Good "starting point" for reading epic fantasy?

I'm never quite sure what is and isn't epic fantasy, but a few possible suggestions...

You mentioned Pathfinder, so I'll start by recommending Josh Vogt's Forge of Ashes.
Following your mention of political drama: Lies of Locke Lamora, by Scott Lynch (and its sequels)
Robin Hobb has never disappointed. Good places to start would include Assassin's Apprentice, Ship of Magic, or Shaman's Crossing. Each of these is the first book in a different trilogy. Both Assassin and Ship are set in her broader Realm of the Elderlings series.
If you want something a little different, consider Jacqueline Carey's The Sundering (Banewreaker / Godslayer): the story inverts the tropes and makes the villains the point-of-view characters. It's epic fantasy as high tragedy, and one of my all time favourites.

If you're looking for epic fantasy, you probably want to give Tad Williams a try. His Memory, Sorrow and Thorn trilogy is considered a staple (partial inspiration for GRRM's Game of Thrones), and the first book in a follow-up trilogy just hit shelves. If you're looking for different species interacting, you get more of that in his Shadowmarch quartet; seems to be overshadowed by his MST trilogy, but in some ways I liked it better, and it had a larger scope.

Terry Goodkind's Wizard's First Rule focuses on a few characters, though I hear the series gets a bit overlong and bloated (haven't gotten around to pursuing it.)

Anthony Ryan's recent The Waking Fire (start of a series) has epic overtones with politics and distinct main characters, though it's not quite sword and sorcery per se.

If you're interested in sword & sorcery, you might try Fritz Leiber's classic Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser stories, available in collected volumes; if you want to skip the sometimes-lengthy origin tales, you can just track down Ill Met in Lankhmar, which is the tale of how the two heroes met. (IIRC, Leiber is the one who coined the term "sword and sorcery"; he was also poking some fun at a genre following in the overserious footsteps of Conan and other broodingly inhuman heroes, so there's a bit of gentle mockery of tropes.)

For interesting worldbuilding with distinctive cultures, Brandon Sanderson's Stormlight Archives are great.

And if you're really interested in epic fantasy, it still pays to go back to Tolkien - at least to try, if not to finish. Writing styles may have moved on, but much of the genre is still built on his foundations.

Take a look at The Chronicle of the Unhewn Throne series by Brian Stavelely. It's chock-full of political finagling.

I love the genre, but can't stand most epic fantasy books. I guess it depends what you like or want from the genre.

A friend of mine is R&Ring their epic fantasy, and it's honestly the most fun I've had from that genre in years.

I'm another one who isn't sure what does or doesn't count. I love Robin Hobb usually but am surprised to see her described as EF. But maybe that fits, I don't know.

I would have said the Chronicles of Amber qualifies, though it's a non traditional epic, but it has all the right ingredients (with a few twists or so along the way). If you haven't read that, it is really well done. Can't go wrong with Zelazny.

Kings of the Wyld by Nicolas Eames is a recent fantasy hit mixing epic adventure with rock'n'roll. I second the suggestion of The Lies of Locke Lamora.

I like Trudi Canavan's books. No swords, but the fate of the world is at stake over 3 engrossing books - take your pick of trilogies.

Terry Brooks I feel is a good blend of old school epic fantasy mixed with new. His original books are very good, and very LOTR like in plot, especially Sword of Shannara. His newer ones have more of a modern edge to them. He can be a bit wordy, and I haven't been a fan of some of his recent series, but over-all, he's a pretty good go-to.

All three have been mentioned already, but I'll mention them again. Just because.
Trudi Canavan's Millenium Rule series.
Scott Lynch's Gentleman Bastard series.
Brandon Sanderson's Mistborn series.

All different kinds of plot, different kinds of characters and worlds, all very good.

There's also Kate Elliott's Crown of Stars series (seven books, but at least it's finished). King's Dragon is the first one.

Michael J. Sullivan's Riyria books sound like they'd be right up your alley, especially since you mention liking The Palace Job. Start with Riyria Revelations, which begins with Theft of Swords. Some of the most fun I've ever had reading fantasy.

For a series based partly on a video game concept there's the Codex Alera series by Jim Butcher, which is a fusion of Pokemon and the lost Roman legion.

I can also recommend a personal favorite, the Green Rider series by Kristen Britain. The series is ongoing still and offers a little bit of everything, especially if you like companion animals and a little bit of romance with your stories (don't discount it out of hand if it's not your thing, though!).

Also agreeing with the Scott Lynch suggestion. I recommended The Lies of Locke Lamora to a friend of mine who wanted to get into fantasy more and didn't know where to start, and he thoroughly enjoyed it. It's very accessible as fantasy goes.

There's some good suggestions here already - The Lies of Locke Lamora is a superb book but I wouldn't call it epic as such.

If you want real EPIC epic fantasy, look at The Wheel of Time and Malazan Book of the Fallen.

Do the Belgariad and Malloreon series count? Five easy books each. Here's how TVTropes describes it:

David Eddings wrote the series after taking a course on literary criticism. He dug out all the tropes he could find, and decided to build a world that was simultaneously Strictly Formula and really, really good — because Tropes Are Not Bad. He also deliberately focused on the characters rather than the tropes, injecting liveliness and sardonic humor into stock situations. The original books were followed up with a sequel series, The Malloreon (which is basically "The Belgariad all over again but everyone is older", as the characters themselves quickly notice).

Click to expand...

I actually enjoyed The Malloreon even more, mainly because one of the evil emperors becomes a party member and is hysterical. Although it was woefully low on Mandorallen...

Raymond E Feist's books are classic. Also Tad Williams Osten Ard books (Memory, Sorrow and Thorn trilogy is the first, but he's writing some new ones too.) Mary Stewart's Arthur series is somewhat of an epic fantasy and the individual volumes are not overly long. (Although, she was kind of doing some grimdark stuff way before GRRM thought to write ASOFAI.)

JetFueledCar said:

I do not normally read epic fantasy, mostly because it's, well, epic.

Click to expand...

Echo this. And I've tried. And tried. My problem, as a reader, is that I've never found one of these "epics" that was inhabited by characters I could give a rat's about. Every one I've looked at seems driven by world-building/plot contrivance, involving PeterJacksonian megabattles, and other tropes that just inflame my cliché-detection gland. Perhaps I'm over-interpreting the genre concept, I don't know.

caw

I tend to enjoy character-driven narratives, which means that some of the big epics have left me feeling unconnected over the years. I also like the richness of worlds and cultures that exemplify epic fantasy, when they influence the worlds and stories. But stories that are all world building and epic stakes with very little characterization or personal stakes leave me bored and disconnected.

Have you tried Robin Hobb's series that start with Assassin's Apprentice? It's a long series with many installments over the years, but the core books (imo) are the ones written in first person. There's more focus on character in those than in some sprawling epics with a bunch of pov characters to keep straight. Note that some of the other books written in the same world are in more traditional multi-third style narrations, but I found them easier to read once I was invested in the world. And while there are dragons that ally themselves with humans, I find it rather refreshing that they're not exactly tame little pets. More the reverse, in fact. Humans are the dragons' pets. Note, Robin Hobb is not a big fan of unilaterally happy endings. She's harder than hell on her protagonists. "Bittersweet" might be the way I'd define her books, when they're not downright heartbreaking.

Some others I've liked over the years may or may not count as "epic fantasy," though they're definitely heroic fantasies taking place in secondary worlds where some of the expected tropes are present.

I enjoyed Lynn Flewelling's Nightrunner series, and I'm disappointed that she doesn't seem to be starting anything new since finishing the series (unless she's doing so under a different pen name). She's active on twitter and FB but hasn't updated her blog in ages and hasn't said anything about new projects lately. While there are world-changing elements in these stories and some standard fantasy tropes, her stories always felt personal and the characters like real people.

I've liked some of Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar books over the years too. I know many people here like to scoff at them, and they're maybe what counts as lighter fantasy, in that they tend to end with happily ever afters (or at least for nows), but sometimes I'm in the mood for something more upbeat. Each individual book or (sometimes trilogy or duology within the whole) tend to focus on one, or at the most a very few, characters, but taken in their entirety they're pretty epic.

I enjoyed Kate Elliott's Spiritwalker trilogy. They're narrated in a single first-person pov, and take place in an alternative history Europe, but they incorporate interesting world building and magic.

I liked Joe Abercrombie's The Blade Itself and the rest of that trilogy, though it was more a dark and cynical deconstruction of standard epic fantasy tropes. It did get rapey and torturey in places if that's not your kind of thing. His Half a King (Shattered Sea) series was a bit different. It was technically for YA readers, and had teen protagonists, and it was a bit less cynical and dark than his other books. Still, it was far from light fantasy. The first book had one pov protagonist, the second two, and the third three or four (I can't recall), but one of his strengths, imo, is characterization. Like Robin Hobb, he doesn't seem to be too keen on happy endings for his characters.

In a very different vein, I liked the Lady Trent series. I don't know if it counts as epic fantasy, and it's taking place in a different kind of world than many fantasies--a sort of alternative Earth in a Victorian era analog, but where dragons are real. It's narrated in first person with a wry, humorous tone. The protagonist is a very unconventional lady who becomes her society's foremost dragon expert and is of great service to the "crown."

I liked Jacqeline Carey's Kushiel's Dart trilogy. It's pretty epic in scope and length, but it's narrated in first person by the same character throughout. I enjoyed the world building. Note there's quite a bit of sex, since the protagonist is a courtesan and the servant of a god that embodies sensual pain. But there's a lot more to the story than that. It's very different from the previous series, which is told from a more Victorian sensibility, but both are unusual among fantasy epics with female protagonists in that the woman in question is not a warrior or following a heroines journey type arc, where they repudiate their femininity initially. Both are smart, strong and resourceful, however, but they are very happy to be women.

If you want to look at some authors who were writing backstabbing high (or possibly epic) fantasy before A Song of Ice and Fire was even conceived, you might try Katherine Kurtz's books, or Melanie Rawn's Dragon Prince series. Both were very popular in the 70s and 80s, though they're rarely talked about now. Note that the narrative style these books are told in may feel rather dated now.

Roxxsmom said:

His Half a King (Shattered Sea) series was a bit different. It was technically for YA readers, and had teen protagonists, and it was a bit less cynical and dark than his other books. Still, it was far from light fantasy. The first book had one pov protagonist, the second two, and the third three or four (I can't recall), but one of his strengths, imo, is characterization. Like Robin Hobb, he doesn't seem to be too keen on happy endings for his characters.

Click to expand...

Hey I'm reading these right now! I feel a bit too old for them, but they're definitely very accessible and easy to read. They're epic without feeling the weight of epic (except for when that guy fights a ship). Though it makes me angry when he can make me care more about his characters in the first three pages than about my own after five hundred!

I would recommend starting with The Wheel of Time or Mistborn if you're coming from more heroic fantasy.

Aggy B. mentioned Raymond E. Feist books. I completely agree. Classic, wonderful books that still live in my memory.

I don't know if anyone's mentioned this yet, but David Eddings. The Mallorean is probably his best series, imo. The Belgariad came before that. The Elenium and the Tamuli books were great too, and I didn't even mind that I felt like I was reading the same plot, lol. He wrote at a time when prologues were a thing, so you kind of have to get past the prologues, but those books just amazed me. I mean, I fell in love with those books and those characters. I read them back when I was reading all of the Drizzt novels (well, really everything TSR was putting out at the time) for the first time, and they worked great as a transition from more heroic novels to epic.

Someone mentioned the Malazan books, and while those books are amazing, I think the steep learning curve the author puts the reader through might be an initial turn off.

Roxxsmom said:

In a very different vein, I liked the Lady Trent series. I don't know if it counts as epic fantasy, and it's taking place in a different kind of world than many fantasies--a sort of alternative Earth in a Victorian era analog, but where dragons are real. It's narrated in first person with a wry, humorous tone. The protagonist is a very unconventional lady who becomes her society's foremost dragon expert and is of great service to the "crown."

Click to expand...

I recently read the first Lady Trent book, and quite enjoyed it. Great job suggesting the greater world without drowning the reader in it - plus just a good story all around.

Circling back with a couple more...

Not sure if it quite counts, but Django Wexler's writing a flintlock fantasy series, The Shadow Campaigns (first book: The Thousand Names), with some very distinct characters and interesting politics, plus very well done battle scenes. Not the average, traditional, pseudo-Tolkien epic, but worth a look for what's going on in fantasy these days.

The MG series The Prydain Chronicles (starting with The Book of Three) by Lloyd Alexander is considered a classic, and a fairly quick read for an adult; might be a way to get a taste of classic fantasy without a huge time commitment.

Lady Trent is technically "hard fantasy" (so I'm told!) in that it approaches fantasy with a realistic, scientific sort of angle. Somewhere between fictional academic travel writing and pulpy dragon adventure.

But it's a very engaging series of books whatever bucket you stick it in.

Harlequin said:

Lady Trent is technically "hard fantasy" (so I'm told!) in that it approaches fantasy with a realistic, scientific sort of angle. Somewhere between fictional academic travel writing and pulpy dragon adventure.

But it's a very engaging series of books whatever bucket you stick it in.

Click to expand...

Yeah. I find it difficult to determine when something becomes epic. I find that many of my favorite epics are ones where there's debate over whether or not they really are epic. I think of "epic fantasy" being more about the scope of the story and stakes, while designations like "high fantasy," "hard fantasy," "low fantasy," "historical fantasy," "gunpowder fantasy," and so on are more about the style of the storytelling and world building themselves. The thing about the Lady Trent books is that they didn't focus on war, though war was definitely a factor in the story and something that affected the protagonist's options in many cases. To some, if there aren't scenes involving epic battles, it's not epic fantasy.

I love fantasy, and generally prefer fantasy set in secondary worlds and in pre-industrial settings (for modern and futuristic settings, I prefer SF). But I set aside far more fantasy novels than I finish. I find the market is very flooded (which is frustrating for those of us who dream of getting published within it).

It's also very diverse in terms of characterization, writing style, and world building. Even without getting into what constitutes objectively good or bad writing or storytelling, I imagine there are very few readers that like all (or even most) books in the genre. There are plenty of writers in the genre that are popular and regarded as "great," but I just couldn't enjoy. Sometimes (and this is a big thing with older fantasy and SF, like Robert Jordan), it's because I find it sooooo sexist it makes my brain hurt. Other times it's because they employ narrative styles I find distancing or tropes I've simply seen too much of over the years. But sometimes there are modern writers who are considered "must reads" in progressive circles, and who are praised for being very innovative, yet I just can't sink my teeth into them.

Another series that might count as epic, and that has a military flavor, is Naomi Novik's Temeraire books. These get dinged sometimes because they involve an empathic bond between humans and dragons that resembles McCaffrey's Pern books (something that's been done a lot over the years).

The series set in an alternative 19th century/Napoleonic time frame, where dragons function as sentient airships, but everything else is pretty much the same. The same important historical personages are present and the cities and nations are as they were during the Napoleonic Wars and immediately after. If you can get past the unlikelihood of this being the case in a world where dragons evolved alongside humans (I'm sure this would *really* have changed how people design cities, and where they were built, and affected the outcomes of wars and history long before the 1800s), the books are engaging and character focused.

My biggest beef with the books is that I had trouble envisioning how big the dragons really were and how the air battles worked out mechanically with flying creatures portrayed as if they were ocean ships. For instance, the dragons being able to lay their heads in a human lap suggested that they were maybe the size of elephants, or just a bit larger, yet they talked about them having tents pitched on their backs and carrying dozens of men sometimes, as if they were warship sized. Feeding them would have necessitated a much smaller human population with nearly all livestock going to feed the dragon corps.

They are very popular, however, and they are fun.

JetFueledCar said:

I didn't know there was such a thing as hard fantasy and am now fascinated to explore it.

Click to expand...

I don't know if it's an "official" subgenre one can include in a query. I've heard the term used in two different ways.

One describes fantasy set in pre-modern societies that doesn't incorporate magic as such, where any speculative elements (such as the existence of dragons) are explained, or at least presented as being plausible without magic or gods or whatever. In the Lady Trent books, dragons are evolved creatures that have bones that are made of a very light and strong matrix (I assume that's why they can fly) that can be used to make airships. They also have "fantastic breath" that is generated via biological means. The main character is a "lady naturalist" who works her way through the restrictions of her society to study the dragons, but you don't see wizards or gods walking around lobbing fireballs. The normal laws of physics and nature are obeyed overall.

It's not science fiction because the setting is one that appeals to traditional fantasy readers, and also, there's not a real emphasis on futuristic technology, science or sociology.

Another definition I've seen for "hard fantasy" are fantasies with magic that is is explained mechanistically and logically, once one gets past the implausibility of the basic premise of magic existing. For instance, the magic system obeys the laws of thermodynamics and can't produce something from nothing and so on.