OnlineBookClub.org

Despite being third in a series, some reviewers have said that Skills of the Warramunga could be read as a stand alone book, while other reviewers expressed some confusion because they didn't read the first two books.

Personally, I have a hard time not reading a series in order. What important details does a reader need to know if they are picking this book up without reading the two prior books in the series? Or would you say that this is truly a stand alone novel?

For any series, there should be sufficient flashback to understand role of any characters. Also some events from previous books should be explained in short, if these things are included, surely that book will stand alone.

I am a stickler for reading from the first book of a series through the others in order. I agree that knowledge of flashbacks and history of previous books is important to fully understand what’s been going on.

When I start a series out of order, I often find myself stopping mid-read and going to look for the first book. So going out of order never works for me. Thanks for the heads up!

If I know there are other books in a series, I have to start with the first one. Same with tv box sets, I have to go to the first season and start there. I don't do stand alones

I doubt I will enjoy reading the third book first even if it's a standalone; I won't be able to shake off the feeling that I 'm missing some details.

I don't mind starting a series in the middle, but if it's one I end up liking, it's not unusual for me to go back and read the others. I think it's difficult for a book in a series to truly be a 'standalone' if any part is based on something that happened in a previous book. With this one, even in the sample, there were references to events that obviously had occurred in earlier books.

Michelle Fred wrote: ↑03 Oct 2019, 15:55 I doubt I will enjoy reading the third book first even if it's a standalone; I won't be able to shake off the feeling that I 'm missing some details.

I agree. If the book is part of a series, then surely the author used ideas from the previous books to make the third book. But in order to know what ideas the author used, one must read the previous books.

Jyockel08 wrote: ↑03 Oct 2019, 11:31 When I start a series out of order, I often find myself stopping mid-read and going to look for the first book. So going out of order never works for me. Thanks for the heads up!

Same here, actually. I'm in favor of reading the books in order. Certainly works better for me.

The reviewer said that this book could be read as a standalone book in the series and after reading and reviewing this book too, I find that I agree completely.

I am reading the book as a standalone, but I think had I have read the previous books I would have had a greater understanding of each of the characters. I would have liked to have had more in-depth knowledge of Jamie and Jacko's characters.

raikyuu wrote: ↑03 Oct 2019, 19:44

Michelle Fred wrote: ↑03 Oct 2019, 15:55 I doubt I will enjoy reading the third book first even if it's a standalone; I won't be able to shake off the feeling that I 'm missing some details.

I agree. If the book is part of a series, then surely the author used ideas from the previous books to make the third book. But in order to know what ideas the author used, one must read the previous books.

I kind of feel ripped off by series books. I always feel that the author is just picking up some subplots of earlier works and passing them off as new. But if I know a book is a series starter, I usually avoid it. The exception is authors that I truly love.

djr6090 wrote: ↑04 Oct 2019, 09:47 I kind of feel ripped off by series books. I always feel that the author is just picking up some subplots of earlier works and passing them off as new. But if I know a book is a series starter, I usually avoid it. The exception is authors that I truly love.

This is interesting because I am the opposite. I seek out books that are the beginning of a series, especially audiobooks. I love it when I can find a long series that I really enjoy because I know that if I enjoy the first book, there are more more that follow. What I don't like is when you get an unexpected cliffhanger. I've read a few authors who do that for no reason other than selling more books.

Brendan Donaghy wrote: ↑03 Oct 2019, 14:09 If I know there are other books in a series, I have to start with the first one. Same with tv box sets, I have to go to the first season and start there. I don't do stand alones

I agree with you. I would have done the same

I am one of the reviewers who recommended it as a stand-alone book. Having not read the others, I felt the author did an excellent job of providing necessary background information in the story. Having said that, now that I have read one in the series, I would like to eventually read the others.