Geez... it's been a month since I last posted a blog. (Or you could get kitschy and say "I haven't posted a blog since last year!")

Where did the time go? Well, Christmas and New Year's ate up a chunk, as did my work on Mass Effect: Ascension - the sequel novel to Mass Effect: Revelation (yeah, I know it's not SW, but I thought I'd sneak it in).

But I'm not here to shamelessly plug my next book. (Mass Effect: Ascension - coming in July 2008! Based on the critically acclaimed bestselling video game!) I'm actually here to talk about Darth Bane: Rule of Two, and give my take on how my latest SW novel has been received by you, the fans. I did something similar in one of my blogs long ago, when Path of Destruction was released.

If you read that blog, you might remember my eloquent, impassioned defense against the continuity conformists who took umbrage with my work. Or you might have dismissed it as a hack trying to justify his butchering of a treasured comic series. Whatever floats your boat - it was cathartic for me, so I thought I'd do it again. However, for good or ill, this blog won't be nearly as confrontational.

First, let's start with some good news. Rule of Two debuted at #14 on the New York Times bestseller list last week, and this week it actually *climbed* two spots to #12 - first time that's ever happened with one of my novels. (Like I've had soooo many on the list.) So, from me to all the Bane fans out there -
THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

Overall the reader reaction has been very positive, as evidenced by e-mails I've received, amazon reviews, blogs here on starwars.com, etc. (And, as a side note, I do read all comments on my blog, even though I don't always respond. So thanks to everyone who posts here!)

This is my first sequel, and I was a little nervous about what people would think. (I wrote the third Baldur's Gate novel, but the other two were written by someone else so it doesn't count.) Would they find RoT too similar to PoD; just more of the same ol' same 'ol? Would they find it too different, losing the magic they loved from the first one? In the end, I decided not to worry about things like that, and I just threw myself back into Bane's character and let events sort of unfold on the page. Fortunately, people seemed to enjoy the result.

I haven't done too bad on the continuity issues this time around. (This is not the Chiss you're looking for...) That's probably because I was working in a relatively unexplored time period, so there wasn't as much for me to screw up. Or maybe readers just expect that of me now, so they cut me some slack.

However, there were two nagging issues that I have seen mentioned a few times.

Issue the First, or "What's with all the typos?"
In the forward of the novel, I mentioned that Rule of Two was written and published in the space of six months - a very short time period for a novel. I did this to acknowledge the incredible job the Del Rey and LucasBooks teams did in putting the novel together under such a tight deadline. In retrospect, that might have been a mistake.

I've seen several people comment on typos in the novel, and they almost invariably follow this up with some type of remark alluding to my comment in the forward. (Eg: I found a lot of typos. The author said it was written in six months. Maybe they should have taken more time and made less mistakes.)

I think my comment put people into the frame of mind where they were subconsciously looking for typos or other evidence that the novel was "rushed"; it made them more aware of the mistakes.

Are there typos, etc. in Rule of Two? Yes, there are. Every novel has them. Are there an inordinate number in Rule of Two? Maybe... I haven't gone back and counted, then compared it with my other novels. But I believe the fact that I opened that door (coupled with a couple bad typos early in the novel) made people more inclined to belive the book had a greater number of errors than normal. (And I will note that several readers/reviewers haven't felt there was an abundance of errors.)

So, my advice to you as a reader who wants to enjoy the novel (should you choose to accept it): don't go looking for mistakes. You'll enjoy the book a lot more if you just let yourself get swept up in the characters and story. And if you're the kind of person who simply can't get around the odd typo or spelling error... well, I guess I can't help you there.

Point Number Two, or "I didn't think it would be so short!"
Huh - that title is something no guy ever wants to hear about his... book.

Some people have commented that Rule of Two doesn't feel "long enough" to be a hardcover. I understand the sentiment - if you're shelling out your hard earned cash, you want as much entertainment as you can get for your buck.

But I'm not going to pad my word count just to reach some arbitrary page number. I'll tell a story with a beginning, middle and end, but it's only going to be as long as it needs to be. A lot happens in Rule of Two, and I think readers get their money's worth.

Admittedly, part of the problem may be my style of writing. Some people have called my writing "simplistic" or even "amatuerish"; I prefer to think of it as "tight" and "efficient".

Newsflash - I'm not a literary genius. I don't spin wondrous lyrical lines that will forever live in the annals of literature. I'm out there to entertain people; the best thing I can do as a writer is make sure my prose never gets in the way. I don't want to bog the story down with unnecessary description, or overly self-indulgent essays woven into the fiction and disguised as the thoughts of my characters.

I describe what I feel is important to establishing the mood of a scene, or the thematic tone of a chapter. I'll probably never spend five pages describing the beauty of the old woods as my players walk through.

Some writers have the talent to pull this off. I lack that particular artistry. So my books are, for most of the audience, a "quick read". Personally, I think that's a good thing. If I sweep you up in the action, whisk you along and you get to the end and think - Wow, that was great! But I want *more*! - then I've done my job.

And, for what it's worth, Rule of Two is longer than Temple Hill, Throne of Bhaal and Mass Effect: Revelation.

It's also longer than Catcher in the Rye, To Kill a Mockingbird and even Stephen King's "The Gunslinger". Not that I think my rank works up with those kinds of classics - I'm just trying to make a point. Length does not necessarily equal quality.

Okay, that's enough verbal spew from me. Once again, thank you to everyone who's bought and read Rule of Two. And I hope everyone who enjoyed Path of Destruction decides to check out the sequel; I'm confident you'll find yourself swept up in the continuing adventures of Bane and his new apprentice.

Embrace the dark side.

Drew