Active Users:1130 Time:22/11/2024 04:20:22 PM
Fail. Seriana Sedai Send a noteboard - 21/09/2009 04:43:24 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).

The problem with your theory is in your response unfortunately. If you want to see how much you would hate it no author in his or her right mind would write it.
I guess they did do that at the end of the third Star Wars prequel, but all that does is set up the small army winning in the original movies so it really doesn't count.
Reply to message
Ever notice how in fantasy books the smaller army always wins? - 20/09/2009 01:01:18 PM 1222 Views
It's an essential plot device - 20/09/2009 04:41:04 PM 881 Views
Yeah but... - 20/09/2009 07:38:36 PM 844 Views
I don't quite agree - 21/09/2009 01:22:45 AM 789 Views
I'm sitting here trying to think if I've read any books like that... - 21/09/2009 01:40:08 AM 718 Views
Fail. - 21/09/2009 04:43:24 AM 932 Views
Agreed. - 21/09/2009 04:59:39 AM 825 Views
Well there are plenty of authors not in their right minds - 21/09/2009 05:49:22 PM 745 Views
True. - 21/09/2009 06:50:43 PM 823 Views
Re: Ever notice how in fantasy books the smaller army always wins? - 20/09/2009 08:45:48 PM 984 Views
That, and... - 20/09/2009 09:08:48 PM 844 Views
Nineteen Eighty-Four, baby! - 20/09/2009 10:37:05 PM 778 Views
That is not even fantasy... - 21/09/2009 12:00:48 AM 776 Views
IT ISN'T?! *NM* - 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* - 21/09/2009 01:52:46 AM 319 Views
Doubleplusungood. - 25/09/2009 02:09:27 AM 777 Views
I agree. 1984 is not SF-F. *NM* - 25/09/2009 12:36:46 AM 327 Views
Who knew? ¯\(°O)/¯ *NM* - 25/09/2009 02:07:19 AM 314 Views
I... don't know what those symbols mean. *NM* - 26/09/2009 07:04:13 AM 345 Views
Wheel of Time? - 20/09/2009 11:52:36 PM 751 Views
I have not found that to be always true - 21/09/2009 12:52:00 AM 721 Views
The smaller army doesn't always win - 21/09/2009 02:47:07 AM 753 Views
Because you don't have to root for the huge army that's supposed to win. - 21/09/2009 04:38:22 AM 798 Views
everybody loves an under dog *NM* - 21/09/2009 03:51:12 PM 326 Views
Pratchett makes much of this. *NM* - 21/09/2009 04:11:04 PM 349 Views
Exactly what I was going to say - 27/09/2009 02:55:02 PM 840 Views

Reply to Message