84 replies to this topic

[FireSight]

I know a lot of battletech purists hate him because of adding the "Stackpole" to battletech, which had been, before then, something that was supposedly impossible according to the fluff...

But he is still a very good author. His Rogue Squadron series was very well thought out and written, his Cartomancy series (fantasy "eastern" series where magic is gained by mastery of a skill) is pretty damn awesome and well thought out. His envisioning of the clans as people who basically worship the past is fascinating. Seriously, if you want to take a group of people who are isolated, and ensure they remain strong warriors, dividing them into factions who are supposed to fight eachother regularly for various reasons is the PERFECT way to do it... uniting them is a pain in the *** afterwards, but if you give them all a goal (re-creating the Star League), you give them a uniting focus. Its actually a decently thought out plan, when you try to look at "why would things turn out this way".

Despite what some people claim as his writing being over the top and making no sense... there is some logic to the stuff he adds in.

[Lord Of NOOB]

I like Michael A. Stackpole books. But i think his Star wars books are better then the Battletech books.
The warrior triology is just, uhh, lets say much to cinematic.

The Later books are good. However the political backround was killing all good story Ideas. As far as I know was all Books coordinated by the authors, and were moderated. Which kept the Quality in the story consistant.

I have to say that I only read one book in english. The others I read and own in german. I have to check if Battletech was translated by the same translator. Because I remeber that the Battletech books have a quite readable. Nothing of the ordenary, but nice to read.

And comparing the Warrior Triology with the later books, there is a huge difference in Backround and writing style. I think thats independant of the Author. It is very different. And the Dark Ages series is great Idea! A shame Michael A. Stackpole wrote only two book in the new one.

[Steven Dixon]

I also agree that Robert Thurston was the worst BT writer, his were the only books I didn't like (I even though Far Country was a decent novel if you just ignore the aliens), and Charrette was probably my favorite author, although I would say Stackpole was a close second.

[Gendou]

I respect Stackpole's additions to the canon, as well as his skill as an author. He helped shape the universe that we love, and he stuck with it far past the point when many authors had thrown up their hands and left in exasperation. He's not the greatest writer in the world, but he's one of the best that the Battletech universe has had over the last thirty years.

I do not respect 'Stackpoling,' which reached terminal conclusion with MW4 and created a generation of 'Mech fans who think 'Mechs should explode in a nuclear ball of glowing white when they die.

[grimzod]

Rixx, on 26 June 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

Love Stackpole. First books I read were the Warrior trilogy, followed by the Kerensky trilogy...so 6 books in a row by him. He's not a groundbreaking author, but he's good. You can connect with the characters, and the action is well detailed. He doesn't do the off the wall crazy stuff like some other BT writers (magic powers and acrobatic mechs).

I think Stackpole gets a bad name for 3 reasons.

A. Some of the writers of BT novels do some really odd stuff, and Stackpole is arguably the most famous BT writer, so he gets blamed for stuff he had no part of.

B. He's involved with the introduction of the clans. The pre-clan BT fans tended to hate the clans. They were vested in the Inner Sphere politics and saw the Clans as a really shallow attempt to revitalize the BT universe.

C. He's involved with the introduction of the Dark Age series. The Dark Age timeline, mechs, books, and game are not as good overall as the pre-dark age stuff, but they are still solid and have kept the universe alive and growing. Still though, the purists and long term fans saw the DA stuff as an abomination...and Stackpoles name was on the first novel.

His name wasn't JUST on the first novel:

• 2002 Ghost War (ROC/WizKids)
  
• 2007 Masters of War (ROC/WizKids)

And he defended the DA abortion, not just wrote about it.

[Glasswlkr]

I love his books, and I also read the Blood of Kerensky series, and it was one of the first battletech books I read way back in the day. Really got me sucked into the canon.

[wicked06]

Of course he is alive... haven't anybody seen him on Facebook or Twitter? I just posted a link for him. Told him about the "love" you are showing for him.

I guess with some of the stuff you folks commented on, I must had blinders on or something. I didn't know about any 'bad business'. Which is just fine. I am more interested about what he is posting thru Facebook. A lot of good tips that help improve a writer's craft.

[Hawk819]

I've read jsut about every book he's written. I've met him at GenCon 2007 and enjoyed his class as well. For three days, I listened to what he had to say on writing, its business, and what to expect when it comes to being a professional writer. I'd love to see him again but don't think that will ever happen. Well, come to think of it, one can never tell what Fate has in store for us.

Edited by hawk819, 26 June 2012 - 09:27 AM.

[Linkin]

I never did read the DA books, but I did read and enjoy the Blood of Kerensky Triology. It's been awhile since I read them so I can't go into much detials, other than I liked them. Off topic a bit, as others have stated, I thought that X-Wing books he wrote were acctually a bit better than the BT ones he did. None the less, enjoyed them both.

Edited by Linkin, 26 June 2012 - 09:27 AM.

[Artifice]

Stackpole is a legend of science fiction, in my opinion.

I don't even care to read anything from the Dark Age, but the majority of his work is pretty awesome. Take his current work on Wasteland 2 for example.

He's a dude and will always have free beer with my complements.

[DocH]

I always liked his books. I especially liked the "Blood of Kerensky" trilogy.

[aRottenKomquat]

I have not read his BT novels yet, but I thoroughly enjoyed his Star Wars work. He was definitely one of the best authors for the Star Wars franchise, probably second behind Timothy Zahn. Maybe third.

[Arthwys IronHand]

I liked the Blood of Kerensky trilogy.

[Monsoon]

I love Stackpole, he brought real life to his characters, he gave us intrigue and imagination. The only time I've seen people bash him, is because they didn't like House Davion and his books were 'biased' in their opinion.

Personally, while I love Davion. I do wish there had been another author that could have focused on House Marik, It was the one House the was definitely under-utilized in the books.

[Monsoon]

Artifice, on 26 June 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

Take his current work on Wasteland 2 for example.

He's a dude and will always have free beer with my complements.

I've been waiting 24 years for a damned true sequel. Fallout is awesome, but I've missed, 'Explodes like a blood sausage'. Every few years I go back to play that classic game. Can't wait for the new one.

[Dagger6T6]

I enjoyed the books because I enjoy the lore and the workings of the BT universe... I don't critique writers and writing style because I've never written a book myself, nor am I a published author. I've read both trilogies twice... once way back in middle school and then again more recently.

I was also able to find the first printings of all six books in their 1980's cover glory at a local used bookstore about a year ago.

Edited by Dagger6T6, 26 June 2012 - 10:16 AM.

[JUGMAN]

I have read some of his Star Wars universe stuff and he seems to be pretty good author. He has expanded some characters off into larger roles and brought some obscure story lines to life that had some fans thinking what if. That makes a universe stand the test of time and branch off into multi generation fan bases.

[Dihm]

I need a "I generally like his work, but some elements of it make me gag" option.

[BFalcon]

Tekkiller, on 26 June 2012 - 08:59 AM, said:

IMO he is the best writer of any of the authors having written Battletech novels. On the other hand, Robert Thurston is by far the worst. I get angry reading his books with all those parentheses, un-structured sentences, etc. Arrrghghghghghhhh...!

I dunno - the guy who wrote "Far Country" was worse - that novel pretty much had nothing to do with battletech and was just an author looking to piggyback off the BT brand name. It was also the book that broke the "no alien sentients" rule, which annoyed a lot of people.

[BFalcon]

Monsoon, on 26 June 2012 - 09:39 AM, said:

I love Stackpole, he brought real life to his characters, he gave us intrigue and imagination. The only time I've seen people bash him, is because they didn't like House Davion and his books were 'biased' in their opinion.

Personally, while I love Davion. I do wish there had been another author that could have focused on House Marik, It was the one House the was definitely under-utilized in the books.

Agreed about the Mariks - all the books were biased to the House they focussed on - the Grey Death books were pro-Steiner for the most part, Stackpole was pro-Davion for a lot of it (overall - the Justin Xiang stuff was definitely anti). Even the clan books were biased towards the clan they focussed on. It's only natural.

The only side that seemed to come off worst in most of the books was Comstar...