL. And yes, there are QBs that do have both but there aren't many and some of the ones still playing were failures with their early teams. Saying Young is a bust simply based upon his size (and I do think it is as simple as that for a few guys around here) is unfair to both him and the team.
×
×
  • Create New...