SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

I read a lot of series that are interesting, great fun and have a beginning, middle and end yet the main /other characters and setting remain consistent (C.E Murphy, Jim Butcher, Kim Harrison, Seanan McGuire,.so many..) . Hate with a passion cliffhanger endings - prefer to avoid all books that use this insulting soap opera "tune in next week" bit. Is there any way to ID upfront what type of series you're getting yourself into? So many reviewers play "book report" where they detail the whole story so you know they read it - I hate to have to read reviews to find out(and my last (What the Face as Phil Dunfey would say) had great reviews, not mentioning the "on the last page let's have the protagonist you'd thought dead but probably knew better kidnap the lovable roommate" and immediately end. For authors - is this something certain publishers push and those publishers should be avoided t all costs if you hate cliffhangers? Hate finishing up new authors/books and just feeling pissed.

I don't know that there's any way to reliably find those, other than to focus on standalone books.

Some first books in a series, such as N.K. Jemisin's The Killing Moon, Jack L. Chalker's Midnight at the Well of Souls or Paul O. Williams' The Breaking of Northwall, wrap up the story completely so you don't have to continue with the other books, but I'm not sure anyone has collated them.

What would we call those? "Books in a series that can be read as standalones" seems rather unwieldy.

I am still scarred by the cliff hanger ending in Tom Clancy's Debt of Honor which I read back in 1994; and then had to wait nearly two years for Executive Orders.

Though I am fine with cliff hanger endings when the whole series has been published and I simply dive right into the next book.

We Goodreads librarians can put that information on the series page... but only if we know it or are told about it. PM me if you want me to note that information.

Trike, do you know if the rest of those three series continue as independent reads, or do they have to be read in sequence?

Thanks Cheryl and pm sent. Would love to not get tripped up again. Ann - believe me I get it.
Trilke - I suppose soap opera ending books sounds too judgey - I saw someone say serial series once.
For years I'd also sworn to only read completed series - but let those slide as I found the others listed above and more.

Cheryl wrote: "Trike, do you know if the rest of those three series continue as independent reads, or do they have to be read in sequence? "

It's been too long since I read the Williams books to say for sure. I *think* the others are mostly standalone, but I wouldn't swear to it.

In Chalker's Well World series, the next four books are essentially two books split in half, and they're all of a piece. So 2 & 3 are one book, while 4 & 5 follow directly after that. Each duo are complete story arcs but they're all intended to be read as one long work.

I haven't yet read the follow-ups to Jemisin's book, so I can't speak to those.

Thought of another one: Dragonflight by Anne McCaffrey is a standalone. (It's actually a fix-up novel comprised of her two Pern novellas with additional material added.) The sequels were added later. Numbers 2 and 3, Dragonquest and The White Dragon were written later. A decade later in the case of the latter. The White Dragon can be read as a standalone. (But it's better as the third in the series.)

Maggie wrote: "I suppose soap opera ending books sounds too judgey - I saw someone say serial series once.."

Standalone Serials maybe?

GR is rolling out the ability to search all community reviews. So far only members of the Feedback group have that ability. Once you have it you can search the terms cliff hanger or standalone, that might help you.

Faith wrote: "GR is rolling out the ability to search all community reviews. So far only members of the Feedback group have that ability. Once you have it you can search the terms cliff hanger or standalone, tha..."


I did not know this. Intriguing.


I largely stick to stand-alones - partly for this reason, partly I was turned off fantasy in the 80s as everything was becoming increasingly padded out, multi-volume epics (I'm looking at you, Robert Jordan and Raymond Feist).


The worst example I've ever come across, though, isn't an SF/F novel but Roses are Red. There's a massive cliff-hanger reveal at the end, and I actually had the sequel already - but I just didn't care. Both books went straight to the charity shop.

I think it's important to distinguish between a "cliffhanger" and a "hint/nod" to things to come with characters. A "But who's the father" as a last line is annoying. However, if the characters stop one threat completely, but then the reader finds out a relative of the villain is plotting revenge, that's okay by me. Still, I prefer to wait until the full series is published usually. I'll take a chance on the first book sometimes.

Phillip, that's an excellent point.
I hope people who are asking me to put notes on the series' pages are making that distinction.

Agree with Phillip, a nod, hint that there is a story to come is a-ok. I tend to think it's a publisher/editor thing as the ones that rile me the most are the life and death new situation for a major character slapped onto the last page or so (and they feel slapped on).

But, I fear we may see more as Game of Thrones and the tv watching public has widely accepted season finales of the cliffhanger model.

Love the search reviews feature - if many can add the one word cliffhanger to a review when it applies - those of us who prefer to only read completed series if they contain cliffhangers will be free and clear.