Eh, nothing wrong with Sith. Just Karpyshyn. Of course, I don't really consider Sith "cool" either. Just effective villains as long as their not overused. Oh wait.
The book that people thought had an ambiguous ending, but then Karpyshyn felt the need to ram it into our skulls that he's not an ambiguous writer, doesn't do that "artsy" stuff, and proceeded to kill any sort of possibility of speculation or thought about the ending.
The novel the brought you Darth Cognus and killed the last remaining character from Jedi vs Sith that was left alive
Old and wrinkly Darth Bane is really upset his small and girly apprentice hasn't killed him so he plots to put himself in her body so he can make his Rule of Two nonsensical (with added bonus of an unrelated plot with a guy we never see again learning the same super-power!).
The novel featuring the competition for the most boring and Generic character, opens with Zannah, drops out early when she meets the second most interesting character in the book; Set Harth, who is like Han Solo only evil and an @$$, next Bane gets off to a good start however he meets the most interesting character in the novel; Serra, who wants revenge and has a character arc, but then Zannah gives Bane her permission to die and he obliges, THUS we have our winner Darth Cognus, the most boring and generic character; who some how has the power to see the future and shut down force powers like an evil Ysalamir, with less personality.
OR If that was too long; The Threequal to the book with the really long name introducing Set Harth and a new Sith no one cares about, also a Princess has a character arc and therefore must die, also Bane gets permission to die.
I'd wager Sorcerer. My Jedi Masters sometimes end up with double-blades. We could always ask Karpyshyn, I'm sure he had all of her stats figured out.
Probs, although how do you think Drew Compares to Denning? I prefer Drew, his books, while a bit simple, have good guys being good and evil bad guys, Denning has a lot of trouble with the former in my opinion.
Drew is a continuity steamroller, while Denning is a character steamroller. I can't decide. Drew ran roughshod over the Exile in Revan, while Denning turned Jacen into a Sith. The Darth Bane books didn't offend me when I first read them, whereas Inferno made me really angry even back when I still liked LotF.
I favor Drew. Denning is okay but he loves his roguish antiheroes and there's no greater roguish antihero in his mind than Luke Skywalker.
There are two things wrong with this sentence. 1. Denning doesn't have 'roughish' anti-heros. That would be a jaded character who is a cynical bad@$$, but with his (or her) heart in the right place. Like Han in ANH or the Dwarf in Game of Thrones. 2. Denning's Anti-heros are thugs that we are told have the moral high ground. AND LUKE IS NOT EITHER ONE OF THESE THINGS.
To be perfectly fair, the only time where I truly feel Karpyshyn botched continuity was with Path of Destruction (though of course you could argue that Bane's character was a big continuity flaw in of itself). I don't feel that the Exile was characterized badly at all, actually, just that she really got the short end of the stick when it came to role in the narrative. Hell, that can even be argued with Revan... giving half of the POV to a generic Sith named Scourge is not what I, or anyone, wanted in a book about Revan and the Exile. Karpyshyn is in a lot of ways the Michael Bay of the Star Wars universe (though I don't care what you say, Michael Bay is far worse in every respect). He writes fairly entertaining "popcorn" works, and you might be entertained reading them, though you'll feel somewhat empty and unfulfilled afterwards. Luke and Tywin Lannister? That's certainly a combination I would have never dreamed of... haven't read Denning's books myself yet. Personally, I have no problem whatsoever with Luke being a chessmaster. The "cynical" part should be used only in very small doses, though, if at all. And this is coming from a cynic.
We need a Revan discussion, rather than review, thread because god knows the best way to write a book about the tactician Revan is to have him decide to go head-on against the Sith Emperor and kill him.
Heh. When reading Revan, I was actually happy that Karpyshyn decided to note Revan's more manipulative and subtle side (even if he didn't outright show it, not really his bag), by having him manipulate and guide Scourge over the course of three years, a process that pretty much led to Scourge's betrayal of the Emperor in TOR. Then he seemingly threw it out the window with his plan of attack that had me scratching my head. I guess even the greatest generals have the occasional stumble?
