Great Ideas vs. Great Execution

[BWFoster78]

No, you aren't... Trust me, it's not all that great.

Good to know I wasn't the only one. They weren't bad books; I just felt they got repetitive.

 

[Steerpike]

BTW, am I the only one that didn't think the Codex Alera series was all that great?

Haven't read them. I do like The Dresden Files, however. Those are fun.

 

[Reaver]

The Dresden files were a good romp. "The other wizard named Harry." I like that.

 

[Xaysai]

Two takeaways, for me at least:

1. Don't obsess over your idea.
2. Any time spent trying futilely to come up with an original idea is time that you aren't spending either executing or improving your ability to execute.

BTW, am I the only one that didn't think the Codex Alera series was all that great?

While the "magic system" was something new (to me), I felt the story was bland and I found none of the characters compelling.

 

[Xaysai]

Haven't read them. I do like The Dresden Files, however. Those are fun.

I felt that the Dresden Files was a fun, fast read, but there was a similar formula to most of the books which got repetitive.

If you enjoyed the Dresden Files, read Kevin Hearne's "Iron Druid Chronicles".

Take the fun, fast read of Dresden Files, but make the main character much funnier and weave in (and some times goof on) some great pop culture references and you've got this series.

I very much enjoyed it for what it was.

Also, if you want to check out a series with what I found to be "an original magic systems", check out Peter V. Brett's "Warded Man" and "Desert Spear". Overall I thought they were both kind of a 7/10 on storytelling, but 9/10 in originality and freshness.

They are worth a read.

 

[Mindfire]

Good to know I wasn't the only one. They weren't bad books; I just felt they got repetitive.

Repetitive how? The plot was interesting, the characters were very clever, especially Tavi. And the power levels go through the roof at some points. As fantasy books go, it's fairly flawless. Tons of epic moments sprinkled throughout. It's my barometer for what modern fantasy should be.

While the "magic system" was something new (to me), I felt the story was bland and I found none of the characters compelling.

... I have no words. Not compelling? Tavi alters the course of wars and takes down people far more powerful than him using nothing but his wits- and then he gets superpowers! What about that isn't compelling? He negotiated with implacable barbarians. He defeated a numberless horde. He broke into an unbreachable prison. Twice. This guy is Theseus and Percy Jackson and Batman all rolled into one. How is that not compelling? The secondary characters are interesting too. Gaius Octavian, Warmaster Varg, Fidelias, plus the villains of the piece, the calculating Invidia Aquitaine, the ruthless Lord Kalarus, the cold, inhuman Vord Queen. My only complaint is that Butcher may have given a little too much time to Tavi's romantic relationship with Kitai. But other than that, flawless.

 

[BWFoster78]

Repetitive how?

I read the series from start to finish in a short time period. To me, it seemed like each book was an exact repeat of the previous one. Tavi has just enough resources to defeat the forces arrayed against him. In the next book, the forces against him increase in power, and he once again has just enough resources to defeat them. And so on.

I have no problem with the characters, magic system, or anything else. Again, it just felt like the plot for each book repeated the previous one.

 

[BWFoster78]

Haven't read them. I do like The Dresden Files, however. Those are fun.

The Dresden Files are some kind of detective novels with a supernatural/fantasy twist, right? I just never could get into detective novels; don't know why.

 

[Leif Notae]

Repetitive how? The plot was interesting, the characters were very clever, especially Tavi. And the power levels go through the roof at some points. As fantasy books go, it's fairly flawless. Tons of epic moments sprinkled throughout. It's my barometer for what modern fantasy should be.

Except it is from what I have read on plot synopsis alone. It suffers the same way Drake's Greek inspired series does. Every character finds themselves in an almost copy/paste situation where they go through almost the same scenario and achieve a modicum sliver of growth with very little denouement.

Prompt writing is fine, and if it were interesting enough to keep my attention through a random slave riding on a bull for no reason, I'd give it a go. However, prompt writing can only go so far if you have nothing interesting to it or structure for a good story. This is why I say EXECUTION of the process is far more important than the idea.

Sadly, he doesn't have it. He can try it, but he doesn't have it. Needs more prompts or schooling on outlining and story structure/hooking from the start of the novel.

 

[Mindfire]

Except it is from what I have read on plot synopsis alone. It suffers the same way Drake's Greek inspired series does. Every character finds themselves in an almost copy/paste situation where they go through almost the same scenario and achieve a modicum sliver of growth with very little denouement.

Prompt writing is fine, and if it were interesting enough to keep my attention through a random slave riding on a bull for no reason, I'd give it a go. However, prompt writing can only go so far if you have nothing interesting to it or structure for a good story. This is why I say EXECUTION of the process is far more important than the idea.

Sadly, he doesn't have it. He can try it, but he doesn't have it. Needs more prompts or schooling on outlining and story structure/hooking from the start of the novel.

The structure for a good story? ...Did you read any of my posts? The plot is thoroughly engrossing. And if you had bothered to turn the page, you would have found out that the woman riding the bull in the opening was an Imperial spy. Maybe, just this once, you should read the books before judging them so harshly. Each book is hardly "the same scenario" and there's more than a "modicum" of character growth throughout the novel. Tavi's development, Invidia's descent into inhumanity, Tavi's friend Ehren transforming from a quiet bookish kid into the perfect spy and assassin. The list continues. How much did you read exactly? And denouement? Really? Now you sound like my English teacher. -_-

 

[Xaysai]

Repetitive how? The plot was interesting, the characters were very clever, especially Tavi. And the power levels go through the roof at some points. As fantasy books go, it's fairly flawless. Tons of epic moments sprinkled throughout. It's my barometer for what modern fantasy should be.

... I have no words. Not compelling? Tavi alters the course of wars and takes down people far more powerful than him using nothing but his wits- and then he gets superpowers! What about that isn't compelling? He negotiated with implacable barbarians. He defeated a numberless horde. He broke into an unbreachable prison. Twice. This guy is Theseus and Percy Jackson and Batman all rolled into one. How is that not compelling? The secondary characters are interesting too. Gaius Octavian, Warmaster Varg, Fidelias, plus the villains of the piece, the calculating Invidia Aquitaine, the ruthless Lord Kalarus, the cold, inhuman Vord Queen. My only complaint is that Butcher may have given a little too much time to Tavi's romantic relationship with Kitai. But other than that, flawless.

I'm not going to say the plot wasn't good, I just didn't like (or dislike) the characters.

There are some books where there are several POV's and some POV's I enjoy, and some POV's I just plow through to get back to the POV's I liked. This series made me feel like I was just plowing through POV's without really caring who was up next because I wasn't really enjoying any of them.

Now, keep in mind, I finished the series - which is more than I can say for some (Yes, I'm looking at you, Terry Goodkind).

 

[Mindfire]

I'm not going to say the plot wasn't good, I just didn't like (or dislike) the characters.

There are some books where there are several POV's and some POV's I enjoy, and some POV's I just plow through to get back to the POV's I liked. This series made me feel like I was just plowing through POV's without really caring who was up next because I wasn't really enjoying any of them.

Now, keep in mind, I finished the series - which is more than I can say for some (Yes, I'm looking at you, Terry Goodkind).

What did you not like about them exactly? I'll grant you this is not an "emotional" series, but I'm not sure that's grounds to dislike the characters.

 

[Philip Overby]

I haven't read the series either, but I think you should probably read more than a handful of pages before invalidating the whole series. In any case, I think a good idea can hook a reader, but it's great execution that keeps a reader. There are tons of novels I've read that weren't "hooky" enough, but I stuck with them either because:

a. people kept telling me "No, stick with it!"
b. I felt like the execution was good enough to keep with it
c. I thought the idea was good enough to see where it went

Codex Alera has been recommended to me many times. Each reader is their own judge of what they think is good or bad execution. At the end of the day, as a reader and a writer, you have to make your own decisions and not worry what others say. Which has inspired me to start a new thread. Coming soon...

 

[Xaysai]

The Dresden Files are some kind of detective novels with a supernatural/fantasy twist, right? I just never could get into detective novels; don't know why.

I don't think they are a detective novel like you would find in the Mystery section of B&N, the lead character just happens to be a detective. Admittedly, the first 3-4 books use the same formula, but once you start to learn the backstory of Harry, the White Council, etc, there starts to be more of a persistent story arc carrying over from book to book.

 

[Xaysai]

What did you not like about them exactly? I'll grant you this is not an "emotional" series, but I'm not sure that's grounds to dislike the characters.

To be quite honest, I very much enjoy characters which aren't perfect, which make the wrong decision, or sometimes make the right decision and it goes horribly wrong. I always felt that Tavi and his Uncle were just too perfect and were always going to end up doing the noble thing. This is why I don't like Richard Rahl, or Drizzt, or many others.

Some of my favorite characters are Durzo Blint (Night Angel Trilogy), Logen Ninefingers (First Law Trilogy), Kvothe (Name of the Wind) or most any of the characters from Glen Cook's Black Company series. They are all fundamentally flawed and sometimes just don't do the right thing.

To be clear, I am not here crapping on a series you like; just voicing my opinion on why I didn't enjoy it.

 

[Mindfire]

To be quite honest, I very much enjoy characters which aren't perfect, which make the wrong decision, or sometimes make the right decision and it goes horribly wrong. I always felt that Tavi and his Uncle were just too perfect and were always going to end up doing the noble thing. This is why I don't like Richard Rahl, or Drizzt, or many others.

Some of my favorite characters are Durzo Blint (Night Angel Trilogy), Logen Ninefingers (First Law Trilogy), Kvothe (Name of the Wind) or most any of the characters from Glen Cook's Black Company series. They are all fundamentally flawed and sometimes just don't do the right thing.

To be clear, I am not here crapping on a series you like; just voicing my opinion on why I didn't enjoy it.

The reason I like Tavi so much is that characters like him, who usually "end up doing the noble thing" and do it with style, those kind of characters are very rare nowadays. Anti-heroes are cool, don't get me wrong. But sometimes I just want to see a clever, noble hero outsmart all the villains.

 

[ThinkerX]

I've read both 'Codex Aleria' and most of the 'Dresden' books.

Codex Aleria is...good, though not great. The clip at the start of the thread clears up a few things I'd been wondering about.

Dresden is not so much a detective who practices magic, but a wizard (who, for the first few books anyhow) engaged in a bit of detective work on the side. In the later books, the wizard end of things take over completely. Its fun and fast, but does have serious phausibility issues - several times supernatural bad guys destroy significant parts of Chicago (where the books are usually set) without serious 'normal' reprecussion or even investigation. I kept waiting for for about two hundred FBI / Homeland Security types to swoop in and start picking people up enmass (good and bad both). But then, this is an issue I have with most urban fantasy.

 

[Leif Notae]

I haven't read the series either, but I think you should probably read more than a handful of pages before invalidating the whole series. In any case, I think a good idea can hook a reader, but it's great execution that keeps a reader. There are tons of novels I've read that weren't "hooky" enough, but I stuck with them either because:

a. people kept telling me "No, stick with it!"
b. I felt like the execution was good enough to keep with it
c. I thought the idea was good enough to see where it went

Codex Alera has been recommended to me many times. Each reader is their own judge of what they think is good or bad execution. At the end of the day, as a reader and a writer, you have to make your own decisions and not worry what others say. Which has inspired me to start a new thread. Coming soon...

I will reply over at the other thread for most of this, but if a writer cannot understand the basics of opening a story or executing it within reason, either they need to look at how screenwriters do it or they co-write with someone who can.

And it is my right to invalidate anything. I've invalidated Sanderson's career for the three sentences I read in The Way of Kings.

 

[Mindfire]

I will reply over at the other thread for most of this, but if a writer cannot understand the basics of opening a story or executing it within reason, either they need to look at how screenwriters do it or they co-write with someone who can.

And it is my right to invalidate anything. I've invalidated Sanderson's career for the three sentences I read in The Way of Kings.

That's a tad self-righteous isn't it?

 

[Leif Notae]

That's a tad self-righteous isn't it?

If you feel so, then that is a problem you have. I'm stating my opinion and my knowledge on writing.

If you have more of a bone to pick with me, then I'll be happy to discuss it in a civil manner in private message.

Now, can we return to the topic of execution vs. idea?