[FlyingElvis]

Ok, I am reading this as a light read guilty pleasure. After reading some more serious complex fantasy, I am finding this a nice diversion AND a page turner.

But I can't help but feel like I am reading something Disney could turn into a summer blockbuster. ;)

Anyone else like this series?

[Janos]

Start writing down characters right now. See those fancy shmancy diagrams in the back of the first three books that denote family lines? Yeah... those aren't there in the next three books... (at least they weren't in the version I had)

Trying to track all the characters, and their children, and their grandchildren, and then some of their great-grandchildren got..ohh.. what's the word.... stupidly hard.

:D

[Lowlander]

I remember reading these books about 10-12 years ago. My feelings were mixed. The first book was really good and the rest of the first trilogy was OK. The second trilogy (or the next generation stuff) was a strange reading experience : I hated most of it (especially the characters you were supposed to cheer for) but on the other side I found it impossible not to go on reading. I just wanted to know the end of the story.

Rawn is very good in writing this "soap-opera" fantasy. You know it's not real quality you're reading but it's difficult to stop.

BTW, I read only recently that Rawn is returning to the fantasy field. Her new novel should be published sometime next year.

[Amaunette]

I tried reading the first book, I believe, and I was interested for the first half and then I think some weird plot twist happened that essentially made the books somewhat boring. I don't remember exactly, it was a long time ago, but I think I put it down because something unbelievable happened. Something involving a dragon, I would guess.

[FlyingElvis]

I tried reading the first book, I believe, and I was interested for the first half and then I think some weird plot twist happened that essentially made the books somewhat boring. I don't remember exactly, it was a long time ago, but I think I put it down because something unbelievable happened. Something involving a dragon, I would guess.
Well, there are plot twists, but I think the plot is the strength of the first book.

And although she develops strong characters that you care about, there is a significant amount of cheesy dialog.

[Pug]

Rawn and Dragon Prince is one of my favorites. I fell in love with the characters early on, but the connection wasn't there in the Dragon Star trilogy. I was impressed by what Rawn was willing to do to her best characters.

That said, the geneologies were in every Rawn book I had.

[Zedr0n]

I couldn't get even through the first book. The love relationship between the main heroes was just totally unbelievable for me. They just fell in love with no reason whatsoever, I didn't buy it. Yeah, maybe it does sometimes happen like this in real life, but this is way too soapy.
This is better handled in Eddings' books, or in Goodkind'(don't read the books after the fourth one, though).

[Yobmod]

B'ah double postage

[Yobmod]

I wouldn't recomend it, but then again, the first trilogy is no worse than many epics out there. The second trilogy i gave up on, after realising i wanted all the main characters to die a horrible death. Hmm, the magic system was quite interesting too, and was used for more things than shooting fireball etc.

The first book has that wierd disconnect with the plague. I didn't thank that was well done at all. It felt like Rawn had taken on too ambitious a story, and had to ruthlessly cut it down.

But the melodrama and soap-opera-ness were deliberate, and IMO well done, if thats what you are looking for.

The main relationship (between Rohan and Sioned? can't believe i remeber their names), was a bit romance-novel-esque, but is infinitely preferable to the overly complicated love-polygons of the second trilogy.

[JohnH]

For me Rawn is easily one of the masters of the field. She was one of the first to incorporate political intrigue as an ongoing motif in her work. Long before it became the now ubiquitious force it has in fantasy. In fact, her work transcends the silly title of "epic"; instead perhaps deserving her own label of political machination fantasy. Wonderfully clever at times and yet remaining very accessible. Her world is rich, her characters wonderfuly written and wonderfully flawed. Sometimes even terribly flawed. Her often brutal approach to characters and plots makes for some great reading.

Light? Hardly as the resolution to Rohan and Ianthe's situation plays out. Or Pol's at the end of the second series. Even the much vaunted gritty realism of many of the male authors that have fanbois and grrls screaming in giddy wonder over still deal in people who are lovey dovey compared to Rohan when creating heros. Disguising the hero with disreputable traits or trying to paint in strokes of gray all the while catering to what is accepte as right and wrong. The fact that Rawn is able to have Rohan emerge as still recognizably human was a rather deft turn especially as she does so without a whitewash.

I do think its funny that people couldn't keep her characters straight. Lit classes that include Tolstoy or Homer much be a nightmare then!

Not sure about the notion of love at first sight either. Rohan definitely goes to the woodpile when they first meet. But he doesn't actually begin to build a fire with it until they get to know one another. But then I always thought Eddings wrote love like it involved two ten year old kids who kissed the first time on a dare. Goodkind just produced utter trash and nothing remotely like a true realtionship. Oh he threw in plenty of nipple licking by the woman, but she was so busy just being in heat that she ends up nothing more than a hot throbbing accessory to the heaving virile might of Richard. Goodkind likely wrote bare-bosom romances before he decided to not write fantasy his approach is so incredibly and outrageous out of date and out of any scope of plausibility.