# "Terry" of Fantasy - Goodkind, Brooks, and Pratchett



## J. S. Elliot

As sad as it is to say, I haven't - yet - had the chance to read any titles by any of these authors. From what I see on these forums, Goodkind is a bit of an underdog in the terms of author endearment. But, as much trouble as I have finding the books, I got lucky and did find one by Goodkind in the college library the other day. _The Wizard's First Rule_ is currently sitting like a brick on my desk while I finish reading another novel, but I had some curiosity questions.

What do you like most, as well as least, about each author?  
Which one is your favorite of the three? Why? 
How would you describe their main series in terms of quality and character development? 

And anything else that comes to mind is good, really. The big-name authors of fantasy tend to be expensive to obtain, so I'm trying to gauge if it's worth my money. Especially since there are such mixed reviews that I've heard through grapevine.


----------



## Mindfire

SeleneHime said:


> Goodkind is a bit of an underdog in the terms of author endearment.










*Waiting for the Goodkind haters to show up*


----------



## J. S. Elliot

I'm presuming there is a reason for this sentiment? ^_^"


----------



## Mindfire

SeleneHime said:


> I'm presuming there is a reason for this sentiment? ^_^"



It's just fun to watch people hate. I haven't read Goodkind's works, but based on what I've read about them, they deserve the hate they get. At least a little bit.


----------



## Steerpike

SeleneHime said:


> I'm presuming there is a reason for this sentiment? ^_^"



He's just not a very good writer. I tried to read _The Sword of Truth_ and found it dull. I didn't think the characters were well developed. It wasn't terribly preachy, but apparently he gets bad about that later on. I'll pass.

Pratchett bores me.

I've been given some good recommendations regarding Brooks, and I intend to check his work out.


----------



## ThinkerX

Terry Pratchet is pretty good in a comedic / satire type way.  Very readable, very entertaining, very...light.  A lot of it is digs on contemporary foibles like blackberry's (small demons on diskworld), sports, newspapers, police, finance, and more.  Special plusses for the integration of minor characters.  A slight minus because while the wizard of the Unseen University make frequent appearances, they rarely work much magic.

Terry Brooks...I've read a few of his 'Shanara' books, and one or two of the 'prequels'.  My main gripe is how the world is 'static' - same power groups century after century.  Usually a druid - but eery time the druid attempts to expand the council, it goes bad.  Even with the prequels, I don't think he adequately accounted for the appearance of the elves.  Trying to make Shanara a sort of post apocalyptic earth was a mistake, and so is keeping everything 'frozen'.

Terry Goodkind...I've read 'Wizards First Rule' and a couple of way later books in the series. I didn't particularly notice the 'preaching of democracy' bit which sometimes gets brought up, but for me the killer issue was the deliberate creation of these two 'walls of death' across the country.  The first, as a desperation war time measure I could see, but the second, to separate an area where a FEW people had magic from another area where NOBODY was supposed to have magic didn't work.  I never could get past that.


----------



## Sheriff Woody

I haven't read anything by Goodkind, but all the venom frequently cast in his name makes me quite curious, for better or for worse. I'll probably check out Wizard's First Rule before long, just to see what all the fuss is about.

And I'd like to watch the Legend of the Seeker show that's currently streaming on Netflix. I'm quite a huge Sam Raimi fan. Don't know if his involvement with the show goes any deeper than putting his name in the credits, though. I would have quite liked to see a few episodes directed by him, but sadly, there are none.


----------



## J. S. Elliot

Hmm. Couple things, but I'll have to finish asking them in a day or two. Is "Sword of Truth" the first one? (Meaning I got "Wizard's First Rule" out of order?) 

Anything that someone might particularly like about the other two, though?


----------



## ThinkerX

If I remember right, 'Wizards First Rule' is the first Goodkind book.  I found it passable, apart from the 'walls of magical death' thing.



> And I'd like to watch the Legend of the Seeker show that's currently streaming on Netflix. I'm quite a huge Sam Raimi fan. Don't know if his involvement with the show goes any deeper than putting his name in the credits, though. I would have quite liked to see a few episodes directed by him, but sadly, there are none.



I remember watching a season or two of this a while back.  The biggest variance I saw is that in the books, the 'Seeker' becomes a powerful wizard in his own right, which isn't the case in the television series.


----------



## Kaellpae

I'm a fan of Goodkind, but I've gotten stuck halfway through the series. He switches up the viewpoints in a couple books, and it's nice for the pacing of the series, but the second time in just a couple books, Pillars of Creation, makes me not want to read that particular book, but I don't want to skip it in case I'll miss out on something important. So that puts me at a limbo. I've also noticed a few similarities in Sword of Truth and Wheel of Time.

I don't know anything about Pratchett.

Brooks I'm interested in reading because an idea I had for a world is evidently almost exactly the same as his world, but I'm hoping to execute it a little better than I've heard he has. I'm currently trying to figure out the reading order for his books so I don't get spoilers by reading by publication date.


----------



## myrddin173

I have read a number of books by all three and Goodkind is definitely my least favorite.  I read him about four years ago so I can't comment on writing style or anything like that but I remember he was very "preachy."  It felt like he had a political agenda he was trying to get across to his readers.

I just got into Pratchett towards the end of last year and I have enjoyed everything I have read by him though I tend to prefer his later works.  His books are always good if you need a laugh.

Which leaves Brooks.  I would be lying if I said he was the best writer I have ever read but he is a great storyteller.  He is also one of my all-time favorites, partly because the Shannara series is basically what got me into reading fantasy.  His first book (Sword) is definitely "heavily-inspired" by the Lord of the Rings but I feel he has only gotten better with age.

Yes Wizard's First Rule is the first book in the Sword of Truth series.

@Kaellpae Here is a link to Brooks' suggested reading order.


----------



## Kaellpae

Thanks Myrddin.

I may not have noticed the political preaching in the Sword of Truth since I'm not a big politics person. If you can ignore or don't notice the preaching, then they're good books.


----------



## J. S. Elliot

Some interesting posts here.

I'm not against switching viewpoints - I do that often enough in my own work - so that's fine. But considering the first book started so slowly, will the series pick up as I go along? (Since I've only been reading it on break at work, I'm only onto Chapter 5.) So far, though, I haven't picked up on the preachiness yet, but considering the fact that "Wizard's First Rule" is a doorstopper, it's probably further in. 

I was hoping to find the Shannara series next, but I'd like to at least read the first book at the library (if they have it), before shelling out quite a bit of money for the entire series. Aside from the reputation of being a lighter Tolkien-ripoff, I've heard that it also blooms into it's own thing. Would you say that's correct?


----------



## myrddin173

SeleneHime said:


> Some interesting posts here.
> 
> I'm not against switching viewpoints - I do that often enough in my own work - so that's fine. But considering the first book started so slowly, will the series pick up as I go along? (Since I've only been reading it on break at work, I'm only onto Chapter 5.) So far, though, I haven't picked up on the preachiness yet, but considering the fact that "Wizard's First Rule" is a doorstopper, it's probably further in.
> 
> I was hoping to find the Shannara series next, but I'd like to at least read the first book at the library (if they have it), before shelling out quite a bit of money for the entire series. Aside from the reputation of being a lighter Tolkien-ripoff, I've heard that it also blooms into it's own thing. Would you say that's correct?



I think the preachy-ness doesn't show up until some of the later books, but it has been so long the entire series is fuzzy.  As for Shannara, it definitely becomes its own thing it eventualy gets into a power struggle between magic and science which I think is really cool.  Also airships...


----------



## ThinkerX

> I was hoping to find the Shannara series next, but I'd like to at least read the first book at the library (if they have it), before shelling out quite a bit of money for the entire series. Aside from the reputation of being a lighter Tolkien-ripoff, I've heard that it also blooms into it's own thing. Would you say that's correct?



I've not read a great deal of Terry Brooks.

However, his novels are spread out over a substantial period of time...as in centuries, with each book or group of books set in a different epoch.  From what I remember, there are a few carryovers: main characters from the earlier books might be figures of legend in the later ones, stuff like that, but no serious plot breakers (though its been a while, my knowledge is incomplete, so I could be wrong).  

As to the Tolkien ripoff aspect...I believe most of that stems from his inclusion of elves and another race which to all intents and purposes might as well be orcs.  That didn't bother me too much.


----------



## FatCat

Goodkind is the only author I've read of the Terrys, and as much (well-deserved) hate Goodkind gets, he introduced me to fantasy. As others have said, Goodkind is preachy, but that's the point. Richard is the epitome of morality so you have to expect being preached to, yet at the same time he has a habit of massive dialogues that tend to run together into the same point. Overall, the series is pretty disappointing, especially the end, and the world is nothing original. I'd say avoid it, as much as it pains me to say so.

Also, the fact that Richard is constantly surrounded by a harem of beautiful women vying for his affections gets rather old after a while, but if you don't mind a character whose only faults suggest deep positive traits then go ahead and give it a read.

And the real 'preachyness' begins around book four if I remember correctly. The first three are alright, then you get into a dull slump in the middle. I must say, Faith of the Fallen is a fantastic book (which oddly enough was one of the most ham-fisted democratic, idealistic, moral chest-thumping books). But for the most part, the series isn't special in any way. I remember the book before it was a massive POV shift to an unrelated character to the plot, was incredibly jarring and dull, and then that character was never really used again. Meh.


----------



## Kaellpae

I enjoyed the first 3 or 4 books of Sword of Truth a lot. And with each book I've read after those till I stopped in the middle of Pillars of Creation was a little less exciting and fairly predictable. I've been told by friends that after Pillars the series picks back up again and I'll finish what's released of the series just so I can have the story completed.


----------



## Jes

I have to admit that I haven't read many of Terry Brooks' or Terry Pratchett's books, but I've read several of Terry Goodkind's books. The first two of the Sword of Truth series were okay, but it seemed like Goodkind couldn't get past his main plot hook: betrayal. It seemed like every book was a repetition of the last, give or take a few interesting turns. It became very dull, very quickly. The same two main characters throughout ten books? That's a little too much - especially when they're just going to go through the same motions.

I love what I've read of Terry Brooks. I would go so far as to say that, after Tolkien, he is absolutely my favorite author. There are times when he can get a little bit too descriptive in the exact shape of a tree limb or go off on a page-long tangent about the smell of the grass, but if you can get around that (I think it was mostly only prevalent in his earlier works) the rest of the story is simply exquisite. I loved the Druid books and I loved that while each of his series were set in different time frames, they were still in the same world and thus vaguely familiar. Familiarity is a wonderful subconscious aid while you're reading.

I have heard good things about Terry Pratchett. I just haven't gotten around to reading what I have of his.


----------



## Feo Takahari

I tried to get into Pratchett's _Discworld_ through _Small Gods_, since I heard it was mostly a standalone, but there were clearly ideas in it that I was supposed to recognize from earlier books. I've heard the first few _Discworld_ novels kind of sucked, so I'm not sure what else to use as a starting point. (I have read _Only You Can Save Mankind_, though--it's absolutely brilliant.)

Can't comment on the others; I haven't read anything at all by them.


----------



## thedarknessrising

I just checked out two Terry Brooks novels because of this thread- Magic Kingom for Sale:Sold, and The Black Unicorn. I'll let you guys know what I think of them when I finish them.


----------



## J. S. Elliot

Well, so far I'm still slogging through "Wizard's First Rule". Slogging actually kind of fits my opinion about it, as I'm rather unimpressed. It's decent thus far, but with Darken Rhal's first POV, all of that background build up of why we should fear him lets go of all the steam. A detail-oriented dictator with a pedophile of a compatriot, that, oh yes, has conveniently decided to lust after the protagonist's own forbidden relationship and predictably manipulate a child. 

I'll at very least finish this book, but I'll wait until the end of it to decide if I'll look for more books in the same series by Goodkind. 


Regarding Pratchett, though, I've heard that Discworld is massive. How many stand-alones are there?


----------



## myrddin173

SeleneHime said:


> Regarding Pratchett, though, I've heard that Discworld is massive. How many stand-alones are there?



If you are feeling daunted about starting I would recommend this graphic as it sorts all of the books (though it might be missing some of the newer ones, I can't be sure) in order by plot-line.  In reality though I would suggest looking at the back cover summaries and pick the one you like most.  They are written so that you can still enjoy the story without reading them "in order."  Case in point, I have basically read the Death novels (by far my favorites) in reverse order and I was fine with it.


----------



## J. S. Elliot

Hmm. That is interesting! Thank you for the link, Myrddin.  (And the Death novels have the most interesting titles, by far.)


----------



## Twook00

I tried reading Terry Goodkind once a few years ago and didn't get very far.  I thought maybe I'd try him again sometime, then I saw this picture of him on his website:

What's Your Thought On That: The Dreaded Author Photo

That pretty much killed it for me.


----------



## Telcontar

Goodkind: I seem to be the resident Goodkind fan of the forums, and very much loved the Sword of Truth series (though it had a pretty major stumble with Pillars of Creation).

Pratchett: Read a short story by Pratchett and liked it, but for some reason have never managed to grab and read his other work. It's on my to-do list as I'm fairly certain I'll love it.

Brooks: Attempted to read Talismans of Shannara early on and found it bizarre and boring. Never tried again.


----------



## thedarknessrising

I think, disregarding what people say about Goodkind, I'll try again. Third times a charm, right?


----------



## myrddin173

Telcontar said:


> Brooks: Attempted to read Talismans of Shannara early on and found it bizarre and boring. Never tried again.



That might be due to the fact Talismans is the last in the four part Heritage of Shannara sub-series, so you missed a lot of the background necessary for that book particular book.  The way he writes you get can get away with reading each respective sub-series out of order of the other sub-series.  But you have to read the books of a particular sub-series in order. (wow that got confusing fast... Does that actually make any sense at all? Or am I just spouting nonsense at this point?)


----------



## WyrdMystic

myrddin173 said:


> That might be due to the fact Talismans is the last in the four part Heritage of Shannara sub-series, so you missed a lot of the background necessary for that book particular book.  The way he writes you get can get away with reading each respective sub-series out of order of the other sub-series.  But you have to read the books of a particular sub-series in order. (wow that got confusing fast... Does that actually make any sense at all? Or am I just spouting nonsense at this point?)



I've read all of Brook's books. I love them, however, I could not finish Talismans of Shannara - there was something just wrong about it - if I were to guess it would be the use of the four horseman of the apocolypse, though knowing how things turned out that probably makes more sense now. I still don't know how the story resolved. Strangely, book 3 was my favorite of all.


----------



## Telcontar

myrddin173 said:


> That might be due to the fact Talismans is the last in the four part Heritage of Shannara sub-series, so you missed a lot of the background necessary for that book particular book.  The way he writes you get can get away with reading each respective sub-series out of order of the other sub-series.  But you have to read the books of a particular sub-series in order. (wow that got confusing fast... Does that actually make any sense at all? Or am I just spouting nonsense at this point?)



I remember somebody told me that once, but I found nothing redeeming in that little sample so am not overwhelmingly likely to try again. Too many authors, too little time.


----------



## J. S. Elliot

Thought it was perhaps time to update this. I'm now 500 pages into "Wizard's First Rule", and unfortunately my earlier opinion of the _Sword of Truth_ series still stands - I'm not all that impressed with it. The two main characters are starting to bore me, as I am still being bludgeoned with how "forbidden" and "dangerous" their relationship is. If anything, I'm more interested in Giller; who has already been killed off. 

Will the remaining three hundred pages be, perhaps, more satisfying?


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne

All I've read from these three is Brooks's _Magic Kingdom for Sale—Sold!_ And, sadly, I didn't really enjoy it. The prose style itself was fine, and the characters themselves individually were fine, but the thing as a whole just sort of didn't hold together. The fantasy elements in the story just seemed sort of randomly assembled and strange, and the world itself didn't seem very thoroughly developed.

My wife has read it as well as the sequels and I think she liked them more than I did (well, she must have, since she continued reading them and I didn't).

I started reading one Pratchett book once but for some reason didn't get more than a few pages into it; I don't remember why, but I'm willing to give him another shot. Goodkind, from what I've heard, would just piss me off.


----------



## J. S. Elliot

Well, I've finally finished Goodkind's "Wizard's First Rule". Normally I'd knock out even an 800+ page book in two weeks even if I was busy, but I found it difficult to stay interested. There were numerous things that could've been better than they were, but they were left at the concept stage of an unaltered archetype. The fact that the book is loaded with archetypes isn't in of itself bad, but the fact that they stay archetypes really takes it's toll on the book in predictability ... also when combined with Goodkind's de ux machina in the last sixty pages. I've concluded that I won't be looking for the rest of the series in the library, and certainly won't be buying it.

So, this leaves Brooks and Pratchett in this group. Can you tell me anything specific, example wise, of why you didn't like the title mentioned in your last post, Ben?


----------



## Ireth

A warning for those looking to read Pratchett -- a number of his books have no chapters, which might make them harder to get into. If that would bother you, I'd recommend starting with _The Amazing Maurice and His Educated Rodents_ or the Tiffany Aching books: _The Wee Free Men_, _A Hat Full of Sky_, _Wintersmith_ and _I Shall Wear Midnight_. Just because they're YA doesn't mean they're any less dramatic or humorous than his more adult books, though. _I Shall Wear Midnight_ is especially dark. There's also _The Carpet People_, which I don't think is a Discworld book but is still very good.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne

SeleneHime said:


> So, this leaves Brooks and Pratchett in this group. Can you tell me anything specific, example wise, of why you didn't like the title mentioned in your last post, Ben?



It's been a few years since I read it and seeing as I didn't like it much, I haven't thought about it much, so it's hard to remember... it felt like a sort of empty land. Like, there's the king's castle, with some servants in it, and then way over here there's some people who are necessary for the plot, etc. It felt more like someone had been dropped into a realm that was invented for a D&D campaign rather than an actual place. (Which might make sense given that the protagonist initially lives in Chicago and is teleported into this magic realm... but it didn't engage me.)

The elements of it just rubbed together in a weird way and it just wasn't appealing. I don't know, I can't really think of specific details, I just remember not really enjoying it.


----------



## amadhava

I do believe I'm part of the minority - but I loved the Sword of truth series (read them all except I couldnt get through Pillars of creation the first time, and I still havent been able to bring myself to read the Law of the Nines.

I think the main reason I fell for the Sword of Truth series was that it was the fantasy version of Ayn Rand's Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. The series does try to convince you about democracy, etc - especially in Faith of the Fallen. But Goodkind does have some remarkably good imagination. The exact foundations of magic arent laid out very well, but I like Richard, and Zedd, and Adie, and Gratch and many other characters. I like the world-building too - there is a lot of black and white in his world, which is how Rand also depicts our morality (and I dont agree with that) but it's easier to digest in the fantasy world that he's created. You have to park your reservations at the door (if you don't like a book that is very direct in its philosophical arguments, to go to the level of shoving it down your throat, then dont go here  ). That being said, if I had read his facebook page before I had read the sword of truth, I probably wouldnt have like it half as much. 

But the wizard rules (around which each book is based) are elegantly written out:
(from: Sword of Truth - Wikiquote)

1:
"People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they're afraid it might be true. Peoples' heads are full of knowledge, facts and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool."
2:
"The greatest harm can result from the best intentions."
3:
"Passion rules reason."
4:
"There is magic in sincere forgiveness. Magic to heal. In forgiveness you grant, and more so in the forgiveness you receive."
5:
"Mind what people do, not only what they say, for deeds will betray a lie."
6:
"The most important rule there is, the Wizard's Sixth Rule: the only sovereign you can allow to rule you is reason. The first law of reason is this: what exists, exists, what is, is and from this irreducible bedrock principle, all knowledge is built. It is the foundation from which life is embraced." – Richard
7:
"Life is the future, not the past. The past can teach us, through experience, how to accomplish things in the future, comfort us with cherished memories, and provide the foundation of what has already been accomplished. But only the future holds life. To live in the past is to embrace what is dead. To live life to its fullest, each day must be created anew. As rational, thinking beings, we must use our intellect, not a blind devotion to what has come before, to make rational choices."
8:
"Talga Vassternich. Deserve Victory."
9:
A contradiction cannot exist in reality. Not in part, nor in whole.
10:
"Willfully turning aside from the truth is treason to one's self."
11:
"The rule of all rules. The rule unwritten." The Unwritten rule which must be experienced before true understanding. Everything exists within us; your life is your own.
12:
You can destroy those who speak the truth, but you cannot destroy the truth itself.

I've read "Druid of Shannarra" by Brooks, and I've read one Prachett. But I do want to read more Prachett because I liked his writing style - lots of dry humour. And if I find myself utterly bored and without any other book to read someday, I think I might read another book by Brooks. I don't recall much of the Druid of Shannarra but I also don't remember being thrilled with it.


----------



## Gandalf

Loved the Goodkind books. Read the entire Sword of Truth series, but the TV series is just... Ridiculous.

Pratchett is funny, remarkably so, but it gets _slightly_ excessive after 5,000,000,000,000,000,000 or something books in the same world.

Never read Brooks.


----------



## Ireth

Gandalf said:


> Pratchett is funny, remarkably so, but it gets _slightly_ excessive after 5,000,000,000,000,000,000 or something books in the same world.



I don't find it excessive at all. The great thing about creating an entire world with so many characters and places is that he can focus on different ones almost every time, and those he does return to are sure to get their share of character development. I'm quite fond of the books involving Death and his associates.


----------



## Gandalf

Yes, Death's definitely his best character. But I like the Luggage too. My favourite book is either The Colour of Magic/The Light Fantastic, or Reaper Man.


----------



## Xaysai

I'm sorry, I just couldn't enjoy the Sword of Truth series - I made it to book 4 and just couldn't take it anymore.

As discussed, his writing is a bit preachy and his characters are too, well...perfect.

As for Terry Brooks, I just tried reading the Sword of Shannara and I gotta say, it really feels like I am reading Lord of the Rings.

Really? An unlikely band of characters (a human price, elves, dwarves, half elves) join together on a quest for an ancient artifact which has the power to combat an evil army marching on their homeland, who get split up during the journey and the rest of the story is told from the viewpoints of the different groups of characters who have banded together.

I haven't read Terry Pratchett yet, but would like to!


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne

Xaysai said:


> Really? An unlikely band of characters (a human price, elves, dwarves, half elves) join together on a quest for an ancient artifact which has the power to combat an evil army marching on their homeland, who get split up during the journey and the rest of the story is told from the viewpoints of the different groups of characters who have banded together.



Beware trying to unify different stories by picking out common elements. What you described could apply to countless (published) works; that doesn't mean that stories with the same basic premise (adventurers seeking artifact to defeat evil empire) are similar in tone, themes, or execution.


----------

