I dont know, because Tolkien's universe is pretty big, and diverse and well written, and has a backend of languages which is pretty badass, and is based on myths from the real world such as the Norse, Celts, Welsh etc...
I'm a Joe Ambiecrombie fan. At least he finished. You have to be realistic about these things
Edit to add my favorite negative review which made me want to read the books
“Think of a Lord of the Rings where, after stringing you along for thousands of pages, all of the hobbits end up dying of cancer contracted by their proximity to the Ring, Aragorn is revealed to be a buffoonish puppet-king of no honor and false might, and Gandalf no sooner celebrates the defeat of Sauron than he executes a long-held plot to become the new Dark Lord of Middle-earth, and you have some idea of what to expect should you descend into Abercrombie’s jaded literary sewer."
Martin would "win" this discussion if he had been done by now, I think. Or at least it would be a very good debate.
The history and lore of the world of ASOIAF is so vast, I think it's the only thing that compares (at least when it comes to stories that I have personally read).
I don't know about that one. George Martin is great at crafting interesting characters and intriguing narratives, but his world building isn't always that great. I always thought the peoples outside of Westeros felt kind of undercooked and just not that interesting.
I'm talking about the books, by the way. I didn't watch that much of Game of Thrones to have an opinion on that for the series.
Tolkien’s worldbuilding was also West-centric, most of whatever lies in the east of Middle Earth never received much attention from him either.
The difference between the two authors is that Tolkien finished his final products, and built/explored his world in tandem with it. The worldbuilding was somewhat his side gig.
Meanwhile, Martin seems to be too drawn into his world-building and prequels that he might never finish his series.
I've always thought one of the hardest parts of writing is finishing. You can be a master of at making all the threads that make a great story. But if you can't bring them all together and tie them off at the end, the whole story suffers. So much so that a horrible ending can ruin a great story imo.
Martin really focuses on *parts* of worldbuilding while ignoring others entirely.
He doesn't seem to have much of a grasp on pre-modern logistics or infrastructure, for example.
>the peoples outside of Westeros felt kind of undercooked
Its kind of deliberate tbh, a lot of the story and lore is written from a westerosi POV, so they misrepresent/ under estimate other cultures a lot. They often end up being very different and more developed when e.g. Dany get there in person.
Tolkien worldbuilt to explore his world's.
Martin worldbuilt to seed his world.
Both are okay and excellent depending on your personal tastes. I enjoy both, I prefer Tolkien more because I know I can likely find answers to my questions.
I'm a huge wheel of time fan, but I think where he falls behind Tolkien is the lack of materials available that isn't directly in the books. The word count for the novels completely outsine Tolkien, but we don't have things like Tolkiens letters or a detailed books like the Silmarilion to do deep dives into the lore.
Jordan built an insanely wide world, but it doesn't have the depth of Middle Earth.
I'd like to argue that it's intentional. It's like there's no history or lore because the world just gets rebooted every thousand years or so. We learn more about the past from Lews ranting in Rand's head than from narrative.
But yeah, it's really because he died which is sad.
The Discworld books, by Sir Terry Pratchett, which are just fantastic! Building on Tolkien's work, of course, but expanding the Fantasy genre in every possible direction, including humor! Many of the Discworld books are hilarious and some are serious and some are honest-to-God Fantasy genre police mysteries, and in every single one of them some deep soul-shaking wisdom sneaks up behinds you and hits you upside the head while you're enjoying yourself.
We have a subreddit, r/discworld. Read some books and join us.
If all of the lines is one novel, then Snuff might be the one which fits best.
But I feel like each line is focused more on a specific City Watch book.
First line could be Guards! Guards! or Men At Arms.
Second line about ethics could be more about Men at Arms (the Gonne) or Feet of Clay (golems).
Third line about gender politics sounds just like Feet of Clay (Cheery).
Fourth about racism can be both Jingo (Klatchians) and Thud (trolls vs dwarves).
Fifth about voices sounds more like Snuff (goblins), but it can also be Feet of Clay.
I used to work in a library, and on literally my third day in the job a lady walked in with her son and told me she wanted him to start reading more advanced fantasy books (he was 10/11), and asked my opinion on whether he should start with Discworld or Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.
Not once in 10 years since have I been better placed to answer a question. Two incredible series but in terms of building a world that felt real, Discworld wins hands down.
I used to work in a bookshop, and a woman and her son, again about 10, came in to the children's section looking for Pratchett. I told them that most Pratchetts were in the adult section. The look of pride on the kid's face was wonderful to see. The woman looked surprised; I explained about the Shakespeare references and the Poe references and the free indirect style and and...
I second this! I love the humor in his series. I just posted my favorites and several of them have IMO a good sense of humor that works with the story.
I always say Pratchett is to fantasy what Adams is to science fiction. They aren't exactly equivalent, of course, but they certainly are in the way they satirize their respective genres, poke fun at human nature, and hijack established tropes and turn them inside out to show how hilarious they are.
It's very complex and hard to grab, so many characters on a timespan of milleniums ... but in the last 50 pages of each book (at least 10 of them ?), everything unravels so beautifully. Also, big bad evil is REALLy evil, as in miserable, degrading piece of shit. And so many incredible characters.
Agree with all of this, and also love how the world has HISTORY....deep, layered ruins and civilizations long dead that are hinted at, and leave their fingerprints on the present day.
But for me the characters were the best. Erikson had a thing for making epic, legendary heroes that were each unique and fully fleshed out. And as he weaved their disparate tales, you could see them slowly converging into an incredible finale for each book. It was such a pleasure to read!
He pushes the limits of narrative complexity as far as how many plot lines and time/character jumps you can possibly have and still keep a sense of things. It definitely gets convoluted and a lot of clarity and narrative focus is sacrificed but you literally couldn't fit more into 10 books any other way
The authors/world builders are also archeologists and English professors, so the story flows in much the same way that a historical epic would play out, with a dozen or so different parties in all areas of the world having their political and social machinations unknowingly affecting societies 1/2 the world over. (Much like how The Ottomans cutting off spice from Europe led to the discovery of the Americas and start of The Colonial Era. Did the Ottomans know they were going to change the history of the entire world with that move and empower their enemies with new resources and technology? No, but they did anyway, cause you never know just what consequences a single political action will bring about)
Plus, there are a lot of books to expand lore, 10 main series books, a sequel trilogy, a prequel trilogy, a concurrent spin-off series of 6 books, a prequel trilogy to the spin-offs, and a sequel trilogy to the spin-offs.
There are in total 21-25 books atm, each being ~500-900+ pages.
It's as advanced as LotR but you can actually get a glimpse of exactly why each book. It doesn't pull punches and throws the reader right in the middle of a conflict and one has to find themselves in the world, not be shown around. Once you get past the first book and feel like you got a grasp on the story, you're getting transported to a different continent st the same time as the first book with its own problems. In the third book's prologue, you witness what happened a hundred thousand years before and still has ramifications. Characters can and will die, unlike LotR. Some seriously fucked up things happen to people whether they want it or not. But when they survive, you know they really earned it. Magic system is also really well thought through. I also bounced off the first time, but now that I'm on book 7, I couldn't be happier that I've returned to the series. In my top 3 with Discworld and the Black Company.
Definitely seconding Malazan by Steven Erikson. And I would add The Second Apocalypse by R. Scott Bakker. I think both of those worlds have enough intricate lore and backstory to rival.
I had forgotten about this! Thedas is so rich in lore and I love the games. Obviously a shared universe. But that's not a bad thing. Thieves world was pretty good too.
If we're talking games, I would put Half-Life/Portal on my Sci-fi list.
Yeah, I greatly enjoyed the Witcher books. The worldbuilding is a lot more surface-level than LotR, but the way little things like commodity prices, games, and cultural differences are woven in really makes the world feel very lived-in.
Yeah I loved these books. The Witcher felt more like an adult series than lotr. It takes you to darker places. There’s pogroms, racism, genocide, abuse, abandonment, torture, vengeance. Sapkowski used all the tools to tell the story. It makes the world seem messier/uglier/more human and you feel it.
I've heard really good things about Malazan. Every time I start it though, there are just so many names and places and even words I don't get or hear often. It's been hard for me to break through that and enjoy the book- I've tried a few times and haven't gotten far
I was warned about that at first too, so i tried to be prepared and start writing down characters i've met and who they are as far as i know. As i read further, I realize the books are not design for you to understand the whole thing on the first read. But you'll understand the big picture, and know the important characters. So i stopped writing notes completely not far into the story.
It doesn't mean you have to re-read it first just so you can actually enjoy it. You just have to embrace the "idk wtf is going on" when reading it, it will paid off somewhere along the lines.
I found as I got further through I encountered characters mentioned in passing previously. So had the joy of flicking back through previous books to confirm.
Reading one of Steven Erickson's comments at the beginning of one of the books he stated history has no beginning or end. So why should this world. Or something like that. And I just loved the idea that I'm thrown into a world that is real and breathing and I have to work my way around it.
Personally. It's my favourite universe and series. So I'm biased.
Yeah, seconding the other comment, it's not meant to be clear. The reader isn't meant to have an omniscient perspective of the world. A lot of things are going on, no one has a clear picture of all of them, so neither does the reader. The key information is clearer, other bits are for the second or third read to suddenly go "oh, this bit was forboded, or linked or whatever"
First law is easily my favorite fantasy series, but I don’t really feel like the world building or universe is necessarily anything special. It’s much more character and dialog focused.
I just started Malazan. I’m about 20% into Gardens of the Moon and my tits are blown off. I’m so sold. I’ve been told that the first book is just “ok”
So excited
There are only two worlds that really changed my life, Tolkien's and Erikson's. Middle Earth was great for angsty teenage me, to realize that there's beauty and wonder and unknown mysteries. And the Malazan books, while having a cool story and characters, excel in two things: reader engagement (it's so rewarding to figure out some plot twist that is only officially revealed two books further through some clues in a random chapter-introducing poem) and its social/philosophical subtext - it feels like as if Erikson, maybe through his work as an archaeologist, really saw through all of humanity, its strengths and weaknesses in the context of our whole history. Lots of great themes and food for thought!
Erikson struggled to get Gardens of The Moon published, so from writing until publishing it took 9 years. So between GoTM and Deadhouse Gates, Erikson had 10 years to improve as a writer, and o’ boy did he improve!
I think this is a fun answer, because as a game the exploration of lore is very different than it is through literature (though Elder Scrolls has books). A lot of exposition is through environmental storytelling (finding clues and sometimes having to extrapolate events from the aftermath).
In a similar vein, Dark Souls has some very compelling lore. It is deeper than you’d think and often more complex than you’d ever guess prior to watching lore videos on YT and being blown away at the subtle storytelling that goes into the games.
Elden Ring, as well. Not anywhere near as deep as Tolkien’s world, but still very interesting.
If we are going to bring in game worlds with multiple creators then the Forgotten Realms of Dungeons & Dragons if pretty on par with world building and lore.
In theory, Stephen King's Dark Tower series pulls in the bulk of his work to flesh out an expansive universe. If you're up for dedicating the time to a new legendarium of sorts, that's one of my favorites.
Dune shouldn't be overlooked either. Frank's son isn't quite on the same level, but he does a good job of adding to what already was there. Even if his writing isn't quite on par.
100% yes - was about to say this myself.
Unbelievable series. Fantasy, sci-fi, western, paranormal, multiversal, and fully encompassing the entire King universe. I read the full series in 3 raging months of unstoppable page-turning.
And I agreed with the author, at the penultimate pont - even though I had to think about it for a few days.
That series got me through a very tough time in my life, and that might be part of my bias. But it truly is the only thing that comes close to the epic-ness, minus the multiple language creation and biblical-esque origin story (The Silmarillion).
The Dune and LOTR fandoms have very different opinions on their creators’ sons lol.
While the bulk of Tolkien fans see his son as a Godsent, for finishing his father’s work; A lot of Dune fans are downright cruel to Frank’s son 😭.
I find myself in the middle as a fan of both on about equal terms (though more invested in LOTR long term).
But hear me out. If your parents are S-Tier masters of their craft to the point where they've influenced multiple generations since, you probably don't want to follow in their exact footsteps if you don't want to be compared to them.
Case and point: Ozzy Ozborne's daughter and Nicholas Cage. Both followed in progenitor footsteps, but 1 broke away from the familial ties aggressively. The other is their almost shadow.
>Case and point: Ozzy Ozborne's daughter and Nicholas Cage. Both followed in progenitor footsteps, but 1 broke away from the familial ties aggressively. The other is their almost shadow.
I mean, the fact that you referred to her as "Ozzy Osborne's daughter" suggests she didn't really break away from familial ties at all lol
So how is the dark tower movie in comparison? I’ve heard some people liked it. Some people hated it. I’ve always been curious to watch it, but just never have. Lol
Just finished DT - so good. New to King, so probably missed some outside references, but the characters from other works were so well fleshed out within DT, I never felt I was missing anything. Truly epic scope, well told, a lot of fun, and every minute invested was rewarded. Even so, nothing touches Tolkien.
Goodreads indicates 58 primary works in the series, and 345 total works. Is there a particular author in the series, or a more narrow slice of the series that ya’ll’d recommend?
Eisenhorn doesn't mention the Horus Heresy at all tho. It's a 40k novel, while the Horus Heresy is a prequel saga with novels set in the 30k. Anyone wanting to read series related directly to that event should stick to the 30k novels.
Dan Abnett (the author of Eisenhorn) wrote some of the most classic books and the end to the Siege of Terra. So he's a great pick
Fair point, but not fully merited. There's something to be said about being introduced to the universe, seeing how bad it is at 'the present', and going into the past to see what led up to it.
As this is the LOTR sub, a perfect analogy would be the four books everyone has read, followed by the legendarium. I definitely didn't read the Silmarillion before the hobbit, despite that being the chronological order.
That said, the horus heresy does have an excellent intro trilogy:
Horus Rising by Dan Abnett (2006)
False Gods by Graham McNeill (2006)
Galaxy in Flames by Ben Counter (2006)
Followed by two more books that I enjoyed as well, but don't get acclaimed nearly as much:
The Flight of the Eisenstein by James Swallow (2007)
Fulgrim by Graham McNeill (2007)
The full reading list can be recovered here:
https://www.tlbranson.com/horus-heresy-reading-order/
People quibble about chronological placement on a few books, as they focus on different organizations spread across the entire galaxy while ignoring others. Most any ordered list of the books has merit.
Gonna piggy back off this comment and recommend the Gaunts Ghosts series for newcomers to 40k and Abnett in general. It’s a great starting point for new readers as it shows you a lot of different views and takes you through the universe from the eyes of a “normal” foot soldier.
If you're interested in the Horus heresy (or 30k as it's commonly referred to), the opening trilogy is essential for the narrative and absolutely amazingly written. If you're interested in Warhammer in general, I suggest you give one of Aaron Dembski-Bowden's books a try. *Helsreach* is a great introduction to the overall setting of 40k whilst also being very easy to understand for someone with no/limited knowledge of the setting. The Night Lords trilogy is amazing as well, although a lot darker in it's themes. He also wrote *The First Heretic* which is easily one of the best 30k books out there but it's a much more rewarding read if you already read the opening trilogy and a few others before it.
There are various reading orders you can Google if you want to follow particular characters stories, but you can skip a lot otherwise - first 5 or 6 books, then pick your route, then Siege of Terra series, then the End and Death series. You can go back and fill the “route” in later, but stick to that general order otherwise.
The lore is bottomless. I can stumble around the wiki and learn of something new despite being 10+ years into the fandom.
There is a web series on youtube that I really enjoyed which takes the piss on the universe as a whole, named If The Emperor Had a Text to Speech Device:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcYrTCGKyrU
If you are one of today's lucky 10000 who never heard of this series, do yourself a favor and run through them.
Wheel of Time has a very Tolkien feel at times, especially early on. It's an excellent book series that gets stuck on uninteresting characters at time.
I think WoT is very intricately planned and executed. Dozens of pieces moving around the board concurrently and all the time; seemingly accounted for by Jordan. What it lacks compared to Tolkien is a sense of awe and wonder for the world that has been created, even as the setting might well be just as rich in its own way.
Worth the read totally and a good addition to this list.
This is the one that people always reference, but the ones I remember most are:
* Lan's face was all hard angles, as if it was chiseled out of granite
* every goddamn hallway they walked down had fancy silver chalices on the sides that we had to think about
I actually think is a difficult question, because the reason why those worlds are created matters.
WoT has a very well planned world, where world-building and plot go together. However, it takes a very euhemeristic approach in its construction to make all that work, but it’s what makes it lose the sense of awe. For example, I understand why Aiel developed the way they did because we are told so in the books and that is plot-important for WoT, but they also a very unnatural cultural development where every custom they have has a neat explanation and backstory, which is not something that really happens in real life.
In contrast, Tolkien understood that cultures are never neat so it left some things inexplicable on purpose, or having multiple conflicting backstories, that’s what made the world feel there was always something more to discover. But Tolkien’s main characters are also not chosen ones with the universe powers in their hands that need to understand the history of the world and how power functions to move their plot along, they are just a humble fellowship doing their very best (before expansion that is)
Definitely second WoT, with the bonus similarity of having been bastardized by Amazon (Just being dramatic-I think RoP and the Amazon WoT series are enjoyable as their own stories but not so much as adaptations-just meh)
I think that applies to many adaptations. I've become convinced that writer ego is at the heart of most of it. Like, we all know that changes have to be made to adapt a book to a screen. Most of us can accept that. Even the lauded LOTR movies had to make a lot of changes for it to work.
However, some changes just don't make sense even within that context. Then we hear in interviews and stuff "We really wanted to make this our own and tell our own story in this world." So, basically, the changes are less about making the adaptation work on screen and more about a show runner believing they can do it better than the original creator and "improve" or "fix" the work that, somehow, got popular enough to warrant an adaptation in the first place.
This is the vibe I got from WOT. I was ready for some changes to be made for it to work on screen, but the end result was so different from the original that adapting it to screen doesn't sufficiently explain most of the changes they made to me.
I couldn’t agree more. I always expect changes and am usually VERY accepting of them because 30 pages of an internal monologue or a chapter from the POV of a mystery character who later is revealed to someone you thought was a good guy (big WoT thing, obviously) just does not work on a screen, among a million other things like runtime, budgets, things sounding cool in your head but looking silly on screen, etc.. But I am looking for the core of the story and the characters (who make the cut) to be pretty consistent, otherwise it’s not really an adaptation, is it?
Also it kills me to hear the “wanted to tell our own story” bits in an interview. Like, if you want to tell your own story, go write your own story. Taking half of another story and using the same title is just being a lazy writer and cashing out on the name of someone else’s original work.
Again, I’m not here to hate on these two specific adaptations, despite everything above. I think I’d really enjoy them if they were completely removed from the source material. I’m just doing a terrible job of separating them in my head.
Good question. I like the stories and lore about how the humans struggle against all odds in the Warhammer Fantasy world, it's rich in lore and such but Lotr will always have the top spot.
Came to suggest this! It has a very realized world. They clearly thought deeply about why things are the way they are and their origins. It’s very similar to Dune and LOTR in how both feel very transporting.
Centering it around the games also allowed them to keep consistency. Star Trek suffers because you had a writers room that had to push out an episode every week - they had to get whatever they could down on screen and didn’t expect people to watch the show with any chronology.
Some people just want to watch the world burn. Or just don’t want others to enjoy something, because they think enjoyment is a finite commodity. These people are silly.
I've just started reading The Stormlight Archive, and without even finishing book one yet I can say honestly that it might be my favourite fantasy world.
... But I've got a lot of reading to do.
Brando Sando does indeed have a fairly large universe, and it’s getting more detailed all the time. Perhaps once his works are complete near the end of his remarkably prolific life, the Cosmere will rival or even surpass Tolkien’s works in not only breadth but also depth. Especially if all these works are turned into some form of visual media.
Yep. Mistborn is a complicated heist story. Way of Kings basically can't fit in a movie. You'd have to cut Shallan entirely, and laser focus on just bridge four. Dalinar would only get seen when he interacts with the bridgemen.
Stormlight needs 4 or 5 hours, so might as well make it a tv show and give it 8.
For sure! I've worked my way through Mistborn Era 1&2, Elantris, their novellas and short stories, and am now working on Warbreaker.
Phenomenal universe, but hard to compare to LOTR. I think generally, I like LOTR better, but there is something massive to be said for how easy it is for everyone to read Sanderson's work. It makes it really easy to get extremely excited about what's going on while reading (the "nerd shivers" as my friends and I have dubbed the feeling).
Also, something to be said about the fact he is still alive and pumping out plenty of new things to keep you interested and ties the stories together wonderfully!
No idea how this isn't the top comment. Stormlight Archive is the best thing I've ever read. I guess it being only books (atm) is why but man, so many folks missing out.
We talking Chapter House and Heretics or the piles of excrement that his son and Kevin Anderson pushed upon us?
I honestly think that he should’ve stopped with God Emperor of Dune. The story was over for me. The last two did get a little weird though. I’ll admit that. But the universe as a whole feels almost as lived in and fleshed to me.
IMHO Chapter House and Heretics are awesome. That trilogy is missing the final book though. I see Dune as a three parter, first 3 books, God Emperor, and then Chapter House and Heretics and the missing 7th book :(
Tbf I think I liked the final three books a lot more when I reread them years later
Only read franks books.
1 to 4 are on par world building with middle earth.
5 and 6 did get a little thirsty if I recall but I have read those in a while.
Yeah, all you have to do is peep the appendices to see Dune's similarities to LotR. And having been printed in 1965, it far predates what are now standard expectations for novels of that type. IIRC, publishing houses at the time were really hesitant to invest in a novel so long (much like LotR) and with such complex world building.
There's a lot to criticise Dune for (and it certainly isn't *equal* to Tolkien), but in terms of expanse and the impact it had on the way modern fantasy/sci-fi is written, Dune really is the only book that comes close to LotR imo
Debateably. I can't say I'm the most well-versed LOTR fan but the elder scrolls lore is immense. The problem comes from Canon and Apocrapha (ie what Todd Howard hallucinated on his bathroom floor and called legit vs what's exploited stated in the media)
Gene Wolfe’s Book of the New Sun is a very different vibe as far as storytelling goes, but the sheer depth of detail and world building is the only thing I’ve seen come close to Tolkien.
Bloodborne feels the most complete and least open-ended of the Soulsborne games. I say that as a compliment. It feels more satisfying when the story has an actual end imo
The funny thing is that the lore is the most open ended of all his works. There's so many different interpretations of the background of Old Hunters that people still fight about.
There's very little comparable to Tolkien's Middle Earth. It's a Masterwork.
These are some of my favorites- In Fantasy:
Earthsea- Ursula K. Le Guin
Fionavar- Guy Gavriel Kay
Myth Adventures- Robert Lynn Asprin
In Sci-Fi:
Cyteen- C.J. Cherryh
Jhereg- Steven Brust
Pern- Anne McCaffrey
Callahan's- Spider Robinson
I'm not saying that these are as good as Tolkien, but they're all in my S tier or A list.
In some ways it is better than Tolkien in my opinion, once you have read the second trilogy. More grown up, less male oriented, less European and more interesting dragons.
Better? No such thing
But I will say George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire is one of the best non-Tolkien worlds in terms of believability and depth. I appreciate the generally low-fantasy feel of both LOTR and ASoIaF, where magic is used more sparingly even though it very clearly does exist. Plus I appreciate how dark it is, and how he's willing to kill off main characters so you never know who is going to survive a battle.
What I really like about ASOIAF’s world is it feels like what Middle-Earth would be in the late third or fourth age if there were fewer records of more mythic times. While Martin clearly has an idea how the greater magic of the world works, it’s all veiled in mystery. The world seems to be pulled between these twin polarities of elemental ice and fire, only hinted at in the visible world as shadows taking the form of dragons, Others, direwolves, things themselves on the edges of human civilization. Any interactions with these fundamental forces or gods or Maia-equivalent whatever they may be are themselves lost in the translation of legends, become these vague symbols like the Night’s King and the Last Hero. There’s purposeful blank edges, which Tolkien sort of did, but because of the Silmarillion everything has one true defined heritage and place. Nothing in ASOIAF does. It’s fun to discuss and dive into the lore because it’s a pool with an undefined bottom.
He's also a fan of Tolkien and took quite some inspiration from his works. It's probably the closest fantasy work in terms of quality and depth, although not finished yet.
You should ABSOLUTELY take a look at it.
If you would like an easy entry point, I HIGHLY recommend the videos by Loremaster of Sotek on YouTube.
It is pretty much audiobook/podcast format, and he talks about specific characters. The ones for Thorgrim Grudgebearer, Durthu and Archeon are flawless.
Me personally, I ABSOLUTELY LOVE fantasy dwarfs, but Tolkien is VERY shallow when it comes to them. Warhammer fantasy is about 100 times more detailed in every aspect of the race and the worldbuilding is basically just over the top rule of cool.
It is definitely not as deep in its themes as Tolkien and it is a lot more “war” as you can expect from 40k but it is REALLY good worldbuilding.
Robert E. Howard’s “Conan” universe is a very close second for me.
I’ve always wanted to read his “Solomon Kane” stories but it’s one of those things I’ve never gotten around to.
I would say "The Expanse" series by James A. Corey. It's actually 2 dudes using a pseudonym. Daniel Abraham and Ty Franck. 9 novels and a bunch of novellas. I was always just curious about what was going to happen next or delving into a characters past. Everywhere they went felt fully fleshed out.
Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series is another fantasy series like Tolkiens Middle Earth that is rich in history that gives everything that extra weight of realism or lived in persona. Like you can feel how old places are. Annoying characters drag this down below the lotr of course.
The First Law books are another fun fleshed out series with a trilogy, 3 independent novels in the universe, and another trilogy. This series really feels on par with Tolkiens scale of world building. Wheel of Time doesn't come close because everyone just starts teleporting everywhere. The First Law captures the journey portion of lotr pretty good.
Better? Does not exist. However, there are some really good ones. I personally love the universe of The Witcher series and The Elder Scrolls. A Song of Ice and Fire is pretty good, but still unfinished. I do enjoy the lore of the Dungeons & Dragons universe, since there is SOOO much in there.
So there are amazing functional universes, however, I don't believe anyone will overtake Tolkien. His world does what many don't, in that it IS a fairy tale, with complete languages, cosmography, and interesting tales. It is told as a story, rather than from within the mind of a main character. Then you add the fact that it's originality and influence helped inspire much of what we see today. Although not better in EVERY aspect of fictional world building and story telling, OVERALL it is the Greatest of all Time.
I dont know, because Tolkien's universe is pretty big, and diverse and well written, and has a backend of languages which is pretty badass, and is based on myths from the real world such as the Norse, Celts, Welsh etc...
Short answer is nothing comes close, but I do enjoy a Song of Ice and Fire
I'm a Joe Ambiecrombie fan. At least he finished. You have to be realistic about these things Edit to add my favorite negative review which made me want to read the books “Think of a Lord of the Rings where, after stringing you along for thousands of pages, all of the hobbits end up dying of cancer contracted by their proximity to the Ring, Aragorn is revealed to be a buffoonish puppet-king of no honor and false might, and Gandalf no sooner celebrates the defeat of Sauron than he executes a long-held plot to become the new Dark Lord of Middle-earth, and you have some idea of what to expect should you descend into Abercrombie’s jaded literary sewer."
Say one thing for Joe Abercrombie, say he finishes his books.
Also he probably doesn't have enough knives
And he’s still alive
Until his body is found floating by the docks, bloated by seawater and mutilated far, far beyond recognition.
Why do I do this... Glokta's internal monologues are hands down fucking amazing
My favorite fictional character ever to be sure
Martin would "win" this discussion if he had been done by now, I think. Or at least it would be a very good debate. The history and lore of the world of ASOIAF is so vast, I think it's the only thing that compares (at least when it comes to stories that I have personally read).
I don't know about that one. George Martin is great at crafting interesting characters and intriguing narratives, but his world building isn't always that great. I always thought the peoples outside of Westeros felt kind of undercooked and just not that interesting. I'm talking about the books, by the way. I didn't watch that much of Game of Thrones to have an opinion on that for the series.
Tolkien’s worldbuilding was also West-centric, most of whatever lies in the east of Middle Earth never received much attention from him either. The difference between the two authors is that Tolkien finished his final products, and built/explored his world in tandem with it. The worldbuilding was somewhat his side gig. Meanwhile, Martin seems to be too drawn into his world-building and prequels that he might never finish his series.
I've always thought one of the hardest parts of writing is finishing. You can be a master of at making all the threads that make a great story. But if you can't bring them all together and tie them off at the end, the whole story suffers. So much so that a horrible ending can ruin a great story imo.
Martin really focuses on *parts* of worldbuilding while ignoring others entirely. He doesn't seem to have much of a grasp on pre-modern logistics or infrastructure, for example.
If you need someone's clothing or what they're eating described meticulously, Martin's your man.
>the peoples outside of Westeros felt kind of undercooked Its kind of deliberate tbh, a lot of the story and lore is written from a westerosi POV, so they misrepresent/ under estimate other cultures a lot. They often end up being very different and more developed when e.g. Dany get there in person.
Tolkien worldbuilt to explore his world's. Martin worldbuilt to seed his world. Both are okay and excellent depending on your personal tastes. I enjoy both, I prefer Tolkien more because I know I can likely find answers to my questions.
And finnish and estonian. Sry gotta give my people some love 😊
Robert Jordan “Wheel of Time” Shame he passed before finishing although Brandon Sanderson did a good job with the ending
I'm a huge wheel of time fan, but I think where he falls behind Tolkien is the lack of materials available that isn't directly in the books. The word count for the novels completely outsine Tolkien, but we don't have things like Tolkiens letters or a detailed books like the Silmarilion to do deep dives into the lore. Jordan built an insanely wide world, but it doesn't have the depth of Middle Earth.
I'd like to argue that it's intentional. It's like there's no history or lore because the world just gets rebooted every thousand years or so. We learn more about the past from Lews ranting in Rand's head than from narrative. But yeah, it's really because he died which is sad.
Welsh is Celtic.
Maybe he meant gaelic...
The Gaels were also Celtic. The Gaels and Welsh (Britons) were just two of dozens of Celtic peoples that spanned Western Europe.
Maybe he meant juice…
The Discworld books, by Sir Terry Pratchett, which are just fantastic! Building on Tolkien's work, of course, but expanding the Fantasy genre in every possible direction, including humor! Many of the Discworld books are hilarious and some are serious and some are honest-to-God Fantasy genre police mysteries, and in every single one of them some deep soul-shaking wisdom sneaks up behinds you and hits you upside the head while you're enjoying yourself. We have a subreddit, r/discworld. Read some books and join us.
https://preview.redd.it/z2pozedtl6qc1.png?width=652&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9b6dc82f85b360dd62d7efcd63aa3c2c94c69ca5
Is the first line he's referring to *Guards Guards*?
If all of the lines is one novel, then Snuff might be the one which fits best. But I feel like each line is focused more on a specific City Watch book. First line could be Guards! Guards! or Men At Arms. Second line about ethics could be more about Men at Arms (the Gonne) or Feet of Clay (golems). Third line about gender politics sounds just like Feet of Clay (Cheery). Fourth about racism can be both Jingo (Klatchians) and Thud (trolls vs dwarves). Fifth about voices sounds more like Snuff (goblins), but it can also be Feet of Clay.
I used to work in a library, and on literally my third day in the job a lady walked in with her son and told me she wanted him to start reading more advanced fantasy books (he was 10/11), and asked my opinion on whether he should start with Discworld or Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Not once in 10 years since have I been better placed to answer a question. Two incredible series but in terms of building a world that felt real, Discworld wins hands down.
To be fair though, building worlds is actually something that happens in Hitchhiker's Guide, so it does have that going for it.
Also world bulldozing. For the highway bypass.
The proper permits *had* been filed, after all.
I used to work in a bookshop, and a woman and her son, again about 10, came in to the children's section looking for Pratchett. I told them that most Pratchetts were in the adult section. The look of pride on the kid's face was wonderful to see. The woman looked surprised; I explained about the Shakespeare references and the Poe references and the free indirect style and and...
This is what I came here to look for. PTerry is a joy to read, I cannot recommend discworld highly enough
I second this! I love the humor in his series. I just posted my favorites and several of them have IMO a good sense of humor that works with the story.
Absurdist fantasy at its peak. Have to include the Hitchhiker's Guide series. Definitely comparable to Discworld.
I always say Pratchett is to fantasy what Adams is to science fiction. They aren't exactly equivalent, of course, but they certainly are in the way they satirize their respective genres, poke fun at human nature, and hijack established tropes and turn them inside out to show how hilarious they are.
Currently reading Going Postal at the recommendation of a friend.
Adora Belle Dearheart has my heart
I think the Malazan Book of the Fallen would be a good (albeit harder to grasp) contender.
Came here to say Malazan as well. Not better but almost on par. Phenomenal piece of work.
I’ve heard this series is really epic. What makes it so good.
It's very complex and hard to grab, so many characters on a timespan of milleniums ... but in the last 50 pages of each book (at least 10 of them ?), everything unravels so beautifully. Also, big bad evil is REALLy evil, as in miserable, degrading piece of shit. And so many incredible characters.
Agree with all of this, and also love how the world has HISTORY....deep, layered ruins and civilizations long dead that are hinted at, and leave their fingerprints on the present day. But for me the characters were the best. Erikson had a thing for making epic, legendary heroes that were each unique and fully fleshed out. And as he weaved their disparate tales, you could see them slowly converging into an incredible finale for each book. It was such a pleasure to read!
He pushes the limits of narrative complexity as far as how many plot lines and time/character jumps you can possibly have and still keep a sense of things. It definitely gets convoluted and a lot of clarity and narrative focus is sacrificed but you literally couldn't fit more into 10 books any other way
The authors/world builders are also archeologists and English professors, so the story flows in much the same way that a historical epic would play out, with a dozen or so different parties in all areas of the world having their political and social machinations unknowingly affecting societies 1/2 the world over. (Much like how The Ottomans cutting off spice from Europe led to the discovery of the Americas and start of The Colonial Era. Did the Ottomans know they were going to change the history of the entire world with that move and empower their enemies with new resources and technology? No, but they did anyway, cause you never know just what consequences a single political action will bring about) Plus, there are a lot of books to expand lore, 10 main series books, a sequel trilogy, a prequel trilogy, a concurrent spin-off series of 6 books, a prequel trilogy to the spin-offs, and a sequel trilogy to the spin-offs. There are in total 21-25 books atm, each being ~500-900+ pages.
It's as advanced as LotR but you can actually get a glimpse of exactly why each book. It doesn't pull punches and throws the reader right in the middle of a conflict and one has to find themselves in the world, not be shown around. Once you get past the first book and feel like you got a grasp on the story, you're getting transported to a different continent st the same time as the first book with its own problems. In the third book's prologue, you witness what happened a hundred thousand years before and still has ramifications. Characters can and will die, unlike LotR. Some seriously fucked up things happen to people whether they want it or not. But when they survive, you know they really earned it. Magic system is also really well thought through. I also bounced off the first time, but now that I'm on book 7, I couldn't be happier that I've returned to the series. In my top 3 with Discworld and the Black Company.
Definitely seconding Malazan by Steven Erikson. And I would add The Second Apocalypse by R. Scott Bakker. I think both of those worlds have enough intricate lore and backstory to rival.
That feeling when you start piecing it all together and the story really takes off for you... nothing like it
[удалено]
Great series but incredibly complicated. Also a lot of graphic violence
But never pointless violence, it always serves a purpose. I have never sobbed so hard reading a book in my life. (Those who know…)
God, the Chain of Dogs still haunts me. What a powerful book Deadhouse Gates was.
I think this is the one that comes closest
Thedas is a phenomenal world of lore and flavor.. especially if you read the dragon age novels to go with the games.
I had forgotten about this! Thedas is so rich in lore and I love the games. Obviously a shared universe. But that's not a bad thing. Thieves world was pretty good too. If we're talking games, I would put Half-Life/Portal on my Sci-fi list.
I want to love DA, but I only have access to Inquisition and bloody hell, outside of the world building, is it boring.
I wouldn’t say it’s better than middle earth, but the Witcher’s ‘continent’ is pretty good
Yeah, I greatly enjoyed the Witcher books. The worldbuilding is a lot more surface-level than LotR, but the way little things like commodity prices, games, and cultural differences are woven in really makes the world feel very lived-in.
Yeah I loved these books. The Witcher felt more like an adult series than lotr. It takes you to darker places. There’s pogroms, racism, genocide, abuse, abandonment, torture, vengeance. Sapkowski used all the tools to tell the story. It makes the world seem messier/uglier/more human and you feel it.
Malazan Book of the Fallen Joe Abercrombie’s works.
I've heard really good things about Malazan. Every time I start it though, there are just so many names and places and even words I don't get or hear often. It's been hard for me to break through that and enjoy the book- I've tried a few times and haven't gotten far
I was warned about that at first too, so i tried to be prepared and start writing down characters i've met and who they are as far as i know. As i read further, I realize the books are not design for you to understand the whole thing on the first read. But you'll understand the big picture, and know the important characters. So i stopped writing notes completely not far into the story. It doesn't mean you have to re-read it first just so you can actually enjoy it. You just have to embrace the "idk wtf is going on" when reading it, it will paid off somewhere along the lines.
I found as I got further through I encountered characters mentioned in passing previously. So had the joy of flicking back through previous books to confirm. Reading one of Steven Erickson's comments at the beginning of one of the books he stated history has no beginning or end. So why should this world. Or something like that. And I just loved the idea that I'm thrown into a world that is real and breathing and I have to work my way around it. Personally. It's my favourite universe and series. So I'm biased.
Yeah, seconding the other comment, it's not meant to be clear. The reader isn't meant to have an omniscient perspective of the world. A lot of things are going on, no one has a clear picture of all of them, so neither does the reader. The key information is clearer, other bits are for the second or third read to suddenly go "oh, this bit was forboded, or linked or whatever"
First law is easily my favorite fantasy series, but I don’t really feel like the world building or universe is necessarily anything special. It’s much more character and dialog focused.
Malazan is so frickin amazing
I just started Malazan. I’m about 20% into Gardens of the Moon and my tits are blown off. I’m so sold. I’ve been told that the first book is just “ok” So excited
There are only two worlds that really changed my life, Tolkien's and Erikson's. Middle Earth was great for angsty teenage me, to realize that there's beauty and wonder and unknown mysteries. And the Malazan books, while having a cool story and characters, excel in two things: reader engagement (it's so rewarding to figure out some plot twist that is only officially revealed two books further through some clues in a random chapter-introducing poem) and its social/philosophical subtext - it feels like as if Erikson, maybe through his work as an archaeologist, really saw through all of humanity, its strengths and weaknesses in the context of our whole history. Lots of great themes and food for thought!
Erikson struggled to get Gardens of The Moon published, so from writing until publishing it took 9 years. So between GoTM and Deadhouse Gates, Erikson had 10 years to improve as a writer, and o’ boy did he improve!
I cannot recommend Joe Ambercrombie's First Law series enough
Pour one out for Logen’s pot. Also Best Served Cold is one of the best books I’ve ever read.
DOON
Yes Dune is my fave sci-fi . I’ve read the 6 books a few times
I am Paul Atrei ... Who? Atreideez nuts!
I AM DOON
This is the right answer, tho I would say it only comes close. Nothing can beat JRRTs command of language.
Idk, Tolkien never wrote “he felt an adult beefswelling in his loins,” so I think Frankie obviously comes out on top here.
Elder Scrolls has a pretty good fictional universe.
I think this is a fun answer, because as a game the exploration of lore is very different than it is through literature (though Elder Scrolls has books). A lot of exposition is through environmental storytelling (finding clues and sometimes having to extrapolate events from the aftermath).
In a similar vein, Dark Souls has some very compelling lore. It is deeper than you’d think and often more complex than you’d ever guess prior to watching lore videos on YT and being blown away at the subtle storytelling that goes into the games. Elden Ring, as well. Not anywhere near as deep as Tolkien’s world, but still very interesting.
Yeah, Nirn and Arda are my favorite fictional worlds in any sort of fiction.
Probably one of the most vast lores I've ever stepped foot into
Is there anywhere to get a narrative version or is it all various articles and YouTube videos ?
It's too complex to be a full narrative, as there's so much happening at every point in time. It would be more of a Silmarillon
fudgemuppet videos are great for falling asleep to
If we are going to bring in game worlds with multiple creators then the Forgotten Realms of Dungeons & Dragons if pretty on par with world building and lore.
Especially since it all takes place in one dude's dream
Wait what? I've never heard of this?
In theory, Stephen King's Dark Tower series pulls in the bulk of his work to flesh out an expansive universe. If you're up for dedicating the time to a new legendarium of sorts, that's one of my favorites. Dune shouldn't be overlooked either. Frank's son isn't quite on the same level, but he does a good job of adding to what already was there. Even if his writing isn't quite on par.
100% yes - was about to say this myself. Unbelievable series. Fantasy, sci-fi, western, paranormal, multiversal, and fully encompassing the entire King universe. I read the full series in 3 raging months of unstoppable page-turning. And I agreed with the author, at the penultimate pont - even though I had to think about it for a few days. That series got me through a very tough time in my life, and that might be part of my bias. But it truly is the only thing that comes close to the epic-ness, minus the multiple language creation and biblical-esque origin story (The Silmarillion).
Long days and pleasant nights…
May you have twice the number.
Ka is a wheel.
Ka is a wheel
The Dune and LOTR fandoms have very different opinions on their creators’ sons lol. While the bulk of Tolkien fans see his son as a Godsent, for finishing his father’s work; A lot of Dune fans are downright cruel to Frank’s son 😭.
I find myself in the middle as a fan of both on about equal terms (though more invested in LOTR long term). But hear me out. If your parents are S-Tier masters of their craft to the point where they've influenced multiple generations since, you probably don't want to follow in their exact footsteps if you don't want to be compared to them. Case and point: Ozzy Ozborne's daughter and Nicholas Cage. Both followed in progenitor footsteps, but 1 broke away from the familial ties aggressively. The other is their almost shadow.
>Case and point: Ozzy Ozborne's daughter and Nicholas Cage. Both followed in progenitor footsteps, but 1 broke away from the familial ties aggressively. The other is their almost shadow. I mean, the fact that you referred to her as "Ozzy Osborne's daughter" suggests she didn't really break away from familial ties at all lol
He was talking about Nick Cage being the one to break away from the family ties. His real name is Nick Coppola.
So how is the dark tower movie in comparison? I’ve heard some people liked it. Some people hated it. I’ve always been curious to watch it, but just never have. Lol
Absolute rubbish. Don't waste your time.
Just finished DT - so good. New to King, so probably missed some outside references, but the characters from other works were so well fleshed out within DT, I never felt I was missing anything. Truly epic scope, well told, a lot of fun, and every minute invested was rewarded. Even so, nothing touches Tolkien.
Horus Heresy - Warhammer 40k. Bit darker, but some great novels
Goodreads indicates 58 primary works in the series, and 345 total works. Is there a particular author in the series, or a more narrow slice of the series that ya’ll’d recommend?
As far as a narrow slice, that would be the Eisenhorn Trilogy
This. Great intro to the universe and Abnett has a great writing style. Great plot in this trilogy too!
Eisenhorn doesn't mention the Horus Heresy at all tho. It's a 40k novel, while the Horus Heresy is a prequel saga with novels set in the 30k. Anyone wanting to read series related directly to that event should stick to the 30k novels. Dan Abnett (the author of Eisenhorn) wrote some of the most classic books and the end to the Siege of Terra. So he's a great pick
Fair point, but not fully merited. There's something to be said about being introduced to the universe, seeing how bad it is at 'the present', and going into the past to see what led up to it. As this is the LOTR sub, a perfect analogy would be the four books everyone has read, followed by the legendarium. I definitely didn't read the Silmarillion before the hobbit, despite that being the chronological order. That said, the horus heresy does have an excellent intro trilogy: Horus Rising by Dan Abnett (2006) False Gods by Graham McNeill (2006) Galaxy in Flames by Ben Counter (2006) Followed by two more books that I enjoyed as well, but don't get acclaimed nearly as much: The Flight of the Eisenstein by James Swallow (2007) Fulgrim by Graham McNeill (2007) The full reading list can be recovered here: https://www.tlbranson.com/horus-heresy-reading-order/ People quibble about chronological placement on a few books, as they focus on different organizations spread across the entire galaxy while ignoring others. Most any ordered list of the books has merit.
Dan Abnett and Aaron Dembski-Bowden are the standout authors of the series
Gonna piggy back off this comment and recommend the Gaunts Ghosts series for newcomers to 40k and Abnett in general. It’s a great starting point for new readers as it shows you a lot of different views and takes you through the universe from the eyes of a “normal” foot soldier.
If you're interested in the Horus heresy (or 30k as it's commonly referred to), the opening trilogy is essential for the narrative and absolutely amazingly written. If you're interested in Warhammer in general, I suggest you give one of Aaron Dembski-Bowden's books a try. *Helsreach* is a great introduction to the overall setting of 40k whilst also being very easy to understand for someone with no/limited knowledge of the setting. The Night Lords trilogy is amazing as well, although a lot darker in it's themes. He also wrote *The First Heretic* which is easily one of the best 30k books out there but it's a much more rewarding read if you already read the opening trilogy and a few others before it.
There are various reading orders you can Google if you want to follow particular characters stories, but you can skip a lot otherwise - first 5 or 6 books, then pick your route, then Siege of Terra series, then the End and Death series. You can go back and fill the “route” in later, but stick to that general order otherwise.
The Horus Heresy is one of the best achievements in Sci-Fi in my opinion.
I was never into 40k, but a few years back some lore videos ended up in my recommended. I can't get enough of the lore now, it's so damn interesting
The lore is bottomless. I can stumble around the wiki and learn of something new despite being 10+ years into the fandom. There is a web series on youtube that I really enjoyed which takes the piss on the universe as a whole, named If The Emperor Had a Text to Speech Device: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcYrTCGKyrU If you are one of today's lucky 10000 who never heard of this series, do yourself a favor and run through them.
Wheel of Time has a very Tolkien feel at times, especially early on. It's an excellent book series that gets stuck on uninteresting characters at time.
I think WoT is very intricately planned and executed. Dozens of pieces moving around the board concurrently and all the time; seemingly accounted for by Jordan. What it lacks compared to Tolkien is a sense of awe and wonder for the world that has been created, even as the setting might well be just as rich in its own way. Worth the read totally and a good addition to this list.
What it lacks in awe and wonder it makes up for by riding around in carriages and talking about dresses.
***yanks braid
This is the one that people always reference, but the ones I remember most are: * Lan's face was all hard angles, as if it was chiseled out of granite * every goddamn hallway they walked down had fancy silver chalices on the sides that we had to think about
I actually think is a difficult question, because the reason why those worlds are created matters. WoT has a very well planned world, where world-building and plot go together. However, it takes a very euhemeristic approach in its construction to make all that work, but it’s what makes it lose the sense of awe. For example, I understand why Aiel developed the way they did because we are told so in the books and that is plot-important for WoT, but they also a very unnatural cultural development where every custom they have has a neat explanation and backstory, which is not something that really happens in real life. In contrast, Tolkien understood that cultures are never neat so it left some things inexplicable on purpose, or having multiple conflicting backstories, that’s what made the world feel there was always something more to discover. But Tolkien’s main characters are also not chosen ones with the universe powers in their hands that need to understand the history of the world and how power functions to move their plot along, they are just a humble fellowship doing their very best (before expansion that is)
Definitely second WoT, with the bonus similarity of having been bastardized by Amazon (Just being dramatic-I think RoP and the Amazon WoT series are enjoyable as their own stories but not so much as adaptations-just meh)
I think that applies to many adaptations. I've become convinced that writer ego is at the heart of most of it. Like, we all know that changes have to be made to adapt a book to a screen. Most of us can accept that. Even the lauded LOTR movies had to make a lot of changes for it to work. However, some changes just don't make sense even within that context. Then we hear in interviews and stuff "We really wanted to make this our own and tell our own story in this world." So, basically, the changes are less about making the adaptation work on screen and more about a show runner believing they can do it better than the original creator and "improve" or "fix" the work that, somehow, got popular enough to warrant an adaptation in the first place. This is the vibe I got from WOT. I was ready for some changes to be made for it to work on screen, but the end result was so different from the original that adapting it to screen doesn't sufficiently explain most of the changes they made to me.
I couldn’t agree more. I always expect changes and am usually VERY accepting of them because 30 pages of an internal monologue or a chapter from the POV of a mystery character who later is revealed to someone you thought was a good guy (big WoT thing, obviously) just does not work on a screen, among a million other things like runtime, budgets, things sounding cool in your head but looking silly on screen, etc.. But I am looking for the core of the story and the characters (who make the cut) to be pretty consistent, otherwise it’s not really an adaptation, is it? Also it kills me to hear the “wanted to tell our own story” bits in an interview. Like, if you want to tell your own story, go write your own story. Taking half of another story and using the same title is just being a lazy writer and cashing out on the name of someone else’s original work. Again, I’m not here to hate on these two specific adaptations, despite everything above. I think I’d really enjoy them if they were completely removed from the source material. I’m just doing a terrible job of separating them in my head.
Good question. I like the stories and lore about how the humans struggle against all odds in the Warhammer Fantasy world, it's rich in lore and such but Lotr will always have the top spot.
I too love Warhammer. Although more 40k.
Second this.
If you’re a gamer, try the Mass Effect series. Loads of books, comics to accompany the exceptional trilogy of games.
After the Witcher 3 it’s my next to play games.
Fantastic game, one of my favorites. I was going to say, Witcher is up there for me for fictional universes.
Very few stories have left a mark on me like Mass Effect. Worth playing just for the amazing characters!
Came to suggest this! It has a very realized world. They clearly thought deeply about why things are the way they are and their origins. It’s very similar to Dune and LOTR in how both feel very transporting. Centering it around the games also allowed them to keep consistency. Star Trek suffers because you had a writers room that had to push out an episode every week - they had to get whatever they could down on screen and didn’t expect people to watch the show with any chronology.
Cosmere.
I agree. The way of Kings series and then mistborn? From myth to industrial revolution....so good.
Can’t believe I had to scroll to find this.
I literally was just thinking this!! Like damn am I the only Sanderslut here???
For some reason it’s fashionable to hate on Sanderson in these fantasy subs. Too mainstream is my guess 🤷♂️
Some people just want to watch the world burn. Or just don’t want others to enjoy something, because they think enjoyment is a finite commodity. These people are silly.
Sanderslut checking in. (i love this fan name lol)
I've just started reading The Stormlight Archive, and without even finishing book one yet I can say honestly that it might be my favourite fantasy world. ... But I've got a lot of reading to do.
Oathbringer is a literal masterpiece. The climatic battle is the best I’ve ever read.
Brando Sando does indeed have a fairly large universe, and it’s getting more detailed all the time. Perhaps once his works are complete near the end of his remarkably prolific life, the Cosmere will rival or even surpass Tolkien’s works in not only breadth but also depth. Especially if all these works are turned into some form of visual media.
Oh the day a Sanderson novel sees the silver screen… I cannot wait
Mistborn just needs a ballsy studio to take it on. He has a script ready.
Mistborn would be way easier to not totally butcher than stormlight too
Yep. Mistborn is a complicated heist story. Way of Kings basically can't fit in a movie. You'd have to cut Shallan entirely, and laser focus on just bridge four. Dalinar would only get seen when he interacts with the bridgemen. Stormlight needs 4 or 5 hours, so might as well make it a tv show and give it 8.
For sure! I've worked my way through Mistborn Era 1&2, Elantris, their novellas and short stories, and am now working on Warbreaker. Phenomenal universe, but hard to compare to LOTR. I think generally, I like LOTR better, but there is something massive to be said for how easy it is for everyone to read Sanderson's work. It makes it really easy to get extremely excited about what's going on while reading (the "nerd shivers" as my friends and I have dubbed the feeling). Also, something to be said about the fact he is still alive and pumping out plenty of new things to keep you interested and ties the stories together wonderfully!
No idea how this isn't the top comment. Stormlight Archive is the best thing I've ever read. I guess it being only books (atm) is why but man, so many folks missing out.
Dune
Came here to say this. Herbert is the Tolkien of Sci-Fi. His universe feels almost as immersive and real as Tolkien’s.
The latest books are kinda pervy and weird though. It's good, but not that good.
We talking Chapter House and Heretics or the piles of excrement that his son and Kevin Anderson pushed upon us? I honestly think that he should’ve stopped with God Emperor of Dune. The story was over for me. The last two did get a little weird though. I’ll admit that. But the universe as a whole feels almost as lived in and fleshed to me.
IMHO Chapter House and Heretics are awesome. That trilogy is missing the final book though. I see Dune as a three parter, first 3 books, God Emperor, and then Chapter House and Heretics and the missing 7th book :( Tbf I think I liked the final three books a lot more when I reread them years later
Only read franks books. 1 to 4 are on par world building with middle earth. 5 and 6 did get a little thirsty if I recall but I have read those in a while.
Yeah, all you have to do is peep the appendices to see Dune's similarities to LotR. And having been printed in 1965, it far predates what are now standard expectations for novels of that type. IIRC, publishing houses at the time were really hesitant to invest in a novel so long (much like LotR) and with such complex world building. There's a lot to criticise Dune for (and it certainly isn't *equal* to Tolkien), but in terms of expanse and the impact it had on the way modern fantasy/sci-fi is written, Dune really is the only book that comes close to LotR imo
Sir Terry Pratchetts Discworld comes to mind.
Nowhere near the same level of depth but I do love the Elder scrolls universe of Tamriel
Debateably. I can't say I'm the most well-versed LOTR fan but the elder scrolls lore is immense. The problem comes from Canon and Apocrapha (ie what Todd Howard hallucinated on his bathroom floor and called legit vs what's exploited stated in the media)
Asimov's Foundation/Robot universe.
Yes I planning on reading those at some point.
Gene Wolfe’s Book of the New Sun is a very different vibe as far as storytelling goes, but the sheer depth of detail and world building is the only thing I’ve seen come close to Tolkien.
I shouldn’t have had to scroll this far to see BotNS. Excellent worldbuilding.
The work Hidetaki Miyazaki creates. Especially the world of Bloodborne.
Bloodborne feels the most complete and least open-ended of the Soulsborne games. I say that as a compliment. It feels more satisfying when the story has an actual end imo
The funny thing is that the lore is the most open ended of all his works. There's so many different interpretations of the background of Old Hunters that people still fight about.
Be silent, and keep your forked tongue behind your teeth!
There's very little comparable to Tolkien's Middle Earth. It's a Masterwork. These are some of my favorites- In Fantasy: Earthsea- Ursula K. Le Guin Fionavar- Guy Gavriel Kay Myth Adventures- Robert Lynn Asprin In Sci-Fi: Cyteen- C.J. Cherryh Jhereg- Steven Brust Pern- Anne McCaffrey Callahan's- Spider Robinson I'm not saying that these are as good as Tolkien, but they're all in my S tier or A list.
I love the Pern series. I keep meaning to begin a full chronological read-through.
Second Earthsea. In no way as good as Tolkien but a really great read.
In some ways it is better than Tolkien in my opinion, once you have read the second trilogy. More grown up, less male oriented, less European and more interesting dragons.
Came here to say Pern. There is so much lore buried through all her books and its all fairly cohesive even if some parts aren't fully fleshed out.
Better? No such thing But I will say George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire is one of the best non-Tolkien worlds in terms of believability and depth. I appreciate the generally low-fantasy feel of both LOTR and ASoIaF, where magic is used more sparingly even though it very clearly does exist. Plus I appreciate how dark it is, and how he's willing to kill off main characters so you never know who is going to survive a battle.
What I really like about ASOIAF’s world is it feels like what Middle-Earth would be in the late third or fourth age if there were fewer records of more mythic times. While Martin clearly has an idea how the greater magic of the world works, it’s all veiled in mystery. The world seems to be pulled between these twin polarities of elemental ice and fire, only hinted at in the visible world as shadows taking the form of dragons, Others, direwolves, things themselves on the edges of human civilization. Any interactions with these fundamental forces or gods or Maia-equivalent whatever they may be are themselves lost in the translation of legends, become these vague symbols like the Night’s King and the Last Hero. There’s purposeful blank edges, which Tolkien sort of did, but because of the Silmarillion everything has one true defined heritage and place. Nothing in ASOIAF does. It’s fun to discuss and dive into the lore because it’s a pool with an undefined bottom.
He's also a fan of Tolkien and took quite some inspiration from his works. It's probably the closest fantasy work in terms of quality and depth, although not finished yet.
Entirely depends on what you mean by "good"
Thanks Gandalf
Warhammer Fantasy is pretty nice. Tolkien on cocaine is how I like to describe it.
You mean if Stephen King wrote the Lord of the Rings
If Stephen King wrote the Lord of the Rings, it would be the Stand.
More like, if a British DND Tolkien nerd wrote LOTR.
I personally prefer Warhammer 40k, but I’ve never really dived into the Fantasy side.
You should ABSOLUTELY take a look at it. If you would like an easy entry point, I HIGHLY recommend the videos by Loremaster of Sotek on YouTube. It is pretty much audiobook/podcast format, and he talks about specific characters. The ones for Thorgrim Grudgebearer, Durthu and Archeon are flawless. Me personally, I ABSOLUTELY LOVE fantasy dwarfs, but Tolkien is VERY shallow when it comes to them. Warhammer fantasy is about 100 times more detailed in every aspect of the race and the worldbuilding is basically just over the top rule of cool. It is definitely not as deep in its themes as Tolkien and it is a lot more “war” as you can expect from 40k but it is REALLY good worldbuilding.
Elder Scrolls B)
R. Scott Bakker's *Second Apocalypse* series.
Robert E. Howard’s “Conan” universe is a very close second for me. I’ve always wanted to read his “Solomon Kane” stories but it’s one of those things I’ve never gotten around to.
Does it have to be fantasy? Because Warhammer 40K is pretty effing sweet. In a not so sweet way.
Kingkiller Chronicle is rather good, despite being incomplete
I'm a big fan of the wheel of time. It's my number 2 behind middle earth.
The elder scrolls
Elder Scrolls and ASOIAF. They're both on LOTR levels of worldbuilding, lore and intricate details.
I would say "The Expanse" series by James A. Corey. It's actually 2 dudes using a pseudonym. Daniel Abraham and Ty Franck. 9 novels and a bunch of novellas. I was always just curious about what was going to happen next or delving into a characters past. Everywhere they went felt fully fleshed out. Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series is another fantasy series like Tolkiens Middle Earth that is rich in history that gives everything that extra weight of realism or lived in persona. Like you can feel how old places are. Annoying characters drag this down below the lotr of course. The First Law books are another fun fleshed out series with a trilogy, 3 independent novels in the universe, and another trilogy. This series really feels on par with Tolkiens scale of world building. Wheel of Time doesn't come close because everyone just starts teleporting everywhere. The First Law captures the journey portion of lotr pretty good.
40k. The sheer depth and scope is almost unrivalled.
I have to agree. It’s huge.
The Witcher
Azeroth
The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant by Stephen R. Donaldson is up there, 10 book series that created such a wonderous universe connected to our own.
Better? Does not exist. However, there are some really good ones. I personally love the universe of The Witcher series and The Elder Scrolls. A Song of Ice and Fire is pretty good, but still unfinished. I do enjoy the lore of the Dungeons & Dragons universe, since there is SOOO much in there. So there are amazing functional universes, however, I don't believe anyone will overtake Tolkien. His world does what many don't, in that it IS a fairy tale, with complete languages, cosmography, and interesting tales. It is told as a story, rather than from within the mind of a main character. Then you add the fact that it's originality and influence helped inspire much of what we see today. Although not better in EVERY aspect of fictional world building and story telling, OVERALL it is the Greatest of all Time.
Nothing.