[OB] Underwhelming

[Alderant she/her]

Just now, Walkerxes said:

Pssshhh no no no! It's because none of you understood the series. Only the most discerning of readers can comprehend it! XD 

Granted, there are some people out there who enjoy that kind of thing, and there's nothing wrong with that. R.A. Salvatore's Drizzt Do'Urden series is like that, though it's certainly less intricate plot detail. And please don't mistake me in saying that the Malazan books are bad--there's an incredible amount of plot detail and stuff going on behind the scenes that indicates impressive world-building. But my thing in a series is characters. I love character arcs, so character-driven fiction, combined with intricate political plots and awe-inspiring world plots (which is often what a lot of epic fantasy is, as opposed to high fantasy) is fascinating to me. I can appreciate a good plot, I can even appreciate intricate magic systems, but what really motivates me to read is the characters, and if those are lacking, I get bored.

[agrabes]

13 minutes ago, Alderant said:

Granted, there are some people out there who enjoy that kind of thing, and there's nothing wrong with that. R.A. Salvatore's Drizzt Do'Urden series is like that, though it's certainly less intricate plot detail. And please don't mistake me in saying that the Malazan books are bad--there's an incredible amount of plot detail and stuff going on behind the scenes that indicates impressive world-building. But my thing in a series is characters. I love character arcs, so character-driven fiction, combined with intricate political plots and awe-inspiring world plots (which is often what a lot of epic fantasy is, as opposed to high fantasy) is fascinating to me. I can appreciate a good plot, I can even appreciate intricate magic systems, but what really motivates me to read is the characters, and if those are lacking, I get bored.

Exactly - well written series of books but completely not to my taste.  I might have liked the books better if they had been a series of prequels - if I knew and loved the end point of where they were going and was looking forward to learning how they got there then I think I might have liked them better.  As it was, I just wasn't interested due to the fact that the books were not character driven and learning about the plot itself was not enough of a payoff for me to keep reading.

[Calderis he/him]

Any time a series is described as "to complicated for most readers" I take that as a sign of readers being overly defensive of the story they happen to like. 

I can understand philosophy texts. Your fiction isn't more complicated than that. 

[Walkerxes]

16 minutes ago, Alderant said:

Granted, there are some people out there who enjoy that kind of thing, and there's nothing wrong with that. R.A. Salvatore's Drizzt Do'Urden series is like that, though it's certainly less intricate plot detail. And please don't mistake me in saying that the Malazan books are bad--there's an incredible amount of plot detail and stuff going on behind the scenes that indicates impressive world-building. But my thing in a series is characters. I love character arcs, so character-driven fiction, combined with intricate political plots and awe-inspiring world plots (which is often what a lot of epic fantasy is, as opposed to high fantasy) is fascinating to me. I can appreciate a good plot, I can even appreciate intricate magic systems, but what really motivates me to read is the characters, and if those are lacking, I get bored.

Agreed. Without the interpersonal relationships, things get dull for me. 

Admittedly I was poking a bit of fun at Iron, with his very lotr fan response to people who don't like the series he likes.. but as I've never read it, I can't judge. It may well be that if I did read it, I'd enjoy it.. I may even look it up and try it out, as I'm always looking for something new to delve into!

[Walkerxes]

1 minute ago, Calderis said:

Any time a series is described as "to complicated for most readers" I take that as a sign of readers being overly defensive of the story they happen to like. 

I can understand philosophy texts. Your fiction isn't more complicated than that. 

This is a very lotr fan response to me. "You're just not sophisticated enough to like this series I like"

[RShara she/her]

Guys, let's make sure to stick to the debate, and not the person.

[Stark he/him]

6 minutes ago, Calderis said:

Any time a series is described as "to complicated for most readers" I take that as a sign of readers being overly defensive of the story they happen to like. 

I can understand philosophy texts. Your fiction isn't more complicated than that. 

Thanks Calderis for voicing this politely!

 

I tried reading it and got bored.  But the best way to start an argument is to tell me I did not like something because it was too complicated for me to understand.  If you like it, that is fantastic, and more power to you.  Please do not insult my intelligence because I disagree with you.  Ad hominem is the easiest logical fallacy to fall prey to.  I did not like Gardens of the moon and stopped reading it, you did like it and read the whole series.  Both are acceptable stances.  No need to be antagonistic about it.

 

Edit: @IronBars I'm sorry you found OB to be underwhelming.  I'm in the camp it was awesome.  I don't think we'll be changing your mind any time soon based on how this thread is progressing.  I hope you find more to enjoy in subsequent entries.  Until then, agree to disagree?

Edited February 19, 2018 by Stark

[Alderant she/her]

1 minute ago, Stark said:

I tried reading it and got bored.  But the best way to start an argument is to tell me I did not like something because it was too complicated for me to understand.  If you like it, that is fantastic, and more power to you.  Please do not insult my intelligence because I disagree with you.  Ad hominem is the easiest logical fallacy to fall prey to.  I did not like Gardens of the moon and stopped reading it, you did like it and read the whole series.  Both are acceptable stances.  No need to be antagonistic about it.

Exactly the point I was trying to make earlier.

[RShara she/her]

2 minutes ago, Stark said:

Thanks Calderis for voicing this politely!

 

I tried reading it and got bored.  But the best way to start an argument is to tell me I did not like something because it was too complicated for me to understand.  If you like it, that is fantastic, and more power to you.  Please do not insult my intelligence because I disagree with you.  Ad hominem is the easiest logical fallacy to fall prey to.  I did not like Gardens of the moon and stopped reading it, you did like it and read the whole series.  Both are acceptable stances.  No need to be antagonistic about it.

I didn't like it either.  I feel like, saying "It's complicated in a way that isn't to everyone's taste" is one thing, but "It's just too complicated for you to understand" is kinda insulting.

[Walkerxes]

3 minutes ago, RShara said:

Guys, let's make sure to stick to the debate, and not the person.

Noted. You're right.

Moral of the story, I did not, in fact, find OB underwhelming.. did stuff happen that I was not expecting? Yes. Did things I wanted to happen happen? Not always, but in the end, I was very pleased with it and felt satisfied as a whole.

[RShara she/her]

3 minutes ago, Walkerxes said:

Noted. You're right.

Moral of the story, I did not, in fact, find OB underwhelming.. did stuff happen that I was not expecting? Yes. Did things I wanted to happen happen? Not always, but in the end, I was very pleased with it and felt satisfied as a whole.

Agreed.

[IronBars he/him]

Ok i have a few people to reply to here so bare with me, 

1 hour ago, Bort said:

Apparently not, otherwise you'd be on the same page as the rest of us, with regards to the various pieces of foreshadowing that has been seen. I'm not saying you would have spotted all of them, or even came to the same conclusions as the rest of us, but your arguments in this very thread tell us that you missed loads of stuff. Only now you're claiming you didn't miss it at all. Only, if you didn't miss it all, you wouldn't have the problems you do with Oathbringer.

This is probably one the mosy conceited things iv ever read on any forum from someone.and i actually don't think you have read this entire thread after it, 

I'd ask you to pleass list what i "missed" in your opinion and show instances from the thread that prove i missed them,

Also expecting everyone to be on the same page as you regards a book is ridiculous.

1 hour ago, Walkerxes said:

That's not necessarily true.. everyone interprets things differently. Hence the flaws with The Diagram

With Teft, though.. why wasn't he addicted in twok? No access, no spheres. Why not in WoR? Not a lot of limelight, but also, still striving to not fail Kaladin and bridge 4.. by OB he'd lost his battle and fell off the wagon. Not a big stretch to believe he'd fall off the wagon between those 3 books.. I've seen people follow similar progressions with alcohol in real life. It still annoyed me, but I understood it.

I actually also believe that part of what happened with Teft was put in to show that not all of the ideals are exactly the same.. "I will protect those I hate, if it is right" vs "I will protect those I hate, even if the one I hate is myself"

This is fine, my point was the level of addiction shown in OB doesnt match up with the moments of foreshadowing seen in tWoK and WoR, what we see in those books is hits toward an alcohol/gambling addiction, not what in my opinion is the equivalent of a meth/heroin addiction, i say this because as i said before the state we see teft in has more parallels with someone addicted to those drugs then as a different poster mentioned something like canabis.

In the WoR, teft had access to spheres, had opportunities to rob spheres even had opportunities to loot the dead for spheres, 

So that would of been more an indication of foreshadowing the levels of addiction seen in OB, 

That is my opinion.

1 hour ago, RShara said:

Guys, arguing about opinion is really not going to get anyone anywhere Some people liked how OB went, some didn't.  Each opinion is valid, and I hope that if OB disappointed you, that SA 4+ will be more what you are hoping for.

 

I, personally, would do a reread of the entire series, checking for foreshadowing and hints as to things that you didn't expect, to see if they are there, before claiming they shouldn't be there, but that's me.

Answered this above i think.

1 hour ago, Alderant said:

Admittedly, I'm coming into this discussion late, but I'd like to make some observations here:

First, @IronBars, if you want to perpetuate a discussion, you need to tone down your arguments, bud. Reading through all three pages, I get the repeated consistency that you're either A) getting too heated in this debate, or B ), you're not rereading your replies before posting them because you're coming off quite abrasive and antagonistic. Good discussion is perpetuated when both sides are willing to discuss what they have read, which I have seen several people attempt to do on here. You, however, are not encouraging a discussion--you do, however, appear to be perpetuating an argument where you're not willing to budge unless everyone else deigns to acknowledge how right you are, which most people appear to not be. I, and many others I'm sure, don't mind discussing the particulars of OB with you--however, in order for that to occur, you have to get off your high horse and actually read between the lines of what others are saying, and not simply react off the cuff to whatever you disagree with. Acknowledging someone else's arguments, even if you disagree, goes a long way to perpetuating an open forum.

Ok with this, the main thing i think your noticing is the fact im using my phone to post not a laptop, so more difficult to proof read posts to see how they come across.

The very first person who replied to my original post made a good point about one of my points, which i said she was right straght away and further down when was mentioned again i addressed that i no longer seen it that way, so what your saying there is incorrect.

Also im not sure where in the world you are from or anyone else for that matter so maybe we just have different ways of talking leading you to believe something that is not the case.

1 hour ago, Alderant said:

Second, punctuation and spelling. This is largely one of the reasons your arguments are coming across as off the cuff, rather than carefully considered. Lack of proofreading makes it difficult to read your words without frustration.

I dealt with this point above, i think.

1 hour ago, Alderant said:

Third, while I understand you're disappointed by Oathbringer, I found most of your points to be the opposite in actuality. However, judging from the way you write and the complaints you raise, I'm assuming you prefer overt developments rather than subtle. I'm also assuming you prefer conflicts to occur through big moments, rather than small developments here and there, and I imagine you probably disliked The Well of Ascension because it dragged on for you. If I'm wrong, I would love for you to enlighten me on how exactly, because as I see it, Oathbringer was a phenomenal book for plot and character development.

Ok i broke point 3 into 2 sections.

Firstly let me say i find the way in which your speaking here insulting and an attempt at belittling both me and my opinion.

My opinion of the book and yours do not have to be the same, 

You make a lot of assumptions here based on nothing substantial, i gave my opinion on one book and from this brief thing you assume this and that, just because my opinion doesnt match yours on one thing ie OB, doesnt mean you can assume what you just did.

Someone keeps mentioning malazan like its the only other book iv ever read, but for this il mention it, the MBoTF is one my favourite series and is a very very subtle series, using that as an example to answer your question about not liking subtety.

1 hour ago, Alderant said:

. I agree that while the character arcs were largely shunted aside in favor of the overall plot, as @Calderis and @maxal noted, to say that no character development occurred at all in OB is to basically say you either didn't comprehend the development, or you were frustrated by the lack of progress that occurred. Overall, there was a lot of development for Kaladin, Dalinar, and Shallan. That has been noted repeatedly on here. The development was not generally forward (progress) for Kaladin or Shallan, but that does not mean that they did not change.

Here again you it comes across like trying to insult me, "didnt comprehend the devolopment" 

Again i point out our opinions dont need to match i have said numerous times for the length of this novel the character progression was minimal, story progression was also minimal, and i pointed out why, people have pointed out how they thought the opposite in every instance i said that was fine or some variation of that. Im not trying to push my opinion on others im just stating mine, and as people state theirs i just repeat mine, what iv noticed is alot of people seem to justify the choices of the author and just back them up rather then see what im saying. You seem to fall into that catagory.

1 hour ago, Alderant said:

Fourth, I've noted this elsewhere but I'll say it again here: Lightweavers do not swear ideals beyond the first. Unlike Kaladin, who literally binds himself to an ideal (i.e. I will protect those who cannot protect themselves), Shallan binds herself to an aspect of self-awareness. We call these Truths, but they do not operate the same way that ideals do--Shallan can't "mean" her Truth before she makes it because it is an ongoing process of self awareness.

I also addressed this at the time. 

I said once shallan says a truth it should mean she embraces that truth......which doesn't happen. 

1 hour ago, Alderant said:

Finally, I would do as @RShara recommended above:

I do this routinely, and it helps me to see things develop. Brandon writes foreshadowing all over the place--but he also writes in an avalanche style. His books start off slow, then build, and build, and build, until they're racing down the plot mountainside and reach "the big moment" near the end, and being able to see these things happening with a fresh eye helps me enjoy them a tremendous amount more.

The plot to OB was glacial up until book 5, it didnt build in plodded in my opinion.

1 hour ago, agrabes said:

I think I read the first two full books, then quit somewhere in the third.  I wouldn't say that Malazan was too complicated for me to understand, but I would say that by the point where I was in the story I just wasn't enjoying it.  The reason for that is that the books up to where I was in the story did not tell a continuous story about a few characters - it told the story of an entire world and what was happening in that world.  I would get to a point where I was finally warmed up to a certain character and looking forward to reading about his/her story and right at that point they would disappear from the narrative.  It was like someone telling a history of a country and trying to explain why things were a certain way - you can't tell the history of China without fleshing out Ghengis Khan and the Mongols, but you also have to make sure they are only a small part of the overall story and they are completely out of the picture once their part is done.  If you really care a lot about the story of China overall the Mongols are just a nice bit of flavor to an overall great story.  On the other hand, if you're just looking for a good story you'd rather hear about the Mongols or the Romance of the Three Kingdoms and less about the many minor wars, conflicts, and periods of social strife over the thousands of years of Chinese history.

Malazan is the complete Chinese history being thrown out with no introduction.  There are a lot of people it's just not going to appeal to.

I have heard that a lot of the characters who appear to be complete throwaways eventually come back and that some characters eventually become true major characters who drive the story.  I just wasn't willing to continue to put in the time to get to that point.  I get that for fans of the series the selling point is that this whole huge, seemingly unconnected set of stories all comes together at the end, but for me I could not push through to the point where things started coming together because the lead up was not fun for me to read.

The stories in malazan alternate approx every 2 books so you see characters every 2 books and a different set the other ones, gardens of the moon was wrote maybe 10 years before its sequel hes writing style changed vastly from that point onwards. Malazan drops you in the middle of things and you either sink or swim, its a love it or hate it series.

1 hour ago, Alderant said:

You get a cookie. I think you phrased well the point other people were trying to make.

  Reveal hidden contents

EDIT:

That was my general gist of the series as well, though I haven't read more than the first book and a half. The premise was interesting, and even the stuff going on behind the scenes was interesting, but the characters were so dull, opaque, and lacking of motivations that there was nothing actually driving the plot forward for me. I got bored listening to the audiobook, and that was the only way I could even make it through the text.

I find it very amusing you insinute i didnt like OB because of subtety when malazan is prob one the most subtle book series ever wrote. 

You dont see me assuming you dont like subtety because of it or claiming you couldnt "comprehend" the series based on your post sharing an opinion on it though.

[RShara she/her]

How about we all assume apologies for any inadvertent or deliberate personal denigrations, and move on before the thread gets locked?  Who's with me?

[Yezrien]

Maybe this is what Brandon was hinting at with the "art is expectation" speech. If something underwhelms you, it's only because you expected something different.

Oathbringer is the third book in a 10-book series. We're moving into the long middle of the Stormlight Archive, and we should calibrate our expectations accordingly. From here to book nine, every book must deal with conflicts that were introduced in an earlier book, but won't be resolved until a later one. And now that we're hooked, and the main plot is underway, the series can become less episodic. It'll become harder and harder to judge each book individually.

(That being said, Oathbringer blew me away.)

[IronBars he/him]

25 minutes ago, Stark said:

Edit: @IronBars I'm sorry you found OB to be underwhelming.  I'm in the camp it was awesome.  I don't think we'll be changing your mind any time soon based on how this thread is progressing.  I hope you find more to enjoy in subsequent entries.  Until then, agree to disagree?

If you noticed, all iv done is share my opinion on it, anyone who said they loved the book i said that was fine, it was great etc that they did, i just said why i didnt, personnally i found people to be trying to change my opinion on it rather then listening to why i felt how i did and justify the authors choices rather theb have an actual opinion of there own.

The perfect example to this is my thoughts in tefts addiction, and dalinar, everything i said i ended with imo or in my opinion,

The perfect example of this being alderant and bort.

I wss a member of this site a long time ago, i recall why i left now, say something against the praise sanderson mantra and basically get attacked and insulted, 

[IronBars he/him]

46 minutes ago, Calderis said:

Any time a series is described as "to complicated for most readers" I take that as a sign of readers being overly defensive of the story they happen to like. 

I can understand philosophy texts. Your fiction isn't more complicated than that. 

Only seen this now and wasnt directed as an insult just poor wording on part, if you were offended or insulted i apologise.

I understand how you feel there becausde its siniliar to how i stated feeling awhile ago with people

[Calderis he/him]

3 minutes ago, IronBars said:

Only seen this now and wasnt directed as an insult just poor wording on part, if you were offended or insulted i apologise.

I understand how you feel there becausde its siniliar to how i stated feeling awhile ago with people

Didn't take offense, but I can absolutely see how people do to that phrasing.

I'm not trying to change your opinion, just trying to understand. It's why I've asked specific questions of you on why you feel certain ways about things. 

[+Ravioli]

10 minutes ago, IronBars said:

 

The perfect example of this being alderant and bort.

I wss a member of this site a long time ago, i recall why i left now, say something against the praise sanderson mantra and basically get attacked and insulted, 

I don't really see anyone attacking or insulting you. They're not getting any more heated than you are. How about we all just step back and understand that sometimes we might not agree, even in a fundamental sense. 

[WhiteLeeopard she/her]

6 hours ago, IronBars said:

Its not enough to say the words, you have to mean them, we see this will kaladin and the 4th ideal he couldnt speak the 4th ideal because he couldnt really mean it.

Shallen should of been the same with her 4th ideal/truth, to say it you have to embrace it, mean it, live it etc, she did the opposite so she either shouldnt be on the 4th ideal stage or she can lie and advance through the ideals that way.

Thats how i see it, if thats not the case then was no need for her to say the 4th ideal/truth atal......

The way I see it, Shallan said the 4th ideal before she was ready because it was either say it or all the alethi army died. I think when a KR is close enough to their next ideal but not quite ready they can say it, but they can have a bad backlash from an Oath said before they are ready for it. I think Kaladin could have said the 4th ideal, because he knew the words, it was just very hard for him as he wasn't quite ready. If Dalinar hadn't made the perpendicularity then Kaladin would have likely said the 4th Oath, saved the day, then been a mess for a few months as he came to terms with having said an Ideal a bit too early. 

I understand why Shallan regressed, but I still hated it. Shallan was so boring for me, even more than in TWoK. I'll probably skip her chapters on re-reads same as I do in WoK and first part of WoR. It was interesting when she spoke with Hoid, but the rest of her was yawn-worthy.

3 hours ago, Calderis said:

 My only issues with OB are some pacing problems. It's not Brandon's greatest ever, but the characters progress naturally other than Moash's abrupt 180.

Moash wasn't a 180. You can dessert, you can betray your country, you can lie, cheat, steal, but if you betray your friends you are rotten to the core and there is nothing that can fix you. It was obvious from the end of WoR he'd walk the most vile path imaginable.

Main character that was tossed to the wind was Amaram. Teft also caught me by surprise. Nale's reasoning still seems bogus for me. I'm a bit surprised Szeth swore to Dalinar and not Kaladin, as Kaladin made more sense simply because he is a Windrunner, and Szeth shouldn't know much of Dalinar. Those were my main surprises that I wouldn't have predicted characterwise based on their personality and past actions.

[IronBars he/him]

Just now, Calderis said:

Didn't take offense, but I can absolutely see how people do to that phrasing.

I'm not trying to change your opinion, just trying to understand. It's why I've asked specific questions of you on why you feel certain ways about things. 

What i said is actually how the author of that series describes the books himself in the foreword of his first book, so in no way shape or form was it meaning as an insult. 

I didnt mention you in the changing of opinion thing.

1 minute ago, Ravioli said:

I don't really see anyone attacking or insulting you. They're not getting any more heated than you are. How about we all just step back and understand that sometimes we might not agree, even in a fundamental sense. 

Read borts and alterand and you should see what i mean

[RShara she/her]

5 minutes ago, IronBars said:

Read borts and alterand and you should see what i mean

I don't see any deliberate insults here.  I see a miscommunication and people expressing unhappiness because of it.

[IronBars he/him]

3 minutes ago, WhiteLeeopard said:

The way I see it, Shallan said the 4th ideal before she was ready because it was either say it or all the alethi army died. I think when a KR is close enough to their next ideal but not quite ready they can say it, but they can have a bad backlash from an Oath said before they are ready for it. I think Kaladin could have said the 4th ideal, because he knew the words, it was just very hard for him as he wasn't quite ready. If Dalinar hadn't made the perpendicularity then Kaladin would have likely said the 4th Oath, saved the day, then been a mess for a few months as he came to terms with having said an Ideal a bit too early. 

That is a good point about shallan, to me personally, i just would of preferred if she embraced it and moved forward it was a good opportunity to go in that direction and made sense if she went that way instead she regressed which by what you said there seems more plausible because the effect of not being ready,  but makes more sense to me if can only say an ideal/truth if mean/embrace it.

 

[Walkerxes]

Iron bars, in the end I respect your opinion that, for you, OB was not what you were hoping for. For me, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I respectfully disagree with some of your points, and agree on others. 

For me, the book fit. Both with character development and plot development. In a 10 book series, you can't move that fast, and I feel OB progressed the story as much as was needed.

[Bort he/him]

40 minutes ago, IronBars said:

This is probably one the mosy conceited things iv ever read on any forum from someone.and i actually don't think you have read this entire thread after it, 

I'd ask you to pleass list what i "missed" in your opinion and show instances from the thread that prove i missed them,

Also expecting everyone to be on the same page as you regards a book is ridiculous.

Well, you do start off by missing pretty much all of the foreshadowing about Teft. From your OP:

Quote

teft suddenly being a crack head was a bit weird, and out the blue

Multiple people in the thread pointed out instances where it was foreshadowed that something was up with Teft. It was never explicitly stated what his problem was until Oathbringer, but the signs he had a problem were there.

Also from your OP:

Quote

Was obvious the humans were the real voidbringers since book 1, found this revelation to be kinda silly and it being the reason for the recreance a bit of a cop out.

You apparently missed the explicitly explained reason for the Recreance, and that wasn't even foreshadowing. That was outright explained.

From another of your posts:

Quote

In 99% of oathbreaker shallan is the same as in WoR, and to a certain degree TWoK, her character has devoloped atal......

Again, not really foreshadowing, but you apparently missed all of Shallan's lessons in all three books.

Like I said in my post you call conceited, it's your arguments that make it clear you have missed parts of the story.

Edited February 19, 2018 by Bort
Sorry, trying to fix quotes... Not working.

[Alderant she/her]

Sigh...

2 minutes ago, IronBars said:

Ok with this, the main thing i think your noticing is the fact im using my phone to post not a laptop, so more difficult to proof read posts to see how they come across.

The very first person who replied to my original post made a good point about one of my points, which i said she was right straght away and further down when was mentioned again i addressed that i no longer seen it that way, so what your saying there is incorrect.

Also im not sure where in the world you are from or anyone else for that matter so maybe we just have different ways of talking leading you to believe something that is not the case.

Okay. First off, I read through all three pages, and over the course of those three pages your writing became more insulting, and more haphazard the more often you posted. To contradict me when I'm analyzing three pages by point out a reply to one of the very first replies, does not reflect that that behavior continued on throughout the discussion, hence my point. Second, it doesn't matter where I'm from, but perhaps you should take a look at how other people are reacting to your arguments throughout the thread--it's clearly not me imagining in my own different way of talking. Perhaps you're not getting heated--if so, then the need for going back and rereading your posts is even more tantamount.

6 minutes ago, IronBars said:

I dealt with this point above, i think.

I'm not going to play grammar nazi on you, but the punctuation is much better in this post, so thank you.

7 minutes ago, IronBars said:

Ok i broke point 3 into 2 sections.

Firstly let me say i find the way in which your speaking here insulting and an attempt at belittling both me and my opinion.

My opinion of the book and yours do not have to be the same, 

You make a lot of assumptions here based on nothing substantial, i gave my opinion on one book and from this brief thing you assume this and that, just because my opinion doesnt match yours on one thing ie OB, doesnt mean you can assume what you just did.

Someone keeps mentioning malazan like its the only other book iv ever read, but for this il mention it, the MBoTF is one my favourite series and is a very very subtle series, using that as an example to answer your question about not liking subtety.

Here again you it comes across like trying to insult me, "didnt comprehend the devolopment" 

Again i point out our opinions dont need to match i have said numerous times for the length of this novel the character progression was minimal, story progression was also minimal, and i pointed out why, people have pointed out how they thought the opposite in every instance i said that was fine or some variation of that. Im not trying to push my opinion on others im just stating mine, and as people state theirs i just repeat mine, what iv noticed is alot of people seem to justify the choices of the author and just back them up rather then see what im saying. You seem to fall into that catagory.

I'm not trying to be insulting, so if that's coming across I apologize. I do make assumptions based on the way you write and the arguments you've made (I do that with everyone on here)--but if you notice, I also gave you free reign to tell me I'm wrong. The fact that I'm telling you what assumptions I'm making, rather than simply attacking based on those assumptions, is also indicative that I'm not trying to insult you. However, I do naturally have a slightly acerbic way of speaking (I have to carefully proofread and sometimes I miss it) so that's probably what you're picking up on.

To counter your point about our opinions not having to match, however (which you are making a repeated point of in this post, and which point I don't actually disagree with), you have practically bludgeoned your point across the thread--others in this post have tried to voice their own thoughts, backing them up with textual evidence, and when they do, instead of simply ignoring it as you are trying to paint yourself, you've actively and antagonistically argued with those who oppose your view. If you're going to post in a forum, you have to expect discussion. Discussion is about the exchange of ideas and thoughts. What you've done here is simply argue with everyone you don't agree with--you're not backing up your arguments with any evidence or even your own examples--you're just saying they're wrong. And that is not good for a forum.

As for the last sentence, you're making an assumption that I blindly follow whatever the author's intent is, thereby contradicting your own comment that you don't make assumptions about me. For the record, I don't blindly follow the author. But I do read a large variety of "epic fantasy" and I do observe that there are certain trends in writing things. I take the author's intent into account, but I make my own judgements and thoughts on the material. You'll notice for example, if you look at other boards, I'm quite firm on my interpretation of Shallan as a character.

15 minutes ago, IronBars said:

I said once shallan says a truth it should mean she embraces that truth......which doesn't happen.

You're right. She doesn't. In fact, her reticence to embrace that truth is what propels her into the regressive arc of the book. Just because she doesn't embrace the truth doesn't mean that she doesn't develop as a character.

20 minutes ago, IronBars said:

I find it very amusing you insinute i didnt like OB because of subtety when malazan is prob one the most subtle book series ever wrote. 

You dont see me assuming you dont like subtety because of it or claiming you couldnt "comprehend" the series based on your post sharing an opinion on it though.

You know what? You're right. I'm sorry for that comprehend comment. I didn't intend it the way that it apparently came across.

That said, I believe I actually acknowledged some of the subtlety in the plot detail in my post about this. I did however, lament the character progression as non-existent. In the little bit of Malazan that I read, the characters were simply objects that the plot acted upon. They had almost no life to me. Not that the dialogue wasn't good or anything, but the actual arcs of the characters were non-existent. Because of that, I got bored. But that doesn't mean you're a bad person or incompetent or anything of the sort because you feel differently--it's great that you have something you love. I actually love Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time, specifically the books in the middle that most people find dull and boring. I think they're awesome, and there's nothing wrong with that either.

For that matter, I'm not trying to change your opinion either. Bygones is bygones. You can have your own opinion. That's fine. But if you're going to post your opinion in a forum, you have to be prepared for people like me, who like to back up their arguments and have actual discussions. No insults intended.