What do you think?
Rate this book
The Four Kings
Politics, magic, and love don't mix. Or do they?
When the world is overcome with The Great Blight of poverty, corruption, and hopelessness, a group of young wizards seizes control and makes sweeping changes--which divides the human race into loyal supporters of the new regime, and bitter, angry revolutionaries.
In the midst of the turmoil is Amanda Fullerton, a grad student who is hired to act as liaison between the wizard council in North America and its citizens. While ruling like monarchs from their perch in the sky, the self-proclaimed "Liberators" create a widening gap among the Mortals, with Amanda caught in the middle.
As Amanda tries to serve both sides, she becomes embroiled in the twisted agendas of these puppet masters. With alluring, yet deadly wizard games that threaten her life and romantic entanglements, Amanda discovers her "dream job" is anything but! While the four wizards--Demus, Indie, Regi, and Justica initially unite under their libertarian ideals and their revered god Elsedor, their unique personalities eventually lead to infighting, with the fate of the continent up for grabs.
"The Four Kings" casts a spell on its readers with a well-woven tale of fantasy, thriller, romance, and political intrigue that will keep you guessing until the end--and perhaps beyond.
When the world is overcome with The Great Blight of poverty, corruption, and hopelessness, a group of young wizards seizes control and makes sweeping changes--which divides the human race into loyal supporters of the new regime, and bitter, angry revolutionaries.
In the midst of the turmoil is Amanda Fullerton, a grad student who is hired to act as liaison between the wizard council in North America and its citizens. While ruling like monarchs from their perch in the sky, the self-proclaimed "Liberators" create a widening gap among the Mortals, with Amanda caught in the middle.
As Amanda tries to serve both sides, she becomes embroiled in the twisted agendas of these puppet masters. With alluring, yet deadly wizard games that threaten her life and romantic entanglements, Amanda discovers her "dream job" is anything but! While the four wizards--Demus, Indie, Regi, and Justica initially unite under their libertarian ideals and their revered god Elsedor, their unique personalities eventually lead to infighting, with the fate of the continent up for grabs.
"The Four Kings" casts a spell on its readers with a well-woven tale of fantasy, thriller, romance, and political intrigue that will keep you guessing until the end--and perhaps beyond.
508 pages, Paperback
First published October 20, 2013
3 people are currently reading
450 people want to read
About the author
Scott Spotson
18 books107 followersScott Spotson is a Canadian novelist who excels in imagining scenes of intrigue and adventure within ordinary lives while daydreaming, then pulls together various plots to create a compelling story.
Scott has written eleven books: "Life II," a time travel novel; and its sequel, "Bridge Through Time," "Seeking Dr. Magic," a novel that imagines what happens when a powerful wizard comes of age as a young man, and wreaks his havoc on the world, which is yet unaware of his existence; "Delusional," in which a woman in love suddenly experiences hallucinations and resolve to track down her tormentor before it's too late; "The Strange Life of Brandon Chambers," in which a young man suffers from hallucinations throughout his life, but others also see them and these illusions contain clues to a deeper meaning--or do they?; "Wizards Rising: The Cataclysm," in which four arrogant wizards take over North America and thrill the populace with deadly wizard games; "Alia Tero: The Many Lives of Darren Datita," in which a bewildered young man must deal with the strange rules of an Earth-like society in an alternate universe; "My Wizard Buddy" series, children's books in which Tyler has a boy wizard as a real friend, not as an imaginary one, and "You Know You're Thin When...," a humor book using large single panel cartoons.
Scott has written eleven books: "Life II," a time travel novel; and its sequel, "Bridge Through Time," "Seeking Dr. Magic," a novel that imagines what happens when a powerful wizard comes of age as a young man, and wreaks his havoc on the world, which is yet unaware of his existence; "Delusional," in which a woman in love suddenly experiences hallucinations and resolve to track down her tormentor before it's too late; "The Strange Life of Brandon Chambers," in which a young man suffers from hallucinations throughout his life, but others also see them and these illusions contain clues to a deeper meaning--or do they?; "Wizards Rising: The Cataclysm," in which four arrogant wizards take over North America and thrill the populace with deadly wizard games; "Alia Tero: The Many Lives of Darren Datita," in which a bewildered young man must deal with the strange rules of an Earth-like society in an alternate universe; "My Wizard Buddy" series, children's books in which Tyler has a boy wizard as a real friend, not as an imaginary one, and "You Know You're Thin When...," a humor book using large single panel cartoons.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 74 reviews
March 4, 2014
An embattled president, leading a corrupt administration, finds himself and everything he fights to keep torn apart when wizards invade his office and take over. Soon, it becomes apparent this is happening worldwide, as wizards change how humanity exists.
Scott Spotson's novel of world domination by wizards first comes across as a fantasy, but it is soon apparent there are glaring problems. What is real in fact isn't, and what is fantasy limps along. Spotson ignores the first and most important rule of urban fantasy: Decide what is real and what is fantasy, and keep it separate. The glaring errors in the first twenty-five chapters make it apparent Mr. Spotson will write fantasy as he deems fit and ignore what doesn't fit his view of the world. Despite those issues, or perhaps because of them, I continued to read what was becoming a dreary omnipotent viewpoint where the author directed everything from above while the characters only took over to inform the reader of who could or couldn't see what was happening.
The idea of replacing aging politicians with those under thirty is an idea discussed on many a college campus, and has been for decades. One has to wonder at just how well this idea would work out. During my twenties, I was all for this, thinking that I knew it all. Oh, how life changes those impressions.
Amanda, the only non-wizard viewpoint character comes off as a wimp throughout much of the story. Her election to Supreme Leader wasn't for any kind of skill in that area, but rather her fawning use of quotes to impress the wizards "interviewing" her. She acquiesces to the wizards, blindly accepting their judgment as all-knowing and benevolent. The wizards themselves are unlikeable to a degree as to turn off a reader. There is no visible plot, only the same mantra repeated over and over – how this society is much better than any other, how the wizards ended strife worldwide and provide bitcoins as currency to everyone, with a new allowance grated daily. This can only lead to a feeling of entitlement.
Is there dissent to this world order? Yes, but said dissent is all in the background, except for one confrontation. Instead of seeing a give and take between good and evil, and letting the reader decide for themselves, Spotson proceeds to describe the battle from the wizard's viewpoints in a supercilious manner, as if Mortals, as they are called, are no more than bugs who must be crushed. Without any kind of empathy, the reader can only be left with the feeling this type of leadership is nothing more than tyranny.
The fact checking on the real world in this novel is abysmal at best. Not just at the beginning of the book, but when a character refers to people in the 20s begging for food in the streets. A few minutes of research would have proven that the 20s were a time of extravagant spending that led to the crash of the stock market at the end of October 1929, and brought about a worldwide depression that lasted into the 30s, where people begged for food and milk was poured into gutters because no one could buy it.
The long chunks of supposedly meaningful dialogue only go to further the omnipotent viewpoint, where quotes are often thrown back and forth. The old adage "show don't tell" is nowhere in evidence in this long, often off track novel.
I purchased The Four Kings in the hopes it was as good as people told me it was and was sorely disappointed in it.
Scott Spotson's novel of world domination by wizards first comes across as a fantasy, but it is soon apparent there are glaring problems. What is real in fact isn't, and what is fantasy limps along. Spotson ignores the first and most important rule of urban fantasy: Decide what is real and what is fantasy, and keep it separate. The glaring errors in the first twenty-five chapters make it apparent Mr. Spotson will write fantasy as he deems fit and ignore what doesn't fit his view of the world. Despite those issues, or perhaps because of them, I continued to read what was becoming a dreary omnipotent viewpoint where the author directed everything from above while the characters only took over to inform the reader of who could or couldn't see what was happening.
The idea of replacing aging politicians with those under thirty is an idea discussed on many a college campus, and has been for decades. One has to wonder at just how well this idea would work out. During my twenties, I was all for this, thinking that I knew it all. Oh, how life changes those impressions.
Amanda, the only non-wizard viewpoint character comes off as a wimp throughout much of the story. Her election to Supreme Leader wasn't for any kind of skill in that area, but rather her fawning use of quotes to impress the wizards "interviewing" her. She acquiesces to the wizards, blindly accepting their judgment as all-knowing and benevolent. The wizards themselves are unlikeable to a degree as to turn off a reader. There is no visible plot, only the same mantra repeated over and over – how this society is much better than any other, how the wizards ended strife worldwide and provide bitcoins as currency to everyone, with a new allowance grated daily. This can only lead to a feeling of entitlement.
Is there dissent to this world order? Yes, but said dissent is all in the background, except for one confrontation. Instead of seeing a give and take between good and evil, and letting the reader decide for themselves, Spotson proceeds to describe the battle from the wizard's viewpoints in a supercilious manner, as if Mortals, as they are called, are no more than bugs who must be crushed. Without any kind of empathy, the reader can only be left with the feeling this type of leadership is nothing more than tyranny.
The fact checking on the real world in this novel is abysmal at best. Not just at the beginning of the book, but when a character refers to people in the 20s begging for food in the streets. A few minutes of research would have proven that the 20s were a time of extravagant spending that led to the crash of the stock market at the end of October 1929, and brought about a worldwide depression that lasted into the 30s, where people begged for food and milk was poured into gutters because no one could buy it.
The long chunks of supposedly meaningful dialogue only go to further the omnipotent viewpoint, where quotes are often thrown back and forth. The old adage "show don't tell" is nowhere in evidence in this long, often off track novel.
I purchased The Four Kings in the hopes it was as good as people told me it was and was sorely disappointed in it.
November 1, 2013
This was a brilliantly entertaining book. It is so original and the author’s vivid imagination deserves a medal alone. It is well written and laced with humour, great characters and sharp dialogue. The writing is clever also and even throws in a line from my favourite philosopher Kierkegaard! It was well edited and formatted and I guarantee you won’t have read such an original and refreshingly great book like this all year. Great stuff!
October 12, 2020
*In this review, I quote a few parts directly from the book.
The Deadly Wizard Games is an imaginative story about what happens after wizards take over the world.
The story is imaginative, but there were many things about it that threw me off. There were some incorrectly worded parts, for example: “…then we can figure out who they are what their agenda they have.” Or “she had with quite a bit of steam to let off.” Or “One of the other applicants screamed as they discovered the same thing.” Since “they” is a plural pronoun, and the gender of the person would not have been difficult for Amanda to ascertain, “he” or “she” should have been used, which threw me off. There was also quite a bit of redundancy. Like “He simply gazed at her with a brooding gaze.” It’s a good idea to refrain as much as possible from using the same word in the same paragraph, let alone the same sentence. One sentence, “Regi was so terrified that he was nearly terrified.” Was too redundant for words. The wording also did not flow as well as it could have, in many places. One example: “Under our protection of our magic…” There were also instances of fragmented sentences. Sentences that end without the complete idea being giving. “Thinking back to that day, when the sky had been criss-crossed with a thousand missiles and the Liberators had taken the world’s safety into their own hands.” The sentence ends there, but I’m left thinking… Okay… then… what? It would have been better to word it like this: “Amanda thought back to that day…” and then it would be a complete sentence, not a fragment.
I would recommend having a professional editor go over this story, and resubmit it.
The book could have been shortened considerably.
Amanda was an interesting character. But I did not like that she was so naïve about the wizards. From the beginning, I didn’t like the wizards and was very suspicious of them because I don’t like the idea of personal choice and accountability being taken away from individuals or nations. Yet the book simply expects me to accept that it is happening. I liked Amanda’s parents and brother, and thought that they and their reactions to things were believable. The story was rather slow moving. I often found myself wondering (through various wizard duels and while Demus and Regi were flirting with Amanda) when significant things would start to happen. Nothing did. From the beginning, I did not like Demus. When he told her she couldn’t tell others about this or that, warning signals would go off in my head. Whenever anyone says something needs to be kept a secret, there's always something sinister behind it. The decision the wizards made in cpt. 33 was something I saw coming from the beginning. Overall, the story was longer than it needed to be, drawn out, and confusing in places. And the narrative simply moves forward through chronological time and various unconnected events. There isn't an actual plot. But the original premise was promising.
The Deadly Wizard Games is an imaginative story about what happens after wizards take over the world.
The story is imaginative, but there were many things about it that threw me off. There were some incorrectly worded parts, for example: “…then we can figure out who they are what their agenda they have.” Or “she had with quite a bit of steam to let off.” Or “One of the other applicants screamed as they discovered the same thing.” Since “they” is a plural pronoun, and the gender of the person would not have been difficult for Amanda to ascertain, “he” or “she” should have been used, which threw me off. There was also quite a bit of redundancy. Like “He simply gazed at her with a brooding gaze.” It’s a good idea to refrain as much as possible from using the same word in the same paragraph, let alone the same sentence. One sentence, “Regi was so terrified that he was nearly terrified.” Was too redundant for words. The wording also did not flow as well as it could have, in many places. One example: “Under our protection of our magic…” There were also instances of fragmented sentences. Sentences that end without the complete idea being giving. “Thinking back to that day, when the sky had been criss-crossed with a thousand missiles and the Liberators had taken the world’s safety into their own hands.” The sentence ends there, but I’m left thinking… Okay… then… what? It would have been better to word it like this: “Amanda thought back to that day…” and then it would be a complete sentence, not a fragment.
I would recommend having a professional editor go over this story, and resubmit it.
The book could have been shortened considerably.
Amanda was an interesting character. But I did not like that she was so naïve about the wizards. From the beginning, I didn’t like the wizards and was very suspicious of them because I don’t like the idea of personal choice and accountability being taken away from individuals or nations. Yet the book simply expects me to accept that it is happening. I liked Amanda’s parents and brother, and thought that they and their reactions to things were believable. The story was rather slow moving. I often found myself wondering (through various wizard duels and while Demus and Regi were flirting with Amanda) when significant things would start to happen. Nothing did. From the beginning, I did not like Demus. When he told her she couldn’t tell others about this or that, warning signals would go off in my head. Whenever anyone says something needs to be kept a secret, there's always something sinister behind it. The decision the wizards made in cpt. 33 was something I saw coming from the beginning. Overall, the story was longer than it needed to be, drawn out, and confusing in places. And the narrative simply moves forward through chronological time and various unconnected events. There isn't an actual plot. But the original premise was promising.
August 29, 2015
I received a copy of The Four Kings as a first-reads giveaway.
Cool premise, but poor execution. The book is self-published, and unfortunately it shows. I managed to get through 10 chapters -- about 70 pages of text that moved quickly, but were so poorly written that I couldn't get into the story. The grammar was distractingly bad in parts, and the dialogue was plastic. Unfortunately, the bad writing was only the beginning.
Plot:
Nothing horribly bad here, other than the lack of a main character for nearly fifty pages of text. It has a flashy start -- in a stunning few hours, wizards take over the world. They trick all the nuclear powers into launching their missiles, then detonate them in space (how wizards can breathe in zero atmosphere is a mystery). Over the next few days they divide the world into regions, each ruled by a quartet of magical mischief-makers. Our heroine (introduced at around Chapter 8) is selected to be the wizards' liason to the mortal world.
Character:
This is where everything falls down. I can't see any of these puppets as real people. The president and his cabinet are simply corrupt and greedy, with no redeeming features whatsoever; they disappear about 5 chapters in anyway. The wizards are all incredibly attractive twenty-somethings that are secure and confident in their supreme power over the rest of mankind. They are portrayed as infallibly wise and benevolent, and all of them believe whole-heartedly in Ayn Rand's philosophies on government and economics. No inner disputes, no character flaws (maybe a little impatience from one?) and no interesting qualities. Finally, our main character. She's a twenty-two year old poly-sci major from the U.S. who is selected as liason for her ability to quote Ayn Rand on international "Wizard TV". She has no personality, and is almost instantly smitten with one of the new wizardly overlords.
Theme:
I don't mind it when an author has a strong theme or moral lesson to get across in his/her writing, but when an author decides to use the entire book as one lengthy soapbox lecture, it gets tiring. All of the wizards are completely unified under the banner of libertarian economic philosophies -- bitcoin is the currency of the new world's "value-based" economy. A few token dissenting viewpoints are brought up and dismissed within a few paragraphs. This book isn't a real examination of the issues; we're just supposed to accept the wizards' way as the right way.
Conclusion:
I apologize for not finishing the book before writing this review, and any potential readers should recognize that this is an opinion based on just 10% of the work. As a first-reads copy, I really wanted to give a review on the entire work. I just can't do it to myself.
Cool premise, but poor execution. The book is self-published, and unfortunately it shows. I managed to get through 10 chapters -- about 70 pages of text that moved quickly, but were so poorly written that I couldn't get into the story. The grammar was distractingly bad in parts, and the dialogue was plastic. Unfortunately, the bad writing was only the beginning.
Plot:
Nothing horribly bad here, other than the lack of a main character for nearly fifty pages of text. It has a flashy start -- in a stunning few hours, wizards take over the world. They trick all the nuclear powers into launching their missiles, then detonate them in space (how wizards can breathe in zero atmosphere is a mystery). Over the next few days they divide the world into regions, each ruled by a quartet of magical mischief-makers. Our heroine (introduced at around Chapter 8) is selected to be the wizards' liason to the mortal world.
Character:
This is where everything falls down. I can't see any of these puppets as real people. The president and his cabinet are simply corrupt and greedy, with no redeeming features whatsoever; they disappear about 5 chapters in anyway. The wizards are all incredibly attractive twenty-somethings that are secure and confident in their supreme power over the rest of mankind. They are portrayed as infallibly wise and benevolent, and all of them believe whole-heartedly in Ayn Rand's philosophies on government and economics. No inner disputes, no character flaws (maybe a little impatience from one?) and no interesting qualities. Finally, our main character. She's a twenty-two year old poly-sci major from the U.S. who is selected as liason for her ability to quote Ayn Rand on international "Wizard TV". She has no personality, and is almost instantly smitten with one of the new wizardly overlords.
Theme:
I don't mind it when an author has a strong theme or moral lesson to get across in his/her writing, but when an author decides to use the entire book as one lengthy soapbox lecture, it gets tiring. All of the wizards are completely unified under the banner of libertarian economic philosophies -- bitcoin is the currency of the new world's "value-based" economy. A few token dissenting viewpoints are brought up and dismissed within a few paragraphs. This book isn't a real examination of the issues; we're just supposed to accept the wizards' way as the right way.
Conclusion:
I apologize for not finishing the book before writing this review, and any potential readers should recognize that this is an opinion based on just 10% of the work. As a first-reads copy, I really wanted to give a review on the entire work. I just can't do it to myself.
September 1, 2016
In this original and entertaining novel, four wizards appear in the Oval Office of the White House and usurp the corrupt US President. They destroy all nuclear weapons and launching capability, and introduce a global bitcoin currency. The story is off to an interesting start.
Amanda isn’t a wizard, but is voted to a position where she acts as liaison between the magical folk and mortals. The rest of the story is told through her eyes.
I liked the story, although the scenes where the wizards had their ‘games’ seemed overlong and didn’t advance the overall storyline much. My attention drifted through these parts.
I didn’t get to know Amanda well, and would have liked to know more of her backstory. The dialogue was good, the pacing (except for the games) was fine, although it suffered from some lag around three-quarters of the way through the book.
Settings were well drawn and I particularly liked some of those set in the wizards’ world.
Mr Spotson has a good command of language.
Overall, I felt this book had an interesting premise and was readable. I don’t think it quite lived up to its early promise, but was entertaining nonetheless.
Amanda isn’t a wizard, but is voted to a position where she acts as liaison between the magical folk and mortals. The rest of the story is told through her eyes.
I liked the story, although the scenes where the wizards had their ‘games’ seemed overlong and didn’t advance the overall storyline much. My attention drifted through these parts.
I didn’t get to know Amanda well, and would have liked to know more of her backstory. The dialogue was good, the pacing (except for the games) was fine, although it suffered from some lag around three-quarters of the way through the book.
Settings were well drawn and I particularly liked some of those set in the wizards’ world.
Mr Spotson has a good command of language.
Overall, I felt this book had an interesting premise and was readable. I don’t think it quite lived up to its early promise, but was entertaining nonetheless.
February 1, 2017
***Edited to add: was harassed by the author for my review, and had contact with a fellow reader also harassed. I suggest avoiding this one***
Amanda is a politically-minded young woman. So when four wizards take over the government and then (very swiftly) the world, changing things to suit themselves and according to their own agenda, she’s exactly the sort of person to jump at the job of human-wizard liaison (aka, Supreme Liaison). The wizards tell the world (they do a lot of telling people stuff) that they’ve taken over for the next three years, with or without the consent of the world, and that at the end of three years, the world is free to go the way it wants to go. But while those three years are running, the world has no choice in the matter and must bow to what the wizards decided. The Deadly Wizard Games takes us through these three years, as Amanda tries to decide if the wizards are good, evil, or some mix in between.
Pros:
-Great concept.
-Highly visual: it reads like a movie or tv show.
-Held my attention for most of the book.
-Interesting study of (extremely flawed in my opinion) politics and government.
-Thought-provoking (mostly as it made me think as to why I disagreed with the politics espoused by the MC and the other main protags).
-Was reminded of V, in the way the wizards swooped in, took over, and gave out ‘supreme liason’ type positions. For me that was highly fascinating, as the political landscape was something I loved about (the original) V.
Cons:
-Blasphemy. If like myself you don’t like to see the names of Jesus and Christ used frivolously or as swearwords, you’ll find the couple of usages here offensive and off-putting. It is only a couple of usages, though.
-Clumsy writing throughout. Stuff that really grated on my nerves and couldn’t really be put down to style.
-Repetitive phrases.
-Would have loved it as a kid, but feel too old for it now, though the excessive focus on politics might throw off kids less inclined to think.
-There is no subtlety of writing here: everything is just pushed in your face and you’re told it straight away. There’s nothing to figure out, no nuance of character.
-No distinct character voices, they all speak in the same way, with the same rhythms. Replace one of the names with another, and you’d never know it.
-The wizards struck me as annoyingly arrogant and condescending know-it-alls who loved the sound of their own voices (this is a personal thing, though: I’m quite certain others will find them likeable). I know they’re supposed to be ‘flawed’ good guys, but they’re SO ANNOYING and SMUG. Amanda, fortunately, seems to realise this SOME of the time, though not all the time.
-For the first 10% of book, the main protag, Amanda, is barely there. You can see a niche being created just for her, but not much of her.
-The wizards are continually inconsistent. They espouse certain high-flown beliefs and consistently do the things they insist are wrong- ex, they think violence is wrong and no one should be taught to be violent, but they themselves injured people in the takeover. There are more instances that annoyed me, but this is the main one.
-Third person tight is sometimes used, and third person omniscient at others. There is no indication of when it’s going to change, and it changes a LOT. It leaves me feeling at a distance from Amanda, who is supposed to be the MC.
-The romance. Amanda thinks about how gorgeous one of the wizards is about twice, then doesn’t seem to do anything about it for the next year and a half. Then, all of a sudden, they’re declaring their love, kissing passionately, and getting married. It’s just that quick and unbelievable. It’s also VERY over the top.
-I couldn’t find a plot. I got to the end of the book and realised that there actually hadn’t been one, just a series of events.
-The pacing was very uneven/
The Deadly Wizard Games is recommended for people who love James Patterson Young Adult books. It has the same sort of style and plain ‘he did this, she did that’ writing, and I believe that readers of James Patterson will find Scott Spotson’s style at least workmanlike and fast-paced. Also recommended for readers of Louise Lawrence’s Llandor series, who don’t mind political views being pushed at them relentlessly, and spoken by every single character they encounter. It honestly felt like this book was a product of the author’s fantasy of what he’d like politics and government to be: there was no discernible plot.
I received a free copy of this book for the purposes of a nonreciprocal review. This does not affect my opinion or thoughts in any way.
Amanda is a politically-minded young woman. So when four wizards take over the government and then (very swiftly) the world, changing things to suit themselves and according to their own agenda, she’s exactly the sort of person to jump at the job of human-wizard liaison (aka, Supreme Liaison). The wizards tell the world (they do a lot of telling people stuff) that they’ve taken over for the next three years, with or without the consent of the world, and that at the end of three years, the world is free to go the way it wants to go. But while those three years are running, the world has no choice in the matter and must bow to what the wizards decided. The Deadly Wizard Games takes us through these three years, as Amanda tries to decide if the wizards are good, evil, or some mix in between.
Pros:
-Great concept.
-Highly visual: it reads like a movie or tv show.
-Held my attention for most of the book.
-Interesting study of (extremely flawed in my opinion) politics and government.
-Thought-provoking (mostly as it made me think as to why I disagreed with the politics espoused by the MC and the other main protags).
-Was reminded of V, in the way the wizards swooped in, took over, and gave out ‘supreme liason’ type positions. For me that was highly fascinating, as the political landscape was something I loved about (the original) V.
Cons:
-Blasphemy. If like myself you don’t like to see the names of Jesus and Christ used frivolously or as swearwords, you’ll find the couple of usages here offensive and off-putting. It is only a couple of usages, though.
-Clumsy writing throughout. Stuff that really grated on my nerves and couldn’t really be put down to style.
-Repetitive phrases.
-Would have loved it as a kid, but feel too old for it now, though the excessive focus on politics might throw off kids less inclined to think.
-There is no subtlety of writing here: everything is just pushed in your face and you’re told it straight away. There’s nothing to figure out, no nuance of character.
-No distinct character voices, they all speak in the same way, with the same rhythms. Replace one of the names with another, and you’d never know it.
-The wizards struck me as annoyingly arrogant and condescending know-it-alls who loved the sound of their own voices (this is a personal thing, though: I’m quite certain others will find them likeable). I know they’re supposed to be ‘flawed’ good guys, but they’re SO ANNOYING and SMUG. Amanda, fortunately, seems to realise this SOME of the time, though not all the time.
-For the first 10% of book, the main protag, Amanda, is barely there. You can see a niche being created just for her, but not much of her.
-The wizards are continually inconsistent. They espouse certain high-flown beliefs and consistently do the things they insist are wrong- ex, they think violence is wrong and no one should be taught to be violent, but they themselves injured people in the takeover. There are more instances that annoyed me, but this is the main one.
-Third person tight is sometimes used, and third person omniscient at others. There is no indication of when it’s going to change, and it changes a LOT. It leaves me feeling at a distance from Amanda, who is supposed to be the MC.
-The romance. Amanda thinks about how gorgeous one of the wizards is about twice, then doesn’t seem to do anything about it for the next year and a half. Then, all of a sudden, they’re declaring their love, kissing passionately, and getting married. It’s just that quick and unbelievable. It’s also VERY over the top.
-I couldn’t find a plot. I got to the end of the book and realised that there actually hadn’t been one, just a series of events.
-The pacing was very uneven/
The Deadly Wizard Games is recommended for people who love James Patterson Young Adult books. It has the same sort of style and plain ‘he did this, she did that’ writing, and I believe that readers of James Patterson will find Scott Spotson’s style at least workmanlike and fast-paced. Also recommended for readers of Louise Lawrence’s Llandor series, who don’t mind political views being pushed at them relentlessly, and spoken by every single character they encounter. It honestly felt like this book was a product of the author’s fantasy of what he’d like politics and government to be: there was no discernible plot.
I received a free copy of this book for the purposes of a nonreciprocal review. This does not affect my opinion or thoughts in any way.
February 20, 2014
This was tricky to rate. I’d say 3.5 because of my personal tastes and thought processes, but it was enjoyable enough to entertain me and probably most people, so I’ll lean towards 4.
The premise here was quite unique. The world is a mess, verging on nuclear war, so what would it take to save it? If all-powerful wizards overthrew every government and took charge, would that be better? Wizards and politics aren’t things you naturally put together, but it’s an interesting combination. I really liked the way the Debate Days were used to flesh out political and philosophical questions in a way that let you think about your own interpretations of what would be right and wrong. The inclusion of famous quotes from several camps was nicely done. And I really liked that, despite this “perfect” system set up by the wizards, there were flaws and people left behind, which showed that no system is ever truly perfect.
The other big element of this book is, of course, the magic of the wizards. While they use their magic in an attempt to solve the world’s problems (which I would've liked to see more of), they also spend a good deal of time playing games. It’s these parts of the book that add a lot of fun action to the story, and the author is really creative in describing the magical games. The writing is simple and visual, and all of the games were easy to picture, many like something from Ninja Warrior. A part of me really, really wishes I could play life-sized, 3D Tetris.
As for Amanda, the human Mortal caught in the middle as Liaison, I thought the author used her well as things went along. At first, Amanda just suddenly appears in the story and you have no idea who she is as a person, what her motivations are for taking this job, or what she really thinks about the wizards' takeover. All you know is that she’s a fan of Ayn Rand, which always makes me a little queasy. I would have liked to see her character a bit more fleshed out at the beginning, considering hers are the eyes we see through. I was often not clear on where she stood. She seems a blind optimist, and what she really thought of the wizards was hazy to me until the moment comes when she DEFINITELY has to pick a side. But, as her part in the story moves along, she becomes more humanized as she interacts with the wizards and, of course, falls in love. When things get really complicated, it turns out she is quite smart and capable, even if she mostly uses her feminine wiles to get the job done.
As for the wizards themselves, I liked the way the author exposed their mysteries as the story moved along and Amanda discovered more and more. There's a nice, complex magical world here, and not all the mysteries are answered. The four main wizards seem like spoiled know-it-alls, which I suppose would be a side effect of being magically superior. Good-intentioned for the most part, they seem to think that their takeover is completely just. They are mostly likable characters, but they're absolutely obtuse and can't understand why people don’t love them - which is again interesting commentary on all-powerful, detached leadership, I think. I would've liked to see a bit more of the world as all this was going on, but I suppose the author’s focus was more on the wizards.
Overall, the writing is pretty good with only a few goofs here and there. I found this book entertaining and worth a read if you like to think about political “what ifs.”
The premise here was quite unique. The world is a mess, verging on nuclear war, so what would it take to save it? If all-powerful wizards overthrew every government and took charge, would that be better? Wizards and politics aren’t things you naturally put together, but it’s an interesting combination. I really liked the way the Debate Days were used to flesh out political and philosophical questions in a way that let you think about your own interpretations of what would be right and wrong. The inclusion of famous quotes from several camps was nicely done. And I really liked that, despite this “perfect” system set up by the wizards, there were flaws and people left behind, which showed that no system is ever truly perfect.
The other big element of this book is, of course, the magic of the wizards. While they use their magic in an attempt to solve the world’s problems (which I would've liked to see more of), they also spend a good deal of time playing games. It’s these parts of the book that add a lot of fun action to the story, and the author is really creative in describing the magical games. The writing is simple and visual, and all of the games were easy to picture, many like something from Ninja Warrior. A part of me really, really wishes I could play life-sized, 3D Tetris.
As for Amanda, the human Mortal caught in the middle as Liaison, I thought the author used her well as things went along. At first, Amanda just suddenly appears in the story and you have no idea who she is as a person, what her motivations are for taking this job, or what she really thinks about the wizards' takeover. All you know is that she’s a fan of Ayn Rand, which always makes me a little queasy. I would have liked to see her character a bit more fleshed out at the beginning, considering hers are the eyes we see through. I was often not clear on where she stood. She seems a blind optimist, and what she really thought of the wizards was hazy to me until the moment comes when she DEFINITELY has to pick a side. But, as her part in the story moves along, she becomes more humanized as she interacts with the wizards and, of course, falls in love. When things get really complicated, it turns out she is quite smart and capable, even if she mostly uses her feminine wiles to get the job done.
As for the wizards themselves, I liked the way the author exposed their mysteries as the story moved along and Amanda discovered more and more. There's a nice, complex magical world here, and not all the mysteries are answered. The four main wizards seem like spoiled know-it-alls, which I suppose would be a side effect of being magically superior. Good-intentioned for the most part, they seem to think that their takeover is completely just. They are mostly likable characters, but they're absolutely obtuse and can't understand why people don’t love them - which is again interesting commentary on all-powerful, detached leadership, I think. I would've liked to see a bit more of the world as all this was going on, but I suppose the author’s focus was more on the wizards.
Overall, the writing is pretty good with only a few goofs here and there. I found this book entertaining and worth a read if you like to think about political “what ifs.”
December 16, 2014
UNREALIZED POTENTIAL
Spotson begins with the challenge of making a nuclear-free Utopia and bit-coin economy that turns out to be driven by a street rat and immature punks. Why would god bother? They happen to be wizards, who debate how to evolve the governance of earth, but there’s no vision or Enlightenment here. Too bad they didn’t read Plato, Socrates, Locke and Swift. Instead they settle for Anne Rand and Kierkegaard, like volunteering for a lobotomy. If you’re under thirty and never read history, you’ll like this book, especially if you think video games are science. I want my wizards to have a dash of insight, to be greater than humans, but not here. The chief bad wizard comes off like Ratso Rizzo.
Lots of imagination and work went into setting up the story, but the characters remain petulant. That’s the problem with a big idea book, all in your head and not in your heart. I require a story that teaches me. This book doesn’t except wizards operate with more sexual tension that most. You’d think all that power would evolve someone, with games and debates, but the wizards prove to be weaker than humans. Is this a comment on the jealous Gods of Greek mythology? The demi-god realm of the Tibetan wheel of life? Maybe, but that’s so last century.
Spotson is a good writer. Nice character profiles and action verbs with little fluff. The weakness is when his characters implement. They snap their fingers and make magic, but the unions gripe anyway. The reason Communism doesn’t work is it legislates out the greed that drives the entrepreneurs. The first twelve Star Treks were about utopias. I love utopias. I think we need more – planning for a thriving society evolving into the perfect. Spotson sticks us with jealous and trite wizards. Not a Harry Potter among them.
For me, fantasy has to be gripping, characters compelling, vision superb. But, all other reviewers raved about this book, so I’ll zoom to the moon gracefully. Maybe Bob Dylan was right, don’t trust your utopia to anyone over that age of thirty.
Spotson begins with the challenge of making a nuclear-free Utopia and bit-coin economy that turns out to be driven by a street rat and immature punks. Why would god bother? They happen to be wizards, who debate how to evolve the governance of earth, but there’s no vision or Enlightenment here. Too bad they didn’t read Plato, Socrates, Locke and Swift. Instead they settle for Anne Rand and Kierkegaard, like volunteering for a lobotomy. If you’re under thirty and never read history, you’ll like this book, especially if you think video games are science. I want my wizards to have a dash of insight, to be greater than humans, but not here. The chief bad wizard comes off like Ratso Rizzo.
Lots of imagination and work went into setting up the story, but the characters remain petulant. That’s the problem with a big idea book, all in your head and not in your heart. I require a story that teaches me. This book doesn’t except wizards operate with more sexual tension that most. You’d think all that power would evolve someone, with games and debates, but the wizards prove to be weaker than humans. Is this a comment on the jealous Gods of Greek mythology? The demi-god realm of the Tibetan wheel of life? Maybe, but that’s so last century.
Spotson is a good writer. Nice character profiles and action verbs with little fluff. The weakness is when his characters implement. They snap their fingers and make magic, but the unions gripe anyway. The reason Communism doesn’t work is it legislates out the greed that drives the entrepreneurs. The first twelve Star Treks were about utopias. I love utopias. I think we need more – planning for a thriving society evolving into the perfect. Spotson sticks us with jealous and trite wizards. Not a Harry Potter among them.
For me, fantasy has to be gripping, characters compelling, vision superb. But, all other reviewers raved about this book, so I’ll zoom to the moon gracefully. Maybe Bob Dylan was right, don’t trust your utopia to anyone over that age of thirty.
January 6, 2014
Wizard for day
Instead of having a normal introduction to a story, you get some wizards that do the first thing you would have done if somebody would have told you: “You get to be wizard for a day and have all the power. From where will start with saving the world?”
I kept reading and things got more interesting by the minute. I started wondering what crazy thing the author will come up with next. The characters were strong and Scott managed to make the perfect wizards show their flaws mostly through their attitude of being right all the time.
You receive an education not only on the rules of a wizard world, a very compelling one with advantages and disadvantages in equal shares, but also in economics. The way in which the wizards decide to help the human kind proves that no good deed goes unpunished.
It has a sad but happy ending in the same time and also leaves some mystery unsolved, enough to make you think about a sequel.
In conclusion, if want to feel like a wizard for a day, this book will help you do it. I give it 5 stars because I had a lot of fun reading it.
Instead of having a normal introduction to a story, you get some wizards that do the first thing you would have done if somebody would have told you: “You get to be wizard for a day and have all the power. From where will start with saving the world?”
I kept reading and things got more interesting by the minute. I started wondering what crazy thing the author will come up with next. The characters were strong and Scott managed to make the perfect wizards show their flaws mostly through their attitude of being right all the time.
You receive an education not only on the rules of a wizard world, a very compelling one with advantages and disadvantages in equal shares, but also in economics. The way in which the wizards decide to help the human kind proves that no good deed goes unpunished.
It has a sad but happy ending in the same time and also leaves some mystery unsolved, enough to make you think about a sequel.
In conclusion, if want to feel like a wizard for a day, this book will help you do it. I give it 5 stars because I had a lot of fun reading it.
April 24, 2014
Oh, God. Make it stop.
January 7, 2018
Just as the world is on the brink of global nuclear disaster, four young wizards take over all world governments and announce that they are now in charge. They are bringing sweeping changes that will solve all the petty problems the “mortals” experience. Because they rule from an off-world location in the sky and have little real interaction with humans, they choose liasons.
Amanda Fullerton, a young social worker, gets the job which is one of mostly explaining the changes and fielding questions or complaints.
As the story develops, Amanda begins to see not all is well with wizard rule. People’s questions and troubles are often ignored even though the mortals get everything they need. She develops a closer relationship with the four and tries to influence them. In return, they show her some of the games and tell her some of their secrets.
This is an ambitious work of political and economic fantasy. It is easy to read, flows nicely and covers a lot of ground as the author, Mr. Spotson relates Amanda’s adventures with the wizards. The descriptive world-building is great. Some of the game scenarios have a vintage video-game feel: like Tetris and 3D chess.
Character development could have been better. The wizards personalities blended together with the possible exception of rebellious Demus. They seemed like naïve children who didn’t understand why the mortals were less than happy after all needs were fulfilled. Amanda, too, even seems innocent, despite the wisdom she acquires. The resolution is a strange one that asks, at the end, if there is more to the story.
A good Young Adult read that makes the reader think, and ask what if?
Amanda Fullerton, a young social worker, gets the job which is one of mostly explaining the changes and fielding questions or complaints.
As the story develops, Amanda begins to see not all is well with wizard rule. People’s questions and troubles are often ignored even though the mortals get everything they need. She develops a closer relationship with the four and tries to influence them. In return, they show her some of the games and tell her some of their secrets.
This is an ambitious work of political and economic fantasy. It is easy to read, flows nicely and covers a lot of ground as the author, Mr. Spotson relates Amanda’s adventures with the wizards. The descriptive world-building is great. Some of the game scenarios have a vintage video-game feel: like Tetris and 3D chess.
Character development could have been better. The wizards personalities blended together with the possible exception of rebellious Demus. They seemed like naïve children who didn’t understand why the mortals were less than happy after all needs were fulfilled. Amanda, too, even seems innocent, despite the wisdom she acquires. The resolution is a strange one that asks, at the end, if there is more to the story.
A good Young Adult read that makes the reader think, and ask what if?
May 11, 2014
How would you re-create a corrupt, failing, unjust world if you had the power? That is the question the four kings, young wizards by the name of Demus, Regi, Indie and Justica, are more than prepared to answer.
Scott Spotson’s Four Kings is an extremely ambitious novel with a worldwide canvass, dealing with everything from politics, ethics, morality, economics to philosophy. The early part of the novel in fact, where the wizards relieve the corrupt and incompetent US president of his office and begin to extol their vision of their intended three year benign dictatorship, deals in a very direct manner with the issues just mentioned. I personally found this a little heavy on exposition and in some ways it reminded me of a College campus debate between undergraduates, condescending and opinionated ones at that. The controversial and in more recent times vilified writer/philosopher Ayn Rand is mentioned a great deal. It is in fact Amanda’s (the only 'mortal' protagonist)knowledge of Rand that impresses the kings to appoint her as liaison between them and the mortals below.
Although a fantasy this is a highly original work, one written in an impressive boiled down prose style. Very quickly one realises there are none of the stereotypes one might expect. The magic is merely a catalyst, an enabler and could easily be substituted with advanced science. The wizards meanwhile resemble overconfident, intellectually arrogant college graduates, albeit well meaning ones, more than they do anything in a J. K. Rowling or David Eddings book. There is also something of classical deities about them, flawed, vain, and prone to squabbling yet with the power to destroy the Earth should they choose.
Whilst the novel begins with such a bold premise and proceeds to deal with how indeed four all powerful individuals would set about the not inconsiderable task of ruling the world it also gradually develops into a powerful human drama with true pathos in the latter part. The story grows in stature as we radically revise our initial impression of the four kings, realising the sacrifices they themselves must pay for their own powers and superlative authority.
There are some scenes which stand out above all others; ones full of existential crisis, self questioning and despair. Almost entirely these are ones involving Amanda, Regi and Demus. Such is the depth of Demus’ own tale for example as he finally accepts the ‘toll of maturity and wisdom’ that this very flawed character is worthy of a novel all to himself. The scenes between Regi and Amanda also, as they face the reality of their bitter sweet love, is a pure romantic tragedy.
The last line before the postscript, a simple one clause sentence has incredible power and poignancy and in just a few words sums up the entire story in all its grandeur and pathos.
I would recommend this novel to anyone, not just fans of fantasy or speculative fiction.
Scott Spotson’s Four Kings is an extremely ambitious novel with a worldwide canvass, dealing with everything from politics, ethics, morality, economics to philosophy. The early part of the novel in fact, where the wizards relieve the corrupt and incompetent US president of his office and begin to extol their vision of their intended three year benign dictatorship, deals in a very direct manner with the issues just mentioned. I personally found this a little heavy on exposition and in some ways it reminded me of a College campus debate between undergraduates, condescending and opinionated ones at that. The controversial and in more recent times vilified writer/philosopher Ayn Rand is mentioned a great deal. It is in fact Amanda’s (the only 'mortal' protagonist)knowledge of Rand that impresses the kings to appoint her as liaison between them and the mortals below.
Although a fantasy this is a highly original work, one written in an impressive boiled down prose style. Very quickly one realises there are none of the stereotypes one might expect. The magic is merely a catalyst, an enabler and could easily be substituted with advanced science. The wizards meanwhile resemble overconfident, intellectually arrogant college graduates, albeit well meaning ones, more than they do anything in a J. K. Rowling or David Eddings book. There is also something of classical deities about them, flawed, vain, and prone to squabbling yet with the power to destroy the Earth should they choose.
Whilst the novel begins with such a bold premise and proceeds to deal with how indeed four all powerful individuals would set about the not inconsiderable task of ruling the world it also gradually develops into a powerful human drama with true pathos in the latter part. The story grows in stature as we radically revise our initial impression of the four kings, realising the sacrifices they themselves must pay for their own powers and superlative authority.
There are some scenes which stand out above all others; ones full of existential crisis, self questioning and despair. Almost entirely these are ones involving Amanda, Regi and Demus. Such is the depth of Demus’ own tale for example as he finally accepts the ‘toll of maturity and wisdom’ that this very flawed character is worthy of a novel all to himself. The scenes between Regi and Amanda also, as they face the reality of their bitter sweet love, is a pure romantic tragedy.
The last line before the postscript, a simple one clause sentence has incredible power and poignancy and in just a few words sums up the entire story in all its grandeur and pathos.
I would recommend this novel to anyone, not just fans of fantasy or speculative fiction.
January 2, 2014
The Four Kings reminded me in a very general way of Ernest Callenbach's Ecotopia Emerging. It has a similar sort of cultural upheaval story, though one pursued along different lines. It also follows the life of a young woman who finds herself as the focal point of the change. In this case, all of the change is abrupt, wrenched into existence by magic.
Amanda is a basically likable character through whose eyes we see the wizards and the world. There were points when I wished I knew more about what she was thinking or feeling, but not many. She's not an exceptionally fascinating person, just an average representative of intelligent and young humanity. I was reminded of people I knew in college *mumble* years ago when reading her, which is, I assure you, a compliment on the author's effort.
It's interesting that the author didn't use any actual historical events in the distant past when discussing the history of wizards. Although delving into such topics might have derailed the story, a linking of some relatively well known and plot relevant event could have helped cement the believability of the whole notion of magic in the world.
The most interesting part of this book was the way it examined applied Randian philosophy. In the beginning, there's a sense that Ayn Rand should be considered brilliant. As it progresses, the story follows the path unflinchingly to the logical conclusions of the wizards' actions. Do not fear this book if you despise Rand, because her ideas are not glorified within it, but rather examined and considered in a reasonable manner.
Some - but not all - of the wizards' games seemed entirely irrelevant to me, other than to have an action sequence. Amanda's ability to deal with her obstacles in the endgame wasn't explained or capitalized on, which confused me greatly. The love story was also a little disjointed.
It's a fairly quick read as novels go. Overall, I enjoyed it. At several points, I found myself needing to put it down and thinking 'just one more chapter...', which then became two more chapters, and then three...
Amanda is a basically likable character through whose eyes we see the wizards and the world. There were points when I wished I knew more about what she was thinking or feeling, but not many. She's not an exceptionally fascinating person, just an average representative of intelligent and young humanity. I was reminded of people I knew in college *mumble* years ago when reading her, which is, I assure you, a compliment on the author's effort.
It's interesting that the author didn't use any actual historical events in the distant past when discussing the history of wizards. Although delving into such topics might have derailed the story, a linking of some relatively well known and plot relevant event could have helped cement the believability of the whole notion of magic in the world.
The most interesting part of this book was the way it examined applied Randian philosophy. In the beginning, there's a sense that Ayn Rand should be considered brilliant. As it progresses, the story follows the path unflinchingly to the logical conclusions of the wizards' actions. Do not fear this book if you despise Rand, because her ideas are not glorified within it, but rather examined and considered in a reasonable manner.
Some - but not all - of the wizards' games seemed entirely irrelevant to me, other than to have an action sequence. Amanda's ability to deal with her obstacles in the endgame wasn't explained or capitalized on, which confused me greatly. The love story was also a little disjointed.
It's a fairly quick read as novels go. Overall, I enjoyed it. At several points, I found myself needing to put it down and thinking 'just one more chapter...', which then became two more chapters, and then three...
November 9, 2013
To say that I never read anything quite like this book would be an understatement. The story involves a contemporary world similar to ours except that it is economically much worse off. Unemployment is high, debt is high, wars rage on, politicians are inept, on and on and on. Then a bunch of wizards appear that wish to save humanity using methods apparently inspired by Ayn Rand.
Although the wizards use magic (obviously) the book earlier on seems to fit more neatly into some political category than fantasy since much of the dialog and implications of the happenings draw the reader into critique and analysis of our economic and socio-political institutions. Much like Animal Farm, the fantasy appears to merely be a device to get the reader focused on the discussion. It seems to be a book that will make you think about your own behavior and how your own actions affect the bigger world around you. As the book moves on though, in focuses more and more on the behavior and happenings of the wizards themselves and their interactions with each other so the second half is much more fantasy-centric. The book follows Amanda, a 20-something America girl who is chosen by the wizards to be their liaison to the continent that they now rule.
I found very few typos and in general the book is well written and well edited. Additionally, the book is very clean and mostly free of violence, drug content and the like. There are some instances of profanity.
I think the book is pretty solid although there are some sections that do not seem to advance the plot line or even the author’s apparent political arguments but are just there for fun such as the entire chapter length discussions of the wizards playing giant board games in the sky. These sections felt out of place to me initially but they came back into prominence towards the end.
I give it a solid 4 stars.
Although the wizards use magic (obviously) the book earlier on seems to fit more neatly into some political category than fantasy since much of the dialog and implications of the happenings draw the reader into critique and analysis of our economic and socio-political institutions. Much like Animal Farm, the fantasy appears to merely be a device to get the reader focused on the discussion. It seems to be a book that will make you think about your own behavior and how your own actions affect the bigger world around you. As the book moves on though, in focuses more and more on the behavior and happenings of the wizards themselves and their interactions with each other so the second half is much more fantasy-centric. The book follows Amanda, a 20-something America girl who is chosen by the wizards to be their liaison to the continent that they now rule.
I found very few typos and in general the book is well written and well edited. Additionally, the book is very clean and mostly free of violence, drug content and the like. There are some instances of profanity.
I think the book is pretty solid although there are some sections that do not seem to advance the plot line or even the author’s apparent political arguments but are just there for fun such as the entire chapter length discussions of the wizards playing giant board games in the sky. These sections felt out of place to me initially but they came back into prominence towards the end.
I give it a solid 4 stars.
November 26, 2013
The Four Kings’ storyline is like nothing I’ve come across before—and after reading many books in the dystopia and paranormal genres I appreciate a book that is truly not derivative. The US, and indeed, the whole world, is in dire condition—poor economy, corrupt politicians, a world on the brink of war—kind of like what we have today! Four wizards appear and easily take over North America while their counterparts stage coups in other parts of the planet. They are young, overconfident and appear to have all the answers to all the social/political problems. But, do they?
Part of what makes this book so interesting is that the wizards are flawed, reminding me of Greek gods. They fight amongst themselves, have big egos, and some are damaged from poor upbringings. Sometimes they are indecisive and also, their political machinations don’t always have beneficial effects. Amanda, the liaison between them and the mortals, must find out their secrets, just in case they don’t depart from their self-appointed posts in three years as they promised.
The four stars instead of the full five is because the beginning of the book is heavy on the politics (not my genre) and heavy with the games (wizards love games). But, I was never able to read completely through one of Harry Potter’s quidditch games either, so another reader might disagree with me and give the full five.
After the politics and games, the story really picks up and becomes a page turner as each person’s back story emerges and Amanda must carefully interact with each wizard in a different way, without revealing her dealings with the other wizards. Several times during the book there are unexpected surprises and the ending was unpredictable as well.
Overall: A fun, engaging, unique read!
Part of what makes this book so interesting is that the wizards are flawed, reminding me of Greek gods. They fight amongst themselves, have big egos, and some are damaged from poor upbringings. Sometimes they are indecisive and also, their political machinations don’t always have beneficial effects. Amanda, the liaison between them and the mortals, must find out their secrets, just in case they don’t depart from their self-appointed posts in three years as they promised.
The four stars instead of the full five is because the beginning of the book is heavy on the politics (not my genre) and heavy with the games (wizards love games). But, I was never able to read completely through one of Harry Potter’s quidditch games either, so another reader might disagree with me and give the full five.
After the politics and games, the story really picks up and becomes a page turner as each person’s back story emerges and Amanda must carefully interact with each wizard in a different way, without revealing her dealings with the other wizards. Several times during the book there are unexpected surprises and the ending was unpredictable as well.
Overall: A fun, engaging, unique read!
June 3, 2014
Here is a well written fantasy story. Human governments around the world are falling into dysfunction when suddenly four wizards join forces with other wizards around the world to establish regional benevolent dictatorships. We in North America receive "the Four Kings." They in turn select a mortal, Amanda, to represent the humans of North America. She serves as an interface between the citizens and the wizards. In short she becomes a very important lady in a very short period of time. This book is entertaining and at times causes the reader to expect that the storyline will soon turn towards object lessons regarding the economic structure of the United States and of other nations. We are expecting an Ayn Rand type book. No such luck. We do not learn a great deal about how we should be running the economies of our nations. What we receive is a fantasy story about wizards who can disappear at will, materialize things that never existed in the past, even produce large factories and housing projects without the need for construction workers. The wizards rebuild the infrastructure of the Americas. And they do it at no cost or effort to us human beings. They dismantle the government bureaucracies of many countries. If we want a specific service from government we pay for it in bitcoins. But few details are presented. Instead we are most entertained and fascinated by the shenanigans of the wizards themselves -- their competitive games -- their efforts to romance Amanda -- their own life-histories. Here is a book for those who enjoy the genre of fantasy. A lover of Harry Potter will be more at home with this book than an admirer of Milton Friedman, the economist. This book is a long read and does not contain a strong romantic story. Four Stars.
December 4, 2013
This type of genre is not usually to my preference, but having said that, I truly enjoyed the imagination put into this story. Some of the best moments were in the vivid descriptions of the imaginary wizard games and in their private world. The plot is an interesting take on what would happen if someone or something could actually destroy what humans have created, pointing out their flaws and such in government and business. However, I like the fair tactic Spotson takes in showing all things have their consequences, meaning the wizards, in their effort to control and make everything "right", weren't always right. There were some humorous moments for me, with reference to classic Donkey Kong and on the "Debate Days" (which there weren't really any debates as the wizards feel they are always right). I also feel, that with the simplistic writing style and delicate handling of relationships and war/battle scenes, this book would be suitable for a young adult audience, for those who are interested in the fantasy genre. I empathized with the main character, Amanda, and I wish her ending could have been a little happier. Overall, I thought there was considerable effort in the plot, but the ending felt slightly rushed to me- I would have liked to see a longer or more detailed time with Regi, and I would have liked to see a fitting "battle" with Demus, as for all his flaws, I am not sure I could have forgiven him as easily as Amanda. Interesting story- haven't read anything like this and very original story line. I recommend trying Spotson's other book, Life II.
December 17, 2013
I bought this book on a recommendation, and I'm very glad I did. I give this book 4.5/5 stars. Here is my breakdown:
Characters: 5/5. This is a real strength for Scott. Despite having nearly unlimited power, he does an excellent job of making his wizards seem like real, fallible people that I could imagine in that position. I love the fact that they come off nearly omniscient and yet regular Mortals (as they are called) start pointing out the cracks and flaws in their arguments and ideas. Amanda was another fantastic character, with her divided loyalties and struggle with her attraction to Regi...one of the conquerors of North America.
Plot/Storyline: 4/5. The story was clear, interesting, and plausible (inasmuch as superpowerful wizards taking over the world is plausible) and the connections followed easily from one another. There was no feeling of "forced" action, no contrived speech. Well done!
Flow: 4/5. The story flowed well, for the most part; my only issue was that, sometimes, the chapter breaks came very fast and it felt a little turbulent. Most of the time, the action was smooth, pleasant, with the jarring spikes coming at just the right time to suck the reader back in.
Spelling/Grammar/Layout: 4.5/5. There were a few missed words, a few misspellings...but they were very, very few, and I was not distracted at all by them.
Overall: 4.5/5. Scott Spotson has delivered a paranormal fantasy that appeals to each of us who have ever wanted to just take over and DO IT RIGHT...and explains, very clearly, why we shouldn't.
Characters: 5/5. This is a real strength for Scott. Despite having nearly unlimited power, he does an excellent job of making his wizards seem like real, fallible people that I could imagine in that position. I love the fact that they come off nearly omniscient and yet regular Mortals (as they are called) start pointing out the cracks and flaws in their arguments and ideas. Amanda was another fantastic character, with her divided loyalties and struggle with her attraction to Regi...one of the conquerors of North America.
Plot/Storyline: 4/5. The story was clear, interesting, and plausible (inasmuch as superpowerful wizards taking over the world is plausible) and the connections followed easily from one another. There was no feeling of "forced" action, no contrived speech. Well done!
Flow: 4/5. The story flowed well, for the most part; my only issue was that, sometimes, the chapter breaks came very fast and it felt a little turbulent. Most of the time, the action was smooth, pleasant, with the jarring spikes coming at just the right time to suck the reader back in.
Spelling/Grammar/Layout: 4.5/5. There were a few missed words, a few misspellings...but they were very, very few, and I was not distracted at all by them.
Overall: 4.5/5. Scott Spotson has delivered a paranormal fantasy that appeals to each of us who have ever wanted to just take over and DO IT RIGHT...and explains, very clearly, why we shouldn't.
December 1, 2013
This extremely original story begins with US President Arthur Kellog Walker, mired in corruption, scandal and ineptitude, presiding over a cabinet meeting when a pack of wizards or supernatural beings with magical powers burst in and take control; they then proceed to expropriate secret nuclear codes and, seemingly, initiate nuclear strikes. But they then force the missiles up into the stratosphere, out of harm's way. All over the world governments are overthrown, currencies seized, and a New World Order instigated, to sort out the world's problems. Amanda Fullerton (in the role of Supreme Liaison) is the Mortal chosen as go-between between mortals and wizards. We then follow a love-triangle involving Amanda, who falls for the wizard Regi, and Demus, another wizard, who has the hots for Amanda. She even takes a trip to the moon, and is forced to confront a series of unpalatable truths, which have a great bearing on the outcome of these momentous events. She ultimately holds the fate of the world in her hands, with the novel rising to a climactic finale of grief and twist and turn which I will do nothing to divulge at this stage. Suffice to say that this imaginatively-constructed piece creates a perfectly believable interface between supernatural beings and mortals and, in the person of Amanda, creates the vehicle for the rival tensions, love interest and dilemmas explored throughout. Check it out. Don't miss it.
January 28, 2014
One thing I can say about The Four Kings is that it is an wholly original tale. One would be hard pressed to categorize this novel or compare it to anything else existing. You can't even really say it is [insert Harry Potter novel] meets {insert political thriller] meets [the Wall Street Journal]. What Mr. Spotson has written is very much his own.
The set-up is pretty simple, wizards realize that the world is going to Hell in a hand basket and decide it's time they did something about it. They take over all the world's governments and institute new laws and finance systems. Each area is ruled by their own group of wizards, the good ol' US of A gets the titular four "kings". And each king is his or her own distinct character, some likable, others not so much.
The main character, Amanda, is very likable and fallible. Though she does/says some things that lack some logic, she is for the most part a relatable and sympathetic character throughout. We stay with her and believe her journey. The only characters not very fleshed out were the four wizards themselves. This feels like it is lacking a bit while reading the book, but the vagueness is understood as the story wraps. We can't know too much about them otherwise they lose their diety-like status to the "mortals".
Overall, I found The Four Kings an engaging and quality read. I would definitely recommend this book to anyone who enjoys stories rife with fantasy and magic.
The set-up is pretty simple, wizards realize that the world is going to Hell in a hand basket and decide it's time they did something about it. They take over all the world's governments and institute new laws and finance systems. Each area is ruled by their own group of wizards, the good ol' US of A gets the titular four "kings". And each king is his or her own distinct character, some likable, others not so much.
The main character, Amanda, is very likable and fallible. Though she does/says some things that lack some logic, she is for the most part a relatable and sympathetic character throughout. We stay with her and believe her journey. The only characters not very fleshed out were the four wizards themselves. This feels like it is lacking a bit while reading the book, but the vagueness is understood as the story wraps. We can't know too much about them otherwise they lose their diety-like status to the "mortals".
Overall, I found The Four Kings an engaging and quality read. I would definitely recommend this book to anyone who enjoys stories rife with fantasy and magic.
November 24, 2013
Why The Four Kings you ask?
There is nothing like it.
This novel is an adventure outside of the ordinary. What the author offers with "The Four Kings" is a answer to "The Great Blight" (which is really just a name for an era of recession, violence, unemployment, etc.). When the bloated leaders of the world cannot reel their prospective countries toward stability... Thank god for wizards!
As per usual, Scott Spotson's writing is spot-on, smooth, clever, funny, and most of all—he gives great consideration to pace and plot. I have grown to enjoy his offerings extremely, and I can see that there is really no limit to his imagination.
Characters and plot development are sound. The wizards whom establish control, are full of witty exchanges and keep you entangled in their rearing of a lost nation.
Wait... Someone should invite these guys over today.
You will find yourself battling over which character is your favorite and in the end, they will all hold a spot in your liking.
This novel is like an SUV (truck + van = happy man)... Combining two great things: Wizardry and politics. A genius idea from an author who delivers every time.
Seeking Dr. Magic is still my favorite.
If you like clever character interactions and wizards playing the puppeteers of political dealings, then please give this book a glance, because it is a lot of fun and like nothing you have ever read.
There is nothing like it.
This novel is an adventure outside of the ordinary. What the author offers with "The Four Kings" is a answer to "The Great Blight" (which is really just a name for an era of recession, violence, unemployment, etc.). When the bloated leaders of the world cannot reel their prospective countries toward stability... Thank god for wizards!
As per usual, Scott Spotson's writing is spot-on, smooth, clever, funny, and most of all—he gives great consideration to pace and plot. I have grown to enjoy his offerings extremely, and I can see that there is really no limit to his imagination.
Characters and plot development are sound. The wizards whom establish control, are full of witty exchanges and keep you entangled in their rearing of a lost nation.
Wait... Someone should invite these guys over today.
You will find yourself battling over which character is your favorite and in the end, they will all hold a spot in your liking.
This novel is like an SUV (truck + van = happy man)... Combining two great things: Wizardry and politics. A genius idea from an author who delivers every time.
Seeking Dr. Magic is still my favorite.
If you like clever character interactions and wizards playing the puppeteers of political dealings, then please give this book a glance, because it is a lot of fun and like nothing you have ever read.
July 22, 2016
I haven't read anything like this before, but it certainly drew me in. The book (plot, characters, etc) would have gotten 4.5 stars or so if not for glaring editing errors throughout (missed words, subject/verb agreement issues, and regular typos). If this hadn't come straight from Amazon, I would have thought it was a proof copy.
Anyway, plot was solid, characters were well-developed. I enjoyed how Spotson brought a "human" element to the wizards even though they truly distance themselves from their human origins. The development of Amanda's character wasn't stagnant, either. I thought Spotson did a nice job of not letting her play second fiddle to the wizards, and her liaisons w/Regi and Demus certainly kept you wondering when and if something was going to go wrong with her plotting.
The quotations interspersed throughout were interesting and eclectic. Not too often a fiction author draws on quotes from historical/current figures. Nice touch.
As a side note, I thought the flags were interesting sketches, too...didn't make sense till a chapter or two into the book,but then I went back and looked at them again.
Too bad Spotson didn't really leave himself open for a sequel...I would read a sequel.
Anyway, plot was solid, characters were well-developed. I enjoyed how Spotson brought a "human" element to the wizards even though they truly distance themselves from their human origins. The development of Amanda's character wasn't stagnant, either. I thought Spotson did a nice job of not letting her play second fiddle to the wizards, and her liaisons w/Regi and Demus certainly kept you wondering when and if something was going to go wrong with her plotting.
The quotations interspersed throughout were interesting and eclectic. Not too often a fiction author draws on quotes from historical/current figures. Nice touch.
As a side note, I thought the flags were interesting sketches, too...didn't make sense till a chapter or two into the book,but then I went back and looked at them again.
Too bad Spotson didn't really leave himself open for a sequel...I would read a sequel.
March 22, 2014
I can honestly say that I had no idea what to expect from this book. I'm not usually a fan of anything supernatural or magic, but I was pleasantly surprised by The Four Kings. This is an inherently fun book. I'm always a fan of humour in a book, whether it be a comedic novel or some kind of dark crime piece, and this certainly has it.
Clever, witty; I have to say that I really enjoyed the style in which Scott writes. Also appreciated is the complete originality of this. While I've already admitted to not being a fan of this genre of book, I don't think I've ever read a blurb on the back of a book that would even remotely remind me of this beyond the thread of magic.
The politics that the story surrounds is a hell of a lot more intriguing than I'd imagined before getting stuck in, and I'd advise any usual magic-haters to cast their predisposition aside for a moment and give this a go. Truly awesome.
Clever, witty; I have to say that I really enjoyed the style in which Scott writes. Also appreciated is the complete originality of this. While I've already admitted to not being a fan of this genre of book, I don't think I've ever read a blurb on the back of a book that would even remotely remind me of this beyond the thread of magic.
The politics that the story surrounds is a hell of a lot more intriguing than I'd imagined before getting stuck in, and I'd advise any usual magic-haters to cast their predisposition aside for a moment and give this a go. Truly awesome.
July 26, 2016
I read the sample (8 chapters, 492 locations) and that was more than enough. Lame writing and lamer characters. Clearly an indie author with over-inflated ratings of the generic "OMG, this is the best thing I've ever read!" variety. Twenty minutes of my life wasted.
December 4, 2017
It's difficult to review this. It's quite unique. Basically, the human race almost blows itself up in a nuclear fireball but at the last moment the wizards step in and take over. They introduce sweeping new economic systems as well as wizard games to keep the population entertained/pacified. The population is not as grateful as they might be, and the plot of the novel revolves around our heroine - Amanda, the human liaison to the wizards council - attempting to find out what they are really up to, and to force them to leave after their three year term is over.
I thought the first chapter was fantastic, and frankly if wizards arrived tomorrow to overthrow our elected leaders I wouldn't be complaining too much. I'd be like 'all hail our new overlords'. But it is assumed that this is a bad thing and Amanda immediately sets out to make sure it doesn't last. From there on the book goes downhill a little as the plot centres around Amanda learning the backstories of her particular four wizards and taking part in some of the random games. The world-building is very imaginative, and the games are great fun, and if you can manage to suspend your disbelief the book is a rollicking read.
The trouble was that I only managed to suspend mine half of the time. After starting off with the horror of a nuclear apocalypse and the wonder of that being averted, and all the talk about economics, I was expecting a more believable exploration of how the wizards' rule affected people on the ground. But everything that made the wizards' rule either tenable or untenable was occasionally reported in an offhand manner while the heroine was concentrating on magic waterslides. I was constantly fighting my own tendency to go "if they're this powerful why haven't they been ruling all along?" and "how does that m-coin thing actually work? Aren't people starving down there? Have the economies of the world collapsed? Who's doing the actual governing here while the wizards sit around and answer questions? How does this all work?"
I never really got an answer for any of that. So IDK, I liked it, but the first few chapters made me hope it was going to be something different than what it was. What it was was fun, but what the first few chapters made me think it would be was going to be even better.
I thought the first chapter was fantastic, and frankly if wizards arrived tomorrow to overthrow our elected leaders I wouldn't be complaining too much. I'd be like 'all hail our new overlords'. But it is assumed that this is a bad thing and Amanda immediately sets out to make sure it doesn't last. From there on the book goes downhill a little as the plot centres around Amanda learning the backstories of her particular four wizards and taking part in some of the random games. The world-building is very imaginative, and the games are great fun, and if you can manage to suspend your disbelief the book is a rollicking read.
The trouble was that I only managed to suspend mine half of the time. After starting off with the horror of a nuclear apocalypse and the wonder of that being averted, and all the talk about economics, I was expecting a more believable exploration of how the wizards' rule affected people on the ground. But everything that made the wizards' rule either tenable or untenable was occasionally reported in an offhand manner while the heroine was concentrating on magic waterslides. I was constantly fighting my own tendency to go "if they're this powerful why haven't they been ruling all along?" and "how does that m-coin thing actually work? Aren't people starving down there? Have the economies of the world collapsed? Who's doing the actual governing here while the wizards sit around and answer questions? How does this all work?"
I never really got an answer for any of that. So IDK, I liked it, but the first few chapters made me hope it was going to be something different than what it was. What it was was fun, but what the first few chapters made me think it would be was going to be even better.
March 5, 2015
The opening chapter really gets your attention and sets the hook. Wizards instantly take over the United States and soon after dispose of almost every nuclear weapon in the world. The story is unpredictable – the wizards forcefully and illegally seized power, yet they did so without killing anyone and seem benevolent. Of course, they’re benevolent now, but they hold absolute power and proclaim they will for another three years. There is plenty of time for their power to corrupt them… but will it? I have degrees in social studies education and history, so it was interesting for me to see the references to political and economic theory, and the author has done due research into those topics.
There are some typographical errors, such as having the word “now” when it was obvious “not” was intended, and some formatting errors. There was an extra space between each paragraph and a blank page between each chapter. I’m an arms and armor geek, so I’ll notice an error like the phrase “semiautomatic machine guns,” which is an oxymoron. If a gun is semiautomatic, it’s not a machine gun.
My main issue is that there are a lot of resources that are never made full use of. Scott Spotson has some very good stuff here. It just needs a little focus and polishing, some loose ends tied up. If he does that, he’ll have a five star novel, easily. For example, when the wizards opened things up for debate with humans, some of the human debaters asked good questions and made good points. I thought some of those debaters would’ve made good foils for the wizards – perhaps some wizards could agree with the points the humans had made while other wizards wouldn’t, thus creating dissention within their ranks that the resistance movement could’ve exploited – but that never happened. The resistance movement was somewhat cartoonish. After seeing what the wizards can do, engaging them in open battle would obviously be suicide, yet that’s what the resistance does. And they get their clocks cleaned. Humans are nothing if not resourceful and adaptable. I kept expecting the resistance would find a weakness in the wizards and exploit it, but again, that doesn’t happen. The wizards mop the floor with them and that’s that.
There are also several inconsistencies. As the story progresses, we find out the wizards are human. One of them acted like he’d never seen a political cartoon before. This struck me as odd since the wizard was human and grew up in the human world. He should know what a political cartoon is. They welcomed debate, yet some of them got impatient rather quickly when human debaters asked difficult questions. I took this to be a crack in their benevolent façade, foreshadowing them becoming tyrants, but that never happened. So what was the point? To show the wizards are human? If so, what right did they have to seize power? If the author’s purpose was to raise that question, he never answers it. The wizards were supposed to be highly educated, yet their actions didn’t demonstrate that. At first they come off as good debaters, but their debating technique consisted almost entirely of quoting others. They didn’t seem to have many original arguments which, for people who are supposed to be skilled at debating, seemed a little inconsistent. They were surprised by criticism and resistance, yet someone well educated in history or political science would know that, no matter how well you lead or improve people’s lives, there will always be dissenters. This is a normal feature of any political or social landscape. Why do ostensibly well educated wizards seem to be completely ignorant of this? The wizards were very secretive about themselves and magic, something else I took as a sign of something sinister to come, but again, that didn’t happen. The wizards were totally oblivious to the idea that Amanda might be playing them for information that would be of use to the humans. How could people so powerful and intelligent and supposedly knowledgeable in politics overlook something so obvious? I thought perhaps this naiveté would be the weakness the humans would exploit but, like so many other things, this was never expanded, used or explained. Each wizard takes Amanda on a tour of a little slice of their personal lives so she, as the liason between the wizards and the humans, can learn more about them. In the case of Demus and Regi, it serves a purpose to the rest of the story. In the case of Indie and Justica, I don’t know why it was done. The scenes were interesting and well written, I just don’t see how they contributed anything to the plot. Justica did many things that left me scratching my head and wondering why. Her motives, like so much else in the story, are never really explained.
I found many of the characters difficult to relate to, the notable exception being Regi. Demus’ mercurial personality came across to me as, at best, bipolar, if not downright psychopathic, and I couldn’t sympathize with Amanda forgiving him. I liked Indie at first, but as the story progressed she went from being a strong female character to an ice queen. Towards the end of the book she attends Amanda’s wedding and is all smiles, something completely at odds with the cold, aloof, impatient person she had been throughout the rest of the book. Again, I was left scratching my head, wondering why this person who had been so cold for four hundred plus pages was suddenly so nice and expressive.
There is a huge amount of unused potential in this story. The flaws noted notwithstanding, the story flowed well. I wanted to know what happened. I read it in about four days. I would’ve finished it sooner if I didn’t have life rudely intruding! The author made me want to know what was going to happen. He kept my attention. The author did exceptionally well in his conceptions of the wizards’ world and Amanda’s forbidden tours through it. He did well placing the reader into the setting, and it’s obvious a great deal of thought went into it. He scored a bull’s eye in the fantasy writer’s goal of creating a new world and making it real for the reader. The opening chapter makes it sound like a political thriller, but then it becomes a fantasy tale and, as I’ve noted, does a very good job of setting the hook. On the one hand, nothing I expected to happen happened. The points I noticed didn’t turn out the way I anticipated, and no one wants a story that’s predictable. On the other hand, they didn’t really turn out at all. It wasn’t, “Whoa, I didn’t see that coming!” It was more like, “Well, okay, so why did this happen?” That’s the major issue. That and I think the author has a rosier outlook than I do – I think if a small number of people seize power, they will be corrupted, if they weren’t corrupt to begin with. Scott Spotson has some very good stuff here. It just needs a little focus and polishing, some loose ends tied up. If he does that, he’ll have a five star novel, easily.
There are some typographical errors, such as having the word “now” when it was obvious “not” was intended, and some formatting errors. There was an extra space between each paragraph and a blank page between each chapter. I’m an arms and armor geek, so I’ll notice an error like the phrase “semiautomatic machine guns,” which is an oxymoron. If a gun is semiautomatic, it’s not a machine gun.
My main issue is that there are a lot of resources that are never made full use of. Scott Spotson has some very good stuff here. It just needs a little focus and polishing, some loose ends tied up. If he does that, he’ll have a five star novel, easily. For example, when the wizards opened things up for debate with humans, some of the human debaters asked good questions and made good points. I thought some of those debaters would’ve made good foils for the wizards – perhaps some wizards could agree with the points the humans had made while other wizards wouldn’t, thus creating dissention within their ranks that the resistance movement could’ve exploited – but that never happened. The resistance movement was somewhat cartoonish. After seeing what the wizards can do, engaging them in open battle would obviously be suicide, yet that’s what the resistance does. And they get their clocks cleaned. Humans are nothing if not resourceful and adaptable. I kept expecting the resistance would find a weakness in the wizards and exploit it, but again, that doesn’t happen. The wizards mop the floor with them and that’s that.
There are also several inconsistencies. As the story progresses, we find out the wizards are human. One of them acted like he’d never seen a political cartoon before. This struck me as odd since the wizard was human and grew up in the human world. He should know what a political cartoon is. They welcomed debate, yet some of them got impatient rather quickly when human debaters asked difficult questions. I took this to be a crack in their benevolent façade, foreshadowing them becoming tyrants, but that never happened. So what was the point? To show the wizards are human? If so, what right did they have to seize power? If the author’s purpose was to raise that question, he never answers it. The wizards were supposed to be highly educated, yet their actions didn’t demonstrate that. At first they come off as good debaters, but their debating technique consisted almost entirely of quoting others. They didn’t seem to have many original arguments which, for people who are supposed to be skilled at debating, seemed a little inconsistent. They were surprised by criticism and resistance, yet someone well educated in history or political science would know that, no matter how well you lead or improve people’s lives, there will always be dissenters. This is a normal feature of any political or social landscape. Why do ostensibly well educated wizards seem to be completely ignorant of this? The wizards were very secretive about themselves and magic, something else I took as a sign of something sinister to come, but again, that didn’t happen. The wizards were totally oblivious to the idea that Amanda might be playing them for information that would be of use to the humans. How could people so powerful and intelligent and supposedly knowledgeable in politics overlook something so obvious? I thought perhaps this naiveté would be the weakness the humans would exploit but, like so many other things, this was never expanded, used or explained. Each wizard takes Amanda on a tour of a little slice of their personal lives so she, as the liason between the wizards and the humans, can learn more about them. In the case of Demus and Regi, it serves a purpose to the rest of the story. In the case of Indie and Justica, I don’t know why it was done. The scenes were interesting and well written, I just don’t see how they contributed anything to the plot. Justica did many things that left me scratching my head and wondering why. Her motives, like so much else in the story, are never really explained.
I found many of the characters difficult to relate to, the notable exception being Regi. Demus’ mercurial personality came across to me as, at best, bipolar, if not downright psychopathic, and I couldn’t sympathize with Amanda forgiving him. I liked Indie at first, but as the story progressed she went from being a strong female character to an ice queen. Towards the end of the book she attends Amanda’s wedding and is all smiles, something completely at odds with the cold, aloof, impatient person she had been throughout the rest of the book. Again, I was left scratching my head, wondering why this person who had been so cold for four hundred plus pages was suddenly so nice and expressive.
There is a huge amount of unused potential in this story. The flaws noted notwithstanding, the story flowed well. I wanted to know what happened. I read it in about four days. I would’ve finished it sooner if I didn’t have life rudely intruding! The author made me want to know what was going to happen. He kept my attention. The author did exceptionally well in his conceptions of the wizards’ world and Amanda’s forbidden tours through it. He did well placing the reader into the setting, and it’s obvious a great deal of thought went into it. He scored a bull’s eye in the fantasy writer’s goal of creating a new world and making it real for the reader. The opening chapter makes it sound like a political thriller, but then it becomes a fantasy tale and, as I’ve noted, does a very good job of setting the hook. On the one hand, nothing I expected to happen happened. The points I noticed didn’t turn out the way I anticipated, and no one wants a story that’s predictable. On the other hand, they didn’t really turn out at all. It wasn’t, “Whoa, I didn’t see that coming!” It was more like, “Well, okay, so why did this happen?” That’s the major issue. That and I think the author has a rosier outlook than I do – I think if a small number of people seize power, they will be corrupted, if they weren’t corrupt to begin with. Scott Spotson has some very good stuff here. It just needs a little focus and polishing, some loose ends tied up. If he does that, he’ll have a five star novel, easily.
June 19, 2018
This book reminds me a lot of the author's other work Alia Tero. Alia Tero was sort of humor, but it also involved a lot of political commentary. This book is the same. It's political commentary wrapped around fantasy. It's not super preachy or partisan, but I can tell the author has issues with society that he's writing out here.
This book is firmly in the fantasy genre, but given I just finished this book and read Alia Tero before it, I think it would be interesting to see the humor in Alia Tero and the imagination in this story to write straight up political satire.
Amanda was an interesting character. I think I was more interested in her than the wizards that invaded the oval office, mainly because Amanda seemed to be the only steady character in the books. The rest the characters would contradict themselves throughout the story.
Overall, it was an enjoyable read
This book is firmly in the fantasy genre, but given I just finished this book and read Alia Tero before it, I think it would be interesting to see the humor in Alia Tero and the imagination in this story to write straight up political satire.
Amanda was an interesting character. I think I was more interested in her than the wizards that invaded the oval office, mainly because Amanda seemed to be the only steady character in the books. The rest the characters would contradict themselves throughout the story.
Overall, it was an enjoyable read
December 30, 2017
The Deadly Wizard Games was an interesting read for me. Not so much that it was about wizards and magic (not my usual favourite) but more because it provoked some thoughts
about world politics and order. Essentially it is a tale of four wizards, Indie, Demus, Regi, and Justica which are selected to lead the North America continent on "Liberation day".
This is after nuclear destruction of major cities in SE Asia and the feeling that man has messed things up enough. These wizards choose Amanda Fullerton, an assuming young woman to be
their supreme liaison with the populace. The wizards instantly solve many issues but at the same time create other unforeseen problems. Amanda is caught in the middle, knowing there is a finite period to this unusual change earth's history.
I really enjoyed the start chapters of the book. The writing is quite witty and fresh, probably a bit wordy in places, but that is a personal opinion. I was more interested in some of the economic
concepts put forward by the author regarding the value of human work and also the m-coin idea, particulary relevant at the moment. There is certainly some foresight there and I suspect the author is well-versed in
these areas.
The chapters about the games and Amanda getting to know the wizards gave a good insight to the back-story, but maybe dragged a little.
The world-building was certainly imaginative and like everyone else, I thought renegade Demus was a much better rendered character than the others.
Overall: an entertaining read, especially if you are into fantasy and magic with a different twist: Four stars.
about world politics and order. Essentially it is a tale of four wizards, Indie, Demus, Regi, and Justica which are selected to lead the North America continent on "Liberation day".
This is after nuclear destruction of major cities in SE Asia and the feeling that man has messed things up enough. These wizards choose Amanda Fullerton, an assuming young woman to be
their supreme liaison with the populace. The wizards instantly solve many issues but at the same time create other unforeseen problems. Amanda is caught in the middle, knowing there is a finite period to this unusual change earth's history.
I really enjoyed the start chapters of the book. The writing is quite witty and fresh, probably a bit wordy in places, but that is a personal opinion. I was more interested in some of the economic
concepts put forward by the author regarding the value of human work and also the m-coin idea, particulary relevant at the moment. There is certainly some foresight there and I suspect the author is well-versed in
these areas.
The chapters about the games and Amanda getting to know the wizards gave a good insight to the back-story, but maybe dragged a little.
The world-building was certainly imaginative and like everyone else, I thought renegade Demus was a much better rendered character than the others.
Overall: an entertaining read, especially if you are into fantasy and magic with a different twist: Four stars.
October 12, 2018
Review Coming Soon 3.75 Stars
August 25, 2019
I recieved a free copy of this book via booksirens in exchange for an honest review.
Okay so the premise of this book had lots of promise. The first 10% or so was great, it was set up nicely, but after that things tanked. There was far too much polictics for me, a lot of it was boring and didn't seem revelant to go into that much detail. For a book about wizards and magic there was not enough magic in it for me.
Until the end I didn't feel that the wizards had much distiction in personality but that may have been on purpose until Amanda got to know them better. It still made reading the beginning feel a little flat. Even when they had personality it was only really for their alligiance not much else.
I found it hard to keep going with this book. Once I put it down I really found it hard to pick it up again. If it hadn't been a review book I would still be reading it.
The last 15% things really picked up and I enjoyed reading it. It didn't go where I thought it was going to. It was a pretty bland ending, it could have been much more inventive and more exciting.
For a book that spanned over three years, not much happened, there was lots of interviews and discussions but not much action.
My biggest annoyance was Wizard chess, not only did the author steal the idea he didn't even change the name. That's just lazy! I was goign to give the book 3 stars before that crime. Doing something similar is a great idea, even if it's only slightly altered. But the only difference here were the characters playing the game.
I did enjoy parts but after writing this review I realised how much annoyed me or left me bored.
2 out of 5 stars
Okay so the premise of this book had lots of promise. The first 10% or so was great, it was set up nicely, but after that things tanked. There was far too much polictics for me, a lot of it was boring and didn't seem revelant to go into that much detail. For a book about wizards and magic there was not enough magic in it for me.
Until the end I didn't feel that the wizards had much distiction in personality but that may have been on purpose until Amanda got to know them better. It still made reading the beginning feel a little flat. Even when they had personality it was only really for their alligiance not much else.
I found it hard to keep going with this book. Once I put it down I really found it hard to pick it up again. If it hadn't been a review book I would still be reading it.
The last 15% things really picked up and I enjoyed reading it. It didn't go where I thought it was going to. It was a pretty bland ending, it could have been much more inventive and more exciting.
For a book that spanned over three years, not much happened, there was lots of interviews and discussions but not much action.
My biggest annoyance was Wizard chess, not only did the author steal the idea he didn't even change the name. That's just lazy! I was goign to give the book 3 stars before that crime. Doing something similar is a great idea, even if it's only slightly altered. But the only difference here were the characters playing the game.
I did enjoy parts but after writing this review I realised how much annoyed me or left me bored.
2 out of 5 stars
Displaying 1 - 30 of 74 reviews