Active Users:1202 Time:22/11/2024 04:38:19 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
I'm sitting here trying to think if I've read any books like that... Brian Send a noteboard - 21/09/2009 01:40:08 AM
Being the pedantic person I am, I'd argue that there is no more suspense in such a situation than there would otherwise be, though when the bigger army wins there would be a surprise.

However, even if the bigger army were to win, it would have to lead to some other event happening that would make the victory hollow (like in Sanderson's Mistborn, where the rebel army is crushed but it leads to other events). After all, if the big army wins, and wins totally, with no other event to mitigate the victory, there's no more story - it's just a static situation.


The good guy's army is outnumbered, gets crushed by the bad guys army, and that's it. Game over, good guys lose. I can think of lots of books where the good guys don't win win, but off the top of my head I am having trouble thinking of any where they outright lose.

I suppose you have some of the heroic tragedy type books where they lose...but even in those there is usually something redeeming. I kinda want to read one where it's just a total crushing loss. Nothing heroic, no redeeming factors, just a terrible loss and that's the end of it. Not because I think I'd necessarily like it, more to see how much I would hate it (although I'm sure if it was done right I could like it).
Reply to message
Ever notice how in fantasy books the smaller army always wins? Murtach74 - 20/09/2009 01:01:18 PM 1223 Views
Re: Ever notice how in fantasy books the smaller army always wins? Dunja - 20/09/2009 01:17:00 PM 840 Views
Well, usually the bigger army are the invaders. Defence tends to have an edge AgentOrange - 20/09/2009 04:38:45 PM 877 Views
It's an essential plot device Tom - 20/09/2009 04:41:04 PM 883 Views
Yeah but... Murtach74 - 20/09/2009 07:38:36 PM 845 Views
I don't quite agree Tom - 21/09/2009 01:22:45 AM 790 Views
I'm sitting here trying to think if I've read any books like that... Brian - 21/09/2009 01:40:08 AM 719 Views
Fail. Seriana Sedai - 21/09/2009 04:43:24 AM 933 Views
Agreed. Tom - 21/09/2009 04:59:39 AM 825 Views
Well there are plenty of authors not in their right minds Brian - 21/09/2009 05:49:22 PM 745 Views
True. Seriana Sedai - 21/09/2009 06:50:43 PM 823 Views
Hrmm...guess Miéville failed to follow the script then *NM* Larry - 20/09/2009 07:48:29 PM 300 Views
and a lot of others. But there's a rumour somewhere that it's not the size that matters... *NM* jh - 20/09/2009 07:53:41 PM 297 Views
It's still a valid point, even if one author doesn't "follow the script." *NM* Joker - 25/09/2009 12:34:48 AM 352 Views
Re: Ever notice how in fantasy books the smaller army always wins? Handel - 20/09/2009 08:45:48 PM 984 Views
That, and... Napoleon62 - 20/09/2009 09:08:48 PM 844 Views
Nineteen Eighty-Four, baby! Ghavrel - 20/09/2009 10:37:05 PM 779 Views
That is not even fantasy... Napoleon62 - 21/09/2009 12:00:48 AM 778 Views
IT ISN'T?! *NM* Ghavrel - 21/09/2009 01:42:16 AM 331 Views
Yeah, didn't your dad tell you about the double ungood days of the 80s? *NM* IndigoAjah - 21/09/2009 01:52:46 AM 319 Views
Doubleplusungood. Ghavrel - 25/09/2009 02:09:27 AM 777 Views
Oops, sorry. Probably a thoughtcrime to put a space in. Rebellious waste of... pixels? Space? *NM* IndigoAjah - 25/09/2009 04:26:14 PM 340 Views
I agree. 1984 is not SF-F. *NM* Joker - 25/09/2009 12:36:46 AM 327 Views
Who knew? ¯\(°O)/¯ *NM* Ghavrel - 25/09/2009 02:07:19 AM 314 Views
I... don't know what those symbols mean. *NM* Joker - 26/09/2009 07:04:13 AM 345 Views
All books should have a point, IMO. Otherwise, what's the point in reading them. IndigoAjah - 25/09/2009 04:32:43 PM 855 Views
Nineteen Eighty-Four is unquestionably Science Fiction. *NM* Ghavrel - 26/09/2009 04:12:47 AM 378 Views
No, it's not. ScyFy does not lay claim to anything and everything that takes place... Joker - 26/09/2009 07:05:59 AM 734 Views
It's a novel which heavily relies upon futuristic technology. How is it not Science Fiction? *NM* Ghavrel - 28/09/2009 01:43:23 AM 320 Views
Because it doesn't have lasers or time-travel in it IndigoAjah - 28/09/2009 02:15:18 AM 742 Views
I read it years ago and I don't remember any futuristic technology except... Joker - 28/09/2009 04:16:21 AM 826 Views
I would say that if a story uses that sort of thing, it has a science fiction element. Ghavrel - 28/09/2009 05:20:39 AM 625 Views
Wheel of Time? Werthead - 20/09/2009 11:52:36 PM 752 Views
I have not found that to be always true IndigoAjah - 21/09/2009 12:52:00 AM 722 Views
The smaller army doesn't always win Tashmere - 21/09/2009 02:47:07 AM 754 Views
Because you don't have to root for the huge army that's supposed to win. Seriana Sedai - 21/09/2009 04:38:22 AM 798 Views
everybody loves an under dog *NM* random thoughts - 21/09/2009 03:51:12 PM 327 Views
Pratchett makes much of this. *NM* Camilla - 21/09/2009 04:11:04 PM 349 Views
"You can take our lives, but you can never take our freedom!" "...wrong!" *NM* Ghavrel - 21/09/2009 11:02:25 PM 282 Views
Exactly what I was going to say Floffe - 27/09/2009 02:55:02 PM 840 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes