"Those Books" Nagash series

[Ka Faraq Gatri]

Similarly with the duel with Khalida, a key, established part of the background, the motives of the two characters and the end result are both completely changed. In other words, it's worse than useless.

Actually, I really liked that. The original source material for that duel is the Tomb Kings army book which is, as it should be, TK-centric, with all the events portrayed told from THEIR point of view.

In this case, the duel is told as Khalida would have told it, casting her as the heroine. The "true" events, as told in the novel, are a little different. If we get the story again in a Lahmian Vampires book, I'm sure it would be different again.

This is what I like the most about the ToL/HH series - seeing the story behind what we think we know from army books/codices, which all take a biased viewpoint.

[sabbathstevie]

I have to say that I quite like some BL books, purely as pulpy entertainment. I haven't read the Sundering but the Sigmar trilogy has been enjoyable for me so far - although having said that I didn't know much Empire fluff prior to reading them.

I am however a big fan of Nagash and his backstory. Pleased to see him get his own trilogy but the first two have warped the fluff a little too far. Not even just minor details, but bloody huge events - like in the first book Nagash is raising armies of the dead but in the old undead books he hadn't done so until after he'd fled to cripple peak. And also, Nagash should really be the genesis of necromancy - the first being to raise a corpse and bind it to his will. But then in the second book, he finds out some primitive tribe near Cripple Peak already know a form of necromancy?!

I didn't really mind the writing style (apart from the chronology of the first book which irritated me) but these two rewrites of well established fluff really spoiled it for me. If I'm nitpicking, I also felt the second book failed to develop Nagash as a character (which started well in the first book) and his descent into utter darkness and instead spent 3/4 delving into the vampires origins (interesting but unbalanced). Oh, and vampires were created accidentally by Arkhan the Black, according to this!

[Tregar]

Actually, I really liked that. The original source material for that duel is the Tomb Kings army book which is, as it should be, TK-centric, with all the events portrayed told from THEIR point of view.

Even if you appreciate that it's the "true" story, that doesn't change that it was really poorly written and was not even internally consistent, let alone considering the few other times it's been in the background. It portrayed Neferata as weak and barely able to fight. Which is patently ridiculous. Then it ignores the entire way that Khalida survived.

There's clarifying and enriching the story, and then there's taking a big black marker pen and blacking out the bit of the Tomb Kings army book about how she was saved by Asaph. The former is good, and makes for great storytelling, the latter is just pure crap.

This is what I like the most about the ToL/HH series - seeing the story behind what we think we know from army books/codices, which all take a biased viewpoint.

How ironic... just last week I was arguing with someone who was saying how the Black Library books are rubbish because they aren't proper background, whereas the army books provide the actual "true" background. The complete reverse of your position. He's black, you're white, but I'm happy as one of the many shades of grey here!

[soultaker]

Death lord I assume your 'spoilers' are a joke intended to goad people who have not read the book into making stupid comments... orcs? seriously XD where did you get that from? As BL books go they are good, I look forward to the 3rd, unlike the sigmar books which are an unreadable abomination.

nagash makes the Yaghur (sour sea human tribe) into the first gouls through cannibalism of the Forsaken (see WA: chaos warriors) theres a lot of warpstone involved. Vampires were created by an unknown bastardisation of various sorceries, by arkhan, by accident, as before its an imperfect version of nagash's elixir at heart. All bloodlines are present potentially plus several extras assuming all the surviving coven members sire a lineage. Abhorash, the kings champion is certainly not just an other scheming immortal, all he does is his job, vampirism is forced upon him to control him as neferata connot trust him after the death of his king. I've never even heard of neferatem??

Specifically I don't see how nagash the unbowed altered any of the khalida/neferata blood kiss/blessing of asaph business, that whole lahmian timeline of the book is from either neferata or arkhans viewpoint and they are hardly omnipotent. Frankly if neferata was aware of khalidas escape from her vampiric gift it simply could not have happened, it is not a book about khalida theres not room for it, nothing has changed in that regard.

[AvatarForm]

Poorly-written; broke canon; 100's of pages of waffle to fill covers.

[xowainx]

The first Nagash TOL book was a real effort to get through, as said, the parallel timelines made the book needlessly confusing with lots of similarly named and ill-defined characters. The other main problem I had was with the battles, in that they were incredibly repetatitive, and without exception, followed the ruled that the "good guys" nearly win, before *shock horror* Nagash pulls a sneaky magic trick that turns the battle in his favour. However, I somehow ended up with a copy of the second book (maybe free at a Black Library open day?), and despite the liberties it took with established canon, I found it a significantly better read (although that's not saying much)

I haven't read the Sigmar books, but the High Elf books were a bit hit and miss. I think Caledor was probably the best of the three, but the other two weren't without their moments. I can understand the comments about Gav's at times army book writing style, but I think he was stuck between a rock and a hard place there, as he had to cover characters and stories that went on for thousands of years in a few hundred pages. It's pretty much either that or terrible dialogued exposition.. "oh Caledor, it's been five years since we've been home, do you remember all the things we've done in that time.." e.t.c

[Danny_D14]

Thought I would bump this thread to see people's thoughts on the 3rd and thankfully last Nagash book.

Personally I thought it was the best of a bad bunch. Biggest disappointment for me was the main Skaven did not at all seem like the typical scheming cowards that I've come to view them as, instead they seemed almost noble to me. I was very excited for this series but the first book was just god awful, a real pain to get through. The 2nd should've been called "Nefereta" and was given to me as a present.

[Brother of the Hydra]

They are poorly written (not as badly as the HE or Sigmar ones though) and crap over long established fluff from a great height...

One example of just how stupid they are - Arkhan The Black, Dark Lord Of Nagash, Scourge Of Araby and feared right hand of the usurper was so called...

because he had poor dental hygiene and ate some seeds that made his teeth black...

I thought this was great! Just because he did not slaughter the life out of x y or z to gain his nickname... it just goes to show the effect time, superstition and chinese whispers have on the world. I thought it was a refreshing change and cudos for being different and not taking the easy way out.

This is from someone that has Arkhan as my all time favourite character EVER and thats after what 16-17+ years. The books jump about a bit which in fairness bugs the life out of me but thats about it. Yes I wish Arkhan was in a proper Undead book rather than this Vampire Counts nonsense that we are being shovelled (hense no WH army) and yes I know I could exchange Vampire Counts for Immortals in my head but its not the same.

Truth is we are all interested in a hobby that has no fixed cannon, for good or ilk, so that means just suck it up...

[blindingdark]

I am a huge fan of the Nagash fluff, and I have been very much disapointed with the books. I have not read the third yet (I will), but as people have said it strays to far from what is expected from the books.

Even without the changes in fluff, the first two books dont cover anywhere near enough of his timeline to fit into a trilogy of books, most of the second book is about other people.....

[SunTzu]

I'm a massive fan of Mike Lee and a massive fan of the Nagash trilogy. It mystifies me how these books can get criticized yet people enthuse about something like the Salamanders trilogy, which is unadulterated tripe.

I guess there's no accounting for taste, but for anyone on the fence, make your own mind up. It's by no means universally agreed that the Nagash trilogy is bad... some may think so, and they have a right to their opinion, but there are dissenting voices.

[Athlan na Dyr]

Hmm... I loved the first book. Thought it was fan-bloody-tastic! So much so that I bought the second one soon after. Nagash the Unbroken was decidedly 'meh'. There was some consistency issues (is Nagash the first son? or the second?) as well as a lack of... well, action. Admitedly there was some, but it was a significant step down from the 1st with the story focussing more on the political aspect and some dodgy chinese guys.

Still, I do generally like the series as a whole, it delves into areas of the warhammer world that lies relatively untouched and makes a nice change.

[BobtheInquisitor]

I'm a massive fan of Mike Lee and a massive fan of the Nagash trilogy. It mystifies me how these books can get criticized yet people enthuse about something like the Salamanders trilogy, which is unadulterated tripe.

I guess there's no accounting for taste, but for anyone on the fence, make your own mind up. It's by no means universally agreed that the Nagash trilogy is bad... some may think so, and they have a right to their opinion, but there are dissenting voices.

I pretty much agree with you dead on. The only reason I can think of not to like the Nagash trilogy is because it conflicts with some aspects of the fluff (which is somewhat debatable). Personally, I prefer that the story is good and the characters are interesting over the army book background being followed to the letter.

Also, I actually enjoyed reading about all the other characters and their reactions to Nagash (and subsequent antics) more than I enjoyed reading about Nagash himself.

[Xisor]

It mystifies me how these books can get criticized yet people enthuse about something like the Salamanders trilogy, which is unadulterated tripe.

<Bluster>

I've just read up to the end of the first chapter of Nocturne, I'm really enjoying it. Kyme captures Marines much better than most, IMO.

That said, if you were to replace "Salamanders trilogy" with "All six Ultramrines novels", I'd agree with you. (Though I'd probably have to say something in strong defence of Warriors of Ultramar as I rather enjoyed it.)

Still: Lee's Nagash books = excellent.

It's just a bloody shame they don't match up fluff-wise to other resources. (And perhaps are misleading expectation-wise.)

Also the Skaven of Bk3 were entirely forgettable.

But otherwise, good!

[blindingdark]

I picked up the third book shortly after posting here and have started reading it, already the pace of the book is far better than the previous two, but as has been said the skaven are a bit strange. They converse a litte to much like people for my liking, rather than the skittish ratmen we see in other portrayals.

And it still jumps around timeline wise,which is a little annoying, but I suppose given his extraordinary life span, this is to be expected.

so far though, vastly better than the previous novel.

[Xisor]

Blindingdark: Similar thoughts from me. That said, the timeline jumps aren't as bad this time: they're always jumping forwards, so it helps to keep an eye on the passage of time, but it's at least linear rather than jumping back/forward in time as well as space!

[blindingdark]

I think , having read another hundred or so pages last night, I have narrowed down the issue I have with the skaven portrayal.

Those in power among the skaven are written as aristocratic in nature (ish) The skaven generals and seers etc are attributed with greater manners and intellect, rather than greater cunning and ruthlesness.

I think this is where the author has gone wrong, he has made the high class skaven behave as perhaps a noble human, or lord would.

I always considered the high ranking skaven to be more devious and ruthless in nature, rather than better spoken or intelligent. This is the discrepancy in my view between the skaven presented and those we have seen in other works.

So far in the book, the lower class skaven do not behave or speak the same way, they are portrayed as I would define 'classic skaven'. The author has made the error of passing human lord-esk trates to the skaven upper class.

This could just be down to my perceptions of skaven, but I have never considered a high ranking skaven to be lordly or aristocratic by any means. They are simply far more ruthless and back stabbing than the skaven beneath them.

[ExquisiteMonkey]

I Just finished the final book last night. Overall, I enjoyed the series, although the way the first two were written with their time jumping shenanigans irritated me a bit.
The third was definitely the best, but I also didn't think that they did the Skaven justice, especially in their speech patterns - far too human, and the double speak just seemed off, like it wasn't in the right spot or something.....

Also, where was Vashanesh (name? spelling?) the sire of the Von Carsteins......

[Danny_D14]

I think , having read another hundred or so pages last night, I have narrowed down the issue I have with the skaven portrayal.

Those in power among the skaven are written as aristocratic in nature (ish) The skaven generals and seers etc are attributed with greater manners and intellect, rather than greater cunning and ruthlesness.

I think this is where the author has gone wrong, he has made the high class skaven behave as perhaps a noble human, or lord would.

I always considered the high ranking skaven to be more devious and ruthless in nature, rather than better spoken or intelligent. This is the discrepancy in my view between the skaven presented and those we have seen in other works.

So far in the book, the lower class skaven do not behave or speak the same way, they are portrayed as I would define 'classic skaven'. The author has made the error of passing human lord-esk trates to the skaven upper class.

This could just be down to my perceptions of skaven, but I have never considered a high ranking skaven to be lordly or aristocratic by any means. They are simply far more ruthless and back stabbing than the skaven beneath them.

Couldn't have said this any better myself, completely agreed. Maybe due to my great love for the Skaven that this novel's portrayal of them really ruined the 3rd book.

Also agreeing with other posts in regards to how the 3rd book is paced, a lot better than the last two books.

[Styles]

I am struggling to finish the last book Nagash Immortal, I have read most of the black library books and this has to be one of the worst. It is so slow and boring. The existing fluff is changed for no reason for the worse. Nagash comes across most of the time as a idiot. The Skaven do not seem like skaven, but humans, they drink wine, use gold and there is hardly any back stabbing, plus they seem to be the longest living skaven in history!
The vampires who are a big part of the book, have their existing fluff hammered and replaced with boring and stupid new fluff. Overall the book is terrible and im suprised it was allowed to be published with all the fluff changes.

[shadowhawk2008]

Exactly! Because the authors have sole control over changing the lore as they see fit!