simazhi's review against another edition
5.0
I "read" these again after more than 1o years and I liked it so much that I reread it again in book form immediately afterwards. Lol.
zachswain's review against another edition
4.0
Not as good as I remember it, but still an entertaining read. The characters draw you in, that hasn't changed since I originally read this as a kid, but the story is just sort of ho-hum.
bigbookslilreads's review against another edition
2.0
Delving into classic fantasy comes with its own perils: will the characters and plot feel cliché? Good against evil? Stoicism and chivalry with a sprinkle of sexism? Check to all of those in this book, but let me elaborate.
DoAT was an adaptation of a D&D campaign and it shows.
And it was one of the authors' first foray into writing.
Aside from the weird descriptions and inclusion of D&D dynamics (e.g. kenders are immune to fear, mages have to memorise their spells at the beginning of the day, etc.), the plot itself is pretty fragmented and follows the sectioned beats of a campaign: gathering of the party, travel to the underworld... It is also not the most original. A great evil, that does not remain mysterious for very long, is threatening the whole world, and this motley crew decides to destroy it because... just because.
While those aspects could have been made more enjoyable, it wasn't the predictability or the use of known tropes that earned DoAT this rating. Instead, it was the characterisation, that did not go beyond the standard D&D initial players-style. By this I mean that there was a clinging to basic character stereotypes: the stoic and silent type, the lawful and grumpy knight, the pure-of-heart cleric, the hesitant leader... These tropes were not developed to allow for more interesting characters and character dynamics, therefore making the story feel tedious and stagnant.
I will say that the from 60% on the writing and pacing gets better. However, the characterisation remained at the same level. I would've DNFd if I wasn't keen on joining my book club's discussions.
Perhaps this is a good choice for children or early teens getting started in the fantasy genre. But I would try to steer away from it, if at all possible. There are better options, like [b:Eragon|113436|Eragon (The Inheritance Cycle, #1)|Christopher Paolini|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1366212852l/113436._SX50_.jpg|3178011], for that.
DoAT was an adaptation of a D&D campaign and it shows.
And it was one of the authors' first foray into writing.
Aside from the weird descriptions and inclusion of D&D dynamics (e.g. kenders are immune to fear, mages have to memorise their spells at the beginning of the day, etc.), the plot itself is pretty fragmented and follows the sectioned beats of a campaign: gathering of the party, travel to the underworld... It is also not the most original. A great evil, that does not remain mysterious for very long, is threatening the whole world, and this motley crew decides to destroy it because... just because.
While those aspects could have been made more enjoyable, it wasn't the predictability or the use of known tropes that earned DoAT this rating. Instead, it was the characterisation, that did not go beyond the standard D&D initial players-style. By this I mean that there was a clinging to basic character stereotypes: the stoic and silent type, the lawful and grumpy knight, the pure-of-heart cleric, the hesitant leader... These tropes were not developed to allow for more interesting characters and character dynamics, therefore making the story feel tedious and stagnant.
I will say that the from 60% on the writing and pacing gets better. However, the characterisation remained at the same level. I would've DNFd if I wasn't keen on joining my book club's discussions.
Perhaps this is a good choice for children or early teens getting started in the fantasy genre. But I would try to steer away from it, if at all possible. There are better options, like [b:Eragon|113436|Eragon (The Inheritance Cycle, #1)|Christopher Paolini|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1366212852l/113436._SX50_.jpg|3178011], for that.
thecolourblue's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
Feels kinda silly to rate this one since it's total nostaligic comfort-food reading.
Honestly, I re-read this cos I was feeling ill and curled up in bed in a hotel while moving apartments, feeling stressed out and shitty, and I wanted something that was an easy popcorn read where I could switch my brain off and just feel a sense of familiarity, and the book gave me that.
I first read this series (plus the Twins books) when I was in my early teens, and I wasn't sure how they would hold up, but they actaully do. Yes, it's formulaic as all hell. Yes, the plot moves for the sake of convienence. Yes, there is some 1980s cringe and some borderline offensive tropes. Yes, it's a D&D book. Just let me have my sick-day read.
Also, unrepentent team Raistlin. He might be an asshole, but he's a fabulous asshole.
Honestly, I re-read this cos I was feeling ill and curled up in bed in a hotel while moving apartments, feeling stressed out and shitty, and I wanted something that was an easy popcorn read where I could switch my brain off and just feel a sense of familiarity, and the book gave me that.
I first read this series (plus the Twins books) when I was in my early teens, and I wasn't sure how they would hold up, but they actaully do. Yes, it's formulaic as all hell. Yes, the plot moves for the sake of convienence. Yes, there is some 1980s cringe and some borderline offensive tropes. Yes, it's a D&D book. Just let me have my sick-day read.
Also, unrepentent team Raistlin. He might be an asshole, but he's a fabulous asshole.
scroggin_cooper's review against another edition
3.0
3.5/5
Liked:
1. The characters' relationships. I can genuinely say that these characters do genuinely seem like they were childhood friends. They bounce off each other, have quarrels, and get each other out of sticky situations that they got themselves into. I can also genuinely say the characters have distinct personalities. Tas is a kleptomaniacal miscreant, Flint is as stubborn as a mule, and Raistlin is a sleazy weirdo.
2. The story. The story is quite cookie-cutter and you can tell that DnD sessions and the Lord of the Rings heavily inspired it. I quite enjoy DnD, Lord of the Rings, and cookies, so this was a triple win.
3. The use of dragons. Dragons are quite literally my favorite magical creatures, and the way Weis and Hickman use them as antagonists and huge pieces of this world's lore is just terrific.
Disliked:
1. Riverwind. Riverwind should have stayed dead. It completely annihilates any stakes they were trying to establish. Riverwind also sucks.
2. Blatant ripping off. Now this isn't like Terry Goodkind stuff, where the authors deny they didn't steal anything, but it's still really clear they were HEAVILY inspired by Lord of the Rings. A wizard even falls down a gorge and is presumed dead after fighting an evil creature.
3. Tika tagging along for no reason. Now I understand her home was destroyed, but she didn't have to tag along with the squad for 200 pages and add nothing to the plot.
Liked:
1. The characters' relationships. I can genuinely say that these characters do genuinely seem like they were childhood friends. They bounce off each other, have quarrels, and get each other out of sticky situations that they got themselves into. I can also genuinely say the characters have distinct personalities. Tas is a kleptomaniacal miscreant, Flint is as stubborn as a mule, and Raistlin is a sleazy weirdo.
2. The story. The story is quite cookie-cutter and you can tell that DnD sessions and the Lord of the Rings heavily inspired it. I quite enjoy DnD, Lord of the Rings, and cookies, so this was a triple win.
3. The use of dragons. Dragons are quite literally my favorite magical creatures, and the way Weis and Hickman use them as antagonists and huge pieces of this world's lore is just terrific.
Disliked:
1. Riverwind. Riverwind should have stayed dead. It completely annihilates any stakes they were trying to establish. Riverwind also sucks.
2. Blatant ripping off. Now this isn't like Terry Goodkind stuff, where the authors deny they didn't steal anything, but it's still really clear they were HEAVILY inspired by Lord of the Rings. A wizard even falls down a gorge and is presumed dead after fighting an evil creature.
3. Tika tagging along for no reason. Now I understand her home was destroyed, but she didn't have to tag along with the squad for 200 pages and add nothing to the plot.
speedracer's review against another edition
adventurous
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.5
charleycrabb0's review against another edition
I might come back to this, it just felt like it didn't have much heart.
dj92's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.25