‘Storm of Steel’ features a blend of quality battles, tense encounters, and some decent drama; however, of Books 1–6, I feel this is the weakest in the series. I liked it in parts rather than on the whole.

Like with many historical novels I’ve read, the author puts so much effort in getting the history elements correct that essential creative writing skills are neglected. Main problem being too much ‘telling’ and not enough ‘showing’. Don’t tell the reader that a character ‘was confused’ – show his confusion with action, or body language, or a facial expression.

Adverb overuse is another evil, and the biggest problem with adverbs is they ‘tell’. For example, at one point we’re told that someone ‘walked determinedly’, which tells us the character got from A to B but we don’t see it. Cut the adverb and use a strong verb to ‘show’ the determination.

Adverbs are pointless in instances like ‘vomited noisily’ (do people ever vomit at any other volume?) and ‘squirmed uncomfortably’ (‘squirmed’ alone implies the discomfort).

Among the worst adverbs is ‘clearly’. To tell the reader that a character was ‘clearly waiting’ or ‘clearly curious’ is ‘telling’ at its worst. In fiction, if you use ‘clearly’ or ‘obviously’, be assured that you’re not ‘showing’ the reader anything.

Two other style issues that irritated me are the overuse of ‘then’ (to state what happens next), and ‘had’ (past perfect).

To keep using ‘then’ is lazy and unimaginative. It’s fine in children’s books, but for gritty historical fiction I expect more imagination. Most can be cut, the rest replaced.

‘Had’ appears in this and previous novels in the series like an infection. It may not bother most readers, but I find it a major distraction. In fact, before I started reading ‘Storm of Steel’, I made a bet with myself that ‘had’ would feature in the first sentence. It did – and in most sentences of the opening page.

The frequent use of ‘had’ in the past perfect tense is something all authors should avoid. It reports on the scene as opposed to taking the reader into the action as it unfolds. The odd one is inevitable, but in this book it’s consistent, even though it’s easy to cut them down.

For one thing, this narrative is in the past tense, so ‘had’ should only be used if a sentence sounds odd without it. For example, ‘He had said’ works fine as ‘he said’ because ‘said’ is in the past tense. ‘She had sat down’ works better as ‘She sat down’ because ‘sat’ is past tense. If a scene that’s past is being recalled, all that’s needed is to inform the reader that these events have already happened, after which the frequent use of ‘had’ is unnecessary.

In this novel, we get the likes of ‘had come', which annoys and baffles me when ‘came’ is available.

The frequency of ‘had’ stands out in all novels in this series, but in this one and Book 5 most prominently, owing to a lot of jumping around the story’s chronology. In several cases, I pondered why this scene or that scene couldn’t have been fitted in as they happened, rather than open with a character located in a certain place, only to start with the, ‘He had done this, and then he had done that’ type of thing. Stories flow better if kept linear, and when backstory is needed, there’s no need to over-swell it with ‘had, had, had’.

So, the opening scene is slowed down through the overuse of ‘had’, as is the final chapter. The penultimate chapter, which features an exciting battle with pirates, is great, but in last chapter, scenes from the battle are told from different viewpoints after the event, rather than being dramatized alongside the main character’s point of view, leading once again to ‘he had done this, he had done that’, etc. It’s devoid of drama this way. It would’ve been way better to have included these scenes alongside the main character’s actions *as they happened*, and not report it afterwards as added information.

Similar, in the last chapter, we see events from an antagonist's viewpoint, which is dramatized and engaging. Following this, we see the scene from one of the protagonists, only this time it’s like reading another report, as we’re told ‘He had done this, he had done that’, etc.

One other general criticism I have for this novel, and all sequels in the series, is that every so often a character from a previous book is referred to with the assumption that the reader has read all previous novels. Not everyone reads full series. Some people might see Book 5 for sale, like the synopsis, and decided to buy. So, if a character who dies in, say, Book 3 is briefly referred to when the main character is reminded of them, the reader is locked out of the story.

Also, those people who do read an entire series may have long gaps between books, in which case it could be a challenge to remember a character from Book 1 when you’re reading Book 6 five years later.

Sometimes an explanation is given regarding who a past character is, but even then it’s debatable whether there’s much point in mentioning them if it has no real significance to the current narrative. To me, I see no point in having main character Beobrand remember a friend being hanged in Book 1 because he sees someone hanging in Book 6.

Another downside to remarking on characters killed off in earlier books, or recalling in detail past battles or such like, is that if someone picks up Book 6 first, they may not want to go back to the beginning and read through the series because they’ve now read several spoilers.

While it’s good to have continuity in a series, an ideal sequel should also work as a stand-alone novel. Thinking about it, a key to writing a quality novel is to always keep the story moving forwards, so this trait should apply even more so to a series.

Criticisms aside, this author uses some excellent similes. I was impressed with his creativity in this department. Also, he recreates the period well, making me feel like I’m in the seventh century.

He’s gifted at creating child characters. Children don’t surface often in this novel or its predecessors, but when they do appear, they’re vivid and believable. Better still are his depictions of animals and birds. ( )