Here’s a detailed tier list of everything I’ve read so far in the genre. Please let me know if you have recs based on these preferences!
For the record, I consider all these books worth reading; otherwise, I wouldn’t have finished them. Feel free to argue if you think my ratings are wrong, and I may update if you can convince me.
It must be Sky Pride
We are currently at end of volume 4 and I am just enjoying it after reading the ,,all similiar Xianxia,, for years
Opened the post just to rec Sky Pride too :)
Out of curiosity as someone who loves both Path of Ascencion and A Practical Guide to Evil why do you think the pacing of Guide is worse? The only issue I have with Path is the pacing while I never had any issues with Guide.
Pacing is probably the most subjective of all of these categories to be fair (besides enjoyment). I think PGtE had really great tension/resolution but my drive to pick the book up and finish it wasn’t nearly as strong as many of these other series.
It felt more like a real fantasy book that I’d read in physical format and had to take time to digest — as compared to Kindle on my phone whenever I get a chance. I really enjoyed it and thought it was very unique within the genre but definitely felt like pacing was its weakest element, especially compared to other series in the genre.
This is an awesome grading tier-list spreadsheet!
Seeing my favorite series IGS getting a 3 in pacing while Dotf gets 3.5 hurts. I swear i thought I was in time loop listening to Dotf book 1.
I recommend super genetics(prob my 2nd fav), instrument of omens, perfect run, exlian syndrome, quest academy, throne hunters.
Lol fair. I clearly loved IGS, and I think that Phil Tucker is amazing at tension/resolution which certainly helps with pacing. But I’ve also had several friends, whose taste I trust, drop IGS because of the pacing so I’m hesitant to put it much higher.
Thanks for the recs, I’ll definitely look into all these!
Amazing list. Thanks!
Curious if it's the entire series or just book 1. For IGS or DCC
I agree that Bastion was slow to pick up but the rest of the books don't have a pacing issue.
Have you read Throne Hunters or Discount Dan? You'd likely enjoy them based on this list.
I'm reading The Sworn Sword 1 right now. Good start.
I also have The Unintended Cultivator & Titan Hoppers on my list. Just added Daighters Defender based on someone else comment in the thread too.
Thanks for these recs, adding them all to my list!
Regarding Bastion, I agree that it’s really just the first book that has a slow start. I don’t mind it too much myself, especially when combined with Phil’s awesome worldbuilding. So I’ll likely be bumping the pacing up a bit for IGS.
Regarding DCC, I can admit it is entirely a personal preference here. I didn’t really enjoy the train floor or playing card floor thematically, so I really felt like my investment in the story and the characters had to pull me through those books more. Without those floors, I would’ve given DCC a 4.5 in pacing.
Of course. A lot of this is subjective. For eg, I think Cradle actually scores low on character development. Mercy and Ziel esp, such a wasted opportunity. Threshold made up for some of it. But from a pacing and enjoyment perspective, it rates v high.
The train level was more about Katia integrating with the team and the cards about dealing with trauma & intention setting. From a mechanics perspective, I love table top card games so that was awesome for me. I get that it may not be everyone's preference. The trains themselves were a slog, yeah.
But yeah, DCC / Discount Dan / Bastion / Throne Hunters are top tier for me. Cradle is always such an easy read that I have a couple books on my kindle all the time for low investment (grey cell wise) but high enjoyment reads on a plane or some such.
If you gave 1% lifesteal 4.5 for pacing we are so radically different that any recommendation I give you is useless.
Sky Pride
Giving "A Soldier´s Life" a 4/5 in WRITING should be a criminal offense. Seriously, the prose is atrocious
lol then lock me up! The first few chapters were actively bad, and the writing can be very utilitarian, but I thought the prose improved a lot as the books progressed. I should probably downgrade it to a 3.5 realistically, but I’ll have to re-read a bit to see.
Fair enough :D
While the early chapters were really rough, especially before the rewrite, I've come to actually enjoy the writing in ASL. It could of course be better but it being utilitarian is a huge plus for me when overwrought purple prose seems to be endemic to genre. The writing being to the point is breath of fresh air to me.
Throne Hunters!
Yeah, I'm always surprised at how many people haven't jumped into this series. It's a lot of fun.
Edit: how many Phil Tucker/Bastion/EGS fans.
You might enjoy Daughter's Defender. It's similar to DCC but with a bit darker.
Otherwise the return of the runebound professor is also good and something you might like
Thanks! Added to TBR list
There's a lot in there I don't agree with, and I could spend hours recounting everything here. But I'll just do a few.
Beware of Chicken characters at 5? Pacing at 4.5? Plot at 4.5? Writing at 4.5? Did we read the same thing?
MoL characters at 4.5 when almost every character has the same voice as Zorian? They speak the same, use the same expression and so on. Not to mention the "all results no work" personality character growth for Zorian. Writing at 4.5 when the dialogue is rather poorly written (and the prose is average at best)? People like MoL despite the poor writing.
I did read MoL quite early on compared to most others, so I may have been more lenient with it. I’ll re-read a bit to see if I should downgrade. I’m standing by my BoC ratings though :)
Considering your taste is a bit more demanding, any recommendations?
Ar'Kendrithyst I suppose. I'd have more recommendations if we look outside of the PF sphere of amateur writers.
I rate this tierkist a 24.5!
I would be delighted with a 24.5 lol, thanks Selkie!
Enjoyment isn’t a category. It’s you putting your finger on the scale. I love this concept. Great job!
It’s definitely a category, just an entirely subjective one rather than the more objectiveness of the others. Also, yeah, love this list compared to the typical TierMaker list where you can’t tell what a book is unless you already recognize the cover.
Iam soooo stealing this for when i got some time xD
This is a killer tier list. Obviously took a lot of thought.
Have you tried 12 miles below? Strong recommendation.
I haven’t but I’ve seen it recommended a lot by people with similar taste. It’s high on my list now, thanks!
Give lord of the mysteries a try. Great world building and a solid system
Beware of Chicken having a 4.5 out of 5 in pacing is a joke right?
It’s considered a slice of life; rating it within that context, it has very consistent pacing, great foreshadowing/tension, and a good balance of action and reflection/emotional impact. I looked forward to every page.
If it had bad pacing it wouldn’t be one of the most consistently recommended books in the sub. Lord knows Progression Fantasy fans don’t have the best attention spans.
If you enjoy the slow parts, I'm happy for you. But there is a reason it slid down from 2nd best rated to 14th on RR.
Slice of life does not mean the book is excused from being slow while it is repeating itself, the first volume of the series is a perfect example of SoL with great fast pacing. Just comparing the series to itself the latter books are glacier.
*Will give an asterisk here that I don't know if the released books are edited down, I read it only on RR or Patreon.
It's slice of life, it has the pacing that it is supposed to have.
Superpowered?
HDT with Characters at 4/5 and Pacing at 4.5/5…?
Can you explain your grading scale OP?
Yeah many people complain that Nat is sociopathic and poorly written but it seems like an intentional choice to me with a good payoff; I also think the supporting characters are decently fleshed out (within the context of the genre lol) and have fairly distinct personalities and motivations.
In simplistic terms I’d say: Plot- overall concept of the series and narrative arcs Characters- unique voices, believability, motivations, etc. As well as how much I actually like the characters Pacing- execution of the plot, tension/resolution, foreshadowing, how much do I want to read the next page Worldbuilding- design of the universe the characters inhabit, is it believable, is it immersive. Originality and authenticity factor in Writing- authors writing style (very lenient considering the genre), usually more focused on prose, action, and descriptive language than syntax, grammar, and spelling but it can definitely detract if it’s unedited
whoa. Now do the same list with cereals. (not serials).
I recently binged Cultivation Nerd, and I am not sure what to think about it. 5 for enjoyment, but I couldn't tell you why.
I never know how to compare my recs to most of these because I tend to prefer different books than most. I've only read two of the series, but a few of my own faves.
Through the Fire and Talyn's Saga by Benjamin Medrano
A Budding Scientist in a Fantasy World by Acaswell
You could also try out my books. https://www.amazon.com/author/chadmaske
All of these are new to me, so thank you very much for the recs! I’ll check them out.
Always happy to
self-promteshare my faves!I really like this format.
my recent recommendation has been Discount Dan‘s Backroom Bargains, it’s got just the right balance of irreverent humour and action with a somewhat unique power structure. I’d place it in a similar niche as DCC in terms of tone and flow, though a little more towards the absurd and less to the crude humour (not saying that that is bad, just that’s the best word I can think of to describe DCCs… nuance).
Where do you all read this books?
I start them on Kindle Unlimited (if they’re on there), if not they’re usually on Royal Road for free.
The only ones that wouldn’t be on either of those are the ones on WebNovel. If you don’t want to pay for those then you have to scour the internet yourself haha.
Just started Hell Difficulty Tutorial. The writing in the first 10 or so chapters is… let’s say rather bad.
You have it at a 4, does it get better or am I being snobbish?
The common complaints are the MCs personality and writing in the beginning, both of which I think improve as the books progress.
I personally think that the way the MC was written is an intentional choice and didn’t mind it, the initial writing quality not so much lol.
I don’t mind the protagonist’s way of thinking, it’s something different… seems slightly sociopathic which is interesting.
I’ll push through the writing for at least the first book and see how I handle it. Thanks for the reply
The way he's written is intentional, and there's some exploration of that as the books go. A lot of people seem to think (and I'd agree) that he's much more bearable/mellow after Book 1, still not neurotypical though which I personally enjoy
I wish every tier list ranked it like this. I only care about a good plot with at least tolerable writing. I don't care at all about world building.
I usually vehemently disagree with tier lists posts so I generally can't use them for recommendations, however I agree with the top books you have in yours. I haven't listened to Elydes yet so I'll check that out.
That said, the pacing column confuses me slightly, since I have difficulty imagining a story with an amazing plot but terrible pacing or vice versa. The two seem intrinsically linked in my mind.
Yeah there’s definitely crossover between many of the categories. In this structure, I’d say plot is more concept and pacing is more execution.
For plot, I’d say ‘how would I describe this series to a friend in a paragraph or two?’, what’s the overall narrative arc of the story, is the concept unique, is it compelling, is it interesting, etc
For pacing, I’d say ‘how balanced is the action vs. reflection/description’, how much do I want to read the next page, how much foreshadowing and tension is there, how quickly is that tension resolved and is it satisfying.
For example, Unintended Cultivator was impossible to put down for me, I had to read the next page. But the actual plot and narrative structure of the series isn’t particularly unique, especially within the xianxia/wandering cultivator genre.
Hey, would you be interested in perhaps reading The Spider Dilemma? It's an interesting LitRPG, different from the ones you'll find on the site!
I certainly recommend perfect run but I'm curious how you'd grade Everybody Loves Large Chests. Caution: it tends to be a love it or hate it book with several scenes that are very problematic
The Wandering Inn.
I was wondering how something like chrysalis gets as high as 4 on the plot. Like for me chrysalis is when I do not need to pay full attention because most things doesn't matter and the motives of certain factions and events doesn't make sense.
I felt pain seeing my beloved 1% lifesteal in the middle, but at least it got 4.5 on enjoyment 😉 It is such a rewarding read.
I would weight enjoyment more heavily
I think Enjoyment should visually stand out a bit. It's the most biased and most important measurement on this.
I feel like there needs to be an explanation of the categories included.
Take world building for example. We have cradle as a 5 and DotF as a 3.5 for world building. However based purely on the AMOUNT of world building in the (much longer) DotF series, it did more world building and showed us more locations just by sheer amount.
Now don't get me wrong I love cradle, and what world building it did was GREAT, however we all know the author explicitly cut down on extra world building to keep the pace of the books good and to avoid bloat. There can probably be another 6 books of our world building set on cradle w/o it being boring that's how much there is that an be shown.
Same with pacing. Primal hunter is higher on pacing than cradle? Based on what? Sure the start of cradle isn't exactly the zoomies ever but its still pretty damn consice and on point. Primal hunter is exactly the opposite of a "fast" story. Hell, we just had 4 books worth of a SINGLE (albeit massive) dungeon dive.
I’ve gotten that feedback a few times regarding DotF and will likely be bumping the worldbuilding up. With that being said, I do think a lot of these series do less with more. DotF is ambitious in its scale, but the immersion factor and originality wasn’t as high for me as many other series. I am due to catch up on the series though so ratings can always change.
Regarding Primal Hunter, I think that pacing will be downgraded after I catch up on the two most recent books lol.
I’ll definitely be modifying this format a bit based on the feedback I’ve gotten. And I’ll probably post a different version once I have some more books to add and I’ll include a detailed explanation of what’s factoring into each category with priorities.
I think you just need to do a bit of a blurb to explain what you mean by each category. What IS pacing to you? Because if pacing means "How long it takes the author to tell the full story and how much stuff there is that can be cut w/o affecting the main plot" then cradle would be like 6/5 because it has basically no filler, while DotF and Primal hunter would be at like 1/5 or 0.5/5 because they have a metric tonn of stuff that could have been waaaay shorter (or cut completely) and not affect the main story. (mind you I do like both of those but let's face it, consise storytelling is NOT their strength)
Yup completely understood, thanks for the detailed feedback! I’ll do a write up in a bit.
I tried to capture most aspects of these categories in my ratings, but I obviously weight aspects differently than others would. For pacing within the context of PF / LitRPG, I value tension and resolution timing, foreshadowing, and engaging stakes more than concise storytelling (although that does still factor in a bit if the story is meandering).
I’m thinking about making a spreadsheet with inputs for others to use where they can weight their own priorities for each of these categories and produce similar ratings.
I'm not here to tell you your list is wrong. Everyone has their own preferences regarding what they enjoy to read and what specific aspects they want to in a LitRPG or Prog fantasy book. But the fact that you put Cradle at the very top of the list and DotF at the very bottom shows me that your preferences and mine are completely reversed. In my opinion Cradle is terrible. But let me explain why.
I hate Anime. Never enjoyed it. Not even a little bit. And that's what I feel like Cradle is. It's just Anime, but in written form. I read the first two books, and it was all I could do to force myself to finish the second book. And I only read the second book hoping that it would get better because so many people rave about how good it is.
Defiance of the Fall is in my top 5. Along with DCC, Primal Hunter, System Universe, and He Who Fights With Monsters. I'm currently on book 7 of Ultimate Level 1 and I think it will push HWFWM out of my top 5. I hated Azarinth Healer, even after 4 1/2 books. I just don't like the main character. I liked the story and the world building, but the MC is just so unlikable.
I'll probably read Chrysalis or Path of Ascension next. I had also planned to read Beware of Chicken but considering you have it at number 2 on your list, I probably won't read it anytime soon.
Also, I want to say this. In your post you said you would consider changing your ratings if you someone convinces you that they are wrong. I don't think you should ever do that. These ratings are your opinions based on how you feel about those series. They aren't wrong. They are just different from others. Don't let others dictate what you should or shouldn't enjoy.
Completely understood on the difference in preferences. This has made me realize I tend to prefer PF and Cultivation over strict LitRPG but it depends on my mood. Based on your taste I’d recommend Welcome to the Multiverse and Stubborn Skill Grinder if you haven’t read either of those. Both are very fun!
Regarding changing ratings, I would only change a rating if I agreed with the point someone made. In some cases it’s been about a year since I’ve read the series so I may have overlooked or forgotten certain aspects.
Thank you for the recommendation about Welcome to the Multiverse and Stubborn Skill Grinder. I'll add those to my list of series to read soon.
Would love for you to add a checkbox column for "Finished series/In progress" as I'm trying to read less unfinished series. Otherwise, great list!
You like what you like, ill never understand the adoration for Cradle so many people have... I like that series but it's got some flaws I find really annoying, namely the utter lack of agency of the main character until about 2/3 of the story and the fact literally every character except the core good guys is an abusive gaslighter and every organisation and group is basically evil - which I found a massive plot issue later on as a big magic problem is introduced (monarchs and dread gods) while I was perfectly content with a "burn it all to the ground including the sky god society which sucks just as much as every other society in this world".
That is what happens when u have power scaling deeply entwined in a fragmented society. Everyone's grinding, hustling all the time, u can even steal the grind, since power even act as currency. Not every group/organisation is evil, what they're is tribal, there's a difference and are fighting with each other for power.
Lindon not having agency also plays very well with the society, how do expect him to have agency all the time when he's not the strongest and agency depends completely on strength on the entire planet. Monarchs can literally wipe him out any second, so how do expect him to have complete agency, it's not like our democracy where a piece of paper protects our agency by simply being born.
I don't think u understood the world/system fully which is completely fine that's the reason u didn't like it.
Uhm I understood it just fine, thanks. It isn't exactly hiding its secondary writing intentions. The reasons you mentioned are those in the book, yes, but both literature in general and litrpgs in particular offer plenty of examples of depictions of oppressive power structures and how to deal with them that are different. I'm not criticising Lindon for not having power in the earlier books, I'm saying that as a story, there are ways to write a character in such a world that takes action within their limits. He could at the very least show a version of his later anger at all the injustice earlier in the story, he stoically accepts it all, even in inner monologue. Also nothing forces the author to have every powerful entity recruiting him as he could start living the life of a self reliant gold, for example. This is done in many other books.
Look, I'm not saying Lindon should run around as a powerhouse as of book2 and some training montage and guided sequences are fine. But literally everyone in these books is a jerk which by the way isn't an inevitable consequence of such power distribution, just the chosen one for the author. My issue is, this lasts forever, until the series is about 2/3 done. As for the plot, the later plot point that the monarchs cause dread gods is a thing I found jarring and unnecessary: could've been all about bringing down the monarchs because they created oppression on cradle and at least to me, have a conclusion where the gang goes AGAINST the powers in the wider cosmos because to be honest, the reaper there is also the only non evil entity in my book. I'm not even entirely convinced the books gave me a reason to prefer the forces of order over the forces of chaos - both blow up planets they deem corrupt, both seem to have rather oppressive societies established where people can live relatively good lives within those systems (eg the planet Lindon lands on in the last chapters). Anyways, my point I guess: societies all suck, Lindon is too polite and doesn't get to decide much until way late.
I’m sorry, but no you still didn’t, and still don’t, understand what kind of world Cradle actually is. You’re consistently looking at it through the lens of an Earth-born citizen of a modern democracy and then calling it “oppressive” when it doesn’t conform to those values. That lens simply does not apply here.
Cradle is not a political hierarchy; it’s a biological and cosmological hierarchy. Power isn’t social capital or privilege, it’s survival capacity. More power literally means more land, more resources, more security, and more room for your people to exist. An individual sacred artist can represent what would be a city, a country, or an entire planetary defense force on Earth. At higher levels, a single person is closer to a standing army or a nuclear deterrent than a politician. Trying to interpret that through democratic ideals is not “critical reading,” it’s category error.
U keep calling this an “oppressive power structure,” but the people living in it don’t experience it that way. To them, it’s the basic physics of their universe. Madra is not a social system that can be voted away or reformed, it’s the foundation of their ecology, economy, warfare, lifespan, and identity. If Lindon genuinely wanted to “solve injustice” in the way you’re suggesting, he wouldn’t just need to overthrow Monarchs, he would need to dismantle the madra system itself, strip everyone of power, and forcibly impose equality. That wouldn’t create justice, it would cause civilizational collapse and likely planetary extinction. And Lindon knows this. He doesn’t even conceptualize the world as unjust in the way you do; that framing is yours, not his. As for Lindon being “too polite” or not angry enough early on: that’s not a writing failure, that’s characterization. Anger without leverage is just suicide with feelings. Early Lindon has no power, no backing, no information, and no margin for error. Expressing open anger in Cradle doesn’t signal moral clarity, it gets you killed. His politeness is threat minimization, information gathering, and survival behavior shaped by Sacred Valley trauma. Expecting him to act like his later self before he has any leverage completely ignores how this world punishes that behavior.
U also say “everyone is a jerk,” which is frankly a selection-bias problem. Lindon spends most of the series interacting with the sharp end of the hierarchy: clan leaders, sect elites, military powers, Monarch factions. Of course they’re hostile, he’s a Blackflame outsider constantly disrupting equilibria they rely on to survive. That doesn’t mean the entire population behaves that way. His mother and sister aren’t bullies. Cassius and his family aren’t. Fisher Gesha isn’t, despite the abrasive exterior. Even then, a lot of the animosity Lindon faces is situational and often self-inflicted by the risks he chooses to take and the way he behaves.
And let’s be clear Lindon absolutely does take action within his limits, just not in the performative, emotionally cathartic way you seem to want. He doesn’t rebel, he builds parallel structures. He unites clans, aggregates power, creates institutions that support sacred artists across backgrounds, and actively reduces internal conflict among millions of people by giving them aligned incentives. That’s not passivity, that’s reform through consolidation. You’re criticizing him for not flipping the table when he’s busy redesigning the room.
Again, you project a lack of understanding where there is a dislike of some elements. You're using exclusively in world reasons where some of my criticism is author choice and thus could be avoided. Let me also point out you built a neat strawman of my criticism: I didn't say, specifically, that Lindon needed to act early on as he did later. The author could have however chosen to set some of the earlier books in an environment where Lindon has choices to make. There is no external need for him to be thrust to ever increasing powers that exert full authority over his life: there were plenty of moments where the story could have very naturally and logically taken Lindon and his gang to go explore a part of the world suited to their power level. My issue isn't that jade or gold Lindon can't tell off Monarchs, my issue is that jade or gold or even underlord Lindon doesn't spend time away from massively overpowered people that force him into the next training montage so that he instead could have some adventure with his group where he and they get to make choices. You present this story as if it was fated to go this way, as if it were a real world but... it's a book, the author could have given his characters more autonomy and agency in the challenges and adventures they had but he didn't. I'd imagine a Lindon in the wild with Yeren being subjected to the first passage of the phoenix or experience attack on house Aurelius where they did some other objective and are thrust into these bigger events they don't understand - not because they were told to be in this training chamber for a book but because they did some objective on their own and then maybe choose to get involved on some low level. It isn't some kind of magic, other stories in this genre do it all the time, the hero is still low on the power scale, maybe even had encounters with hugely overwhelming people before but they still get to go on adventures and choose their own path for larger chunks of the story.
Even within the Cradle series, Lindon after his loss at the tournament and the entire arch where he goes to the dreadgod site and faces cults for a while - more of that earlier in the story is all I'm asking from an agency pow.
Now to the oppression topic. Again, don't misrepresent me, I'm not saying they need to advocate for democracy. Yet the system is incredibly oppressive in the way powerful entities use their powers. I don't have a problem with creating such a world but I'd like some pushback. But just because individuals have the powers of a nuke doesn't make it not oppression. Again, there are lots of other stories with individuals at such a high power point and yet, the characters there don't all accept the state they're in. Again, I'm not complaining that the world of Cradle is oppressive, I'm saying the characters are too tolerant of it. The rage comes but it comes late and it's secondary to the wider cosmic issue of monarchs create dreadgods. As I said, that's an issue introduced late in the series I think wasn't necessary, fighting the monarchs was a natural consequence anyways: the current generation used and abused their powers in a way that goes beyond helping the weaker against monsters, the young around Lindon got every right to want to remove them. It'd have been an interesting discussion to see how one could do it better and there's glimpses of it, the way sacred valley is organised by Lindon at the end being an example of a new start - not democracy but less oppressive even if de facto power imbalance still exists.
The issue with Lindon not “exploring” or pursuing justice earlier is straightforward. You effectively need to be Lowgold just to exist in the wider world, and Lindon wasn’t. Even so, he still tried. He intervened with the mining prisoners and failed catastrophically, which directly caused the Jai clan blood feud and forced him to advance instead of wander. That was an attempt at agency that backfired, not a lack of it.
Even after losing his arm, Lindon didn’t just grind in isolation. He joined the Skysworn, helped evacuate civilians, and fought bloodspawn. So the claim that he only starts helping after the tournament loss just isn’t accurate and he made such choices multiple times.
There’s also a hard narrative timer you’re downplaying. A Dreadgod was on track to erase his home and family. That pressure matters. Lindon pushing advancement wasn’t authorial laziness, it was the logical response to an existential deadline.
On the Monarch point, I still don’t see the argument. If you remove the Dreadgod logic, why exactly should Lindon or anyone be fighting Monarchs at all. You say they “used and abused” their power, but beyond their existence enabling Dreadgods, what are the concrete crimes here.
They run stable clans and empires, kill monsters that would wipe out populations, and cultivate future talent. Dragons weren’t peacefully coexisting, they were an extinction level threat. So what is the specific evil that justifies removing Monarchs absent the Dreadgod system. Because right now it sounds like the argument is simply “they’re too powerful and hierarchical,” which isn’t the same thing.
On Monarchs and Dreadgods: the idea that the Monarchs causing Dreadgods is “jarring and unnecessary” is honestly baffling. Without Dreadgods, there is no coherent reason to remove Monarchs at all. What, exactly, are you fighting them for? Being rude? Acting imperiously? Defending their people aggressively? Monarch conflicts without Dreadgods are just geopolitics scaled up, ugly, yes, but not inherently unjust in this setting. The Dreadgods turn Monarchs into structural hazards, not just powerful rulers. Their removal becomes preventative and necessary, not moralistic.
You list Monarchs like Malice, Shen, Northstrider as if their moral worth is determined by how politely they speak. That’s an incredibly shallow metric. They provide deterrence, security, high-level resources, and fate manipulation to protect their dependent populations from annihilation by rival powers. Some Monarchs are even genuinely benevolent by Cradle standards. Are they saints? No. But they are locally optimal solutions to an insanely hostile universe.
So when you say “societies all suck,” what you really mean is that they don’t conform to modern Earth liberal values and that’s true. But that doesn’t make them incoherent, lazy, or poorly written. Lindon isn’t polite because the author is afraid of anger; he’s polite because in Cradle, restraint is a weapon, and tantrums without power don’t change systems, they just remove you from them permanently. If your definition of injustice boils down to “powerful people behave like jerks and don’t ask consent,” then yes, Cradle will always look terrible to you. But that says more about the lens you’re using than about the world or the character.
The Monarchs are removal worthy for the way they've used their powers, not a lack of politeness. I used the word jerk as a shortcut but basically the Monarchs without dreadgods ... are basically villains in their own right. I'll make some exceptions for the ones that help Lindon as we don't see them act with inferiors outside of these situations but Malice, Northstrider etc are just acting as bullies and tyrants. They sometimes give but on a whim, will take and think nothing of it. They'll make their inferiors part of their territory or group unilaterally and act all offended when someone doesn't enjoy doing what they say. All they do and represent is textbook gaslighting and oppressing. Now yes, I'm fully aware that their powers gives them the ability to do that and that everyone around them knows this too. And no, I'm not saying the story shouldn't be like that. I'm saying that it'd be natural to want to change that world, just because of these systems of oppression. Figuring out a better way, removal of current monarchs and whatever else suits them better would've been interesting enough. A semi sweet ending of current oppression over and the expectation that it'll get bad again when the well intentioned new most powerful beings start to be jaded and act the same way, that I could also get behind.
Again though, plenty of other stories with such power imbalances and different reactions to them or ways they are interpreted. In Primal Hunter, there's enough diversity in that some gods act like the Monarchs, some don't. In DCC, the MC is subjected to people with all power over him and has to act polite and hide his rebellion for a long time, it's visibly there from the start though. In Immortal Great Souls, the MC is abused by power, some parallels to Lindon and his understandable reaction is anger, beyond what is healthy to him ofc. In Calamitous Bob, the MC throws literal middle fingers at powerful people. Obviously Cradle doesn't need to be exactly like those, but they show that you can write a story with power imbalance and abuse by oppressive systems where an appropriate response exists.
Final thing I'll say here is that the end point of Cradle is rather bleak for the world. Lindon got his family and friends up in the wider cosmos and I loved those final chapters. Yet he joined yet another incredibly oppressive system that upholds the status quo and "order" in the universe by culling systems that are deemed diseased - we see them solve issues to avoid that so that part is neat but still, I'm not convinced the Abeddon (spelling?) got any moral superiority over the Vroshir (same, spelling?). We see the latter destroy planets but know the former also do when they think it's necessary and we see the vroshir govern peaceful planets... now before I'm misinterpreted again, that in itself is fine, ending on an imperfect situation is fine, not everything needs to be happy and wrapped up. Moral complexity and grey areas are also fine. My issue with the "cosmic conclusion" so to speak is that we spend so much time with the problems of the Abeddon and are lead to conclude that they're basically just Monarchs at a larger scale and yet the MC group just joins a section of them. With an aim to change things, maybe, and still...not enough questioning for me, too much acceptance of an oppressive status quo.
The core claim here seems to be that Monarchs are villains because they forcibly claim territory, ignore consent, and oppress inferiors. But I don’t think the text supports that framing nearly as much as you’re asserting.
First, on “territory.” Cradle is not a peaceful world where Monarchs are arbitrarily annexing land. There is a centuries-long existential war between humans and dragons, with Monarchs on both sides. Human Monarchs expanding or defending territory is not imperialism in a vacuum, it’s survival. More territory means more resources, more population, more sacred artists, and therefore a better chance of not being wiped out.
Importantly, the human territories we see are not being seized from other humans. They are being held against dragons. The leaders of smaller human factions are clearly aware of what protection from a Monarch actually means, and they willingly align themselves accordingly. We never see a small human ruler resist Akura authority and get crushed for it. In fact, we don’t really see meaningful “talking back” at all, because the alternative is annihilation by non-human enemies.
On the accusation of tyranny and gaslighting: yes, Monarchs are aloof, coercive, and often cruel. But cruelty alone is not villainy in Cradle’s context. Power is existentially zero-sum at that level. A Monarch who behaves “nicely” but loses ground gets their people killed. The system itself incentivizes domination, not courtesy. If the argument is that the system is bad, I agree. But that’s very different from claiming Monarchs are uniquely evil for operating inside it.
As for Malice and Northstrider specifically, they are not moral exemplars. But neither are they arbitrary bullies. Malice is explicitly focused on human survival against dragons and Dreadgods. Northstrider is obsessed with strength because weakness, at that scale, means extinction. Their flaws are real, but they are also functional within the reality they inhabit. So I’ll ask the question directly: what concrete crimes are Monarchs guilty of, beyond exercising power in a world where not exercising it means death? Not vibes, not tone, not “they’re jerks,” but actual actions that would meaningfully distinguish them from any other top-tier actor in Cradle.
On the cosmic side, I broadly agree that the Abidan are morally compromised. They are effectively Monarchs scaled up to the multiverse. But intent and structure still matter. The Vroshir pursue freedom even when it predictably destroys worlds. The Abidan destroy worlds only after Chaos has passed a point of no return, and deliberately limit intervention beforehand to avoid greater damage.
This is exactly why Ozriel left. He rejected both extremes. He didn’t side with Chaos, and he didn’t accept the Abidan’s rigid fatalism. He believed earlier, targeted intervention could prevent mass annihilation. The Reaper division exists because the Abidan refused to act sooner, not because Ozriel embraced their moral framework.
Lindon joining the Abidan is not an endorsement of the status quo. It’s a recognition that change requires power at the level where the rules are written. The series doesn’t end with utopia, but with leverage. That’s consistent with Cradle’s themes, even if it’s intentionally uncomfortable.
Eh. Not sure I agree with what you're saying here. You like what you like, but this sounds an awful lot like being contrary because you think not liking popular things makes you better than people who do. Lindon lacks power until a decent way through the story but not agency. He constantly had opportunities to choose to quite or push, and he always chose push. Early in the story he is always creating his own problems, because he's choosing to snatch at power or money basically any chance he can. He chose to continue to pursue soul smithing from early on, and made that happen himself. That's agency. I'm not going to get into all your other points because I'm not going to write 3 more paragraphs. It's a really funny thing in nerdy spaces though that there are constantly people who are just against the popular thing.
There's a difference between not liking the popular thing and not seeing what others see in a popular thing and having reasons for it. You disagree with me? That's fine but no need to invent reasons for my opinion when I gave them. For the record, I do like other of the most popular series in the genre, DCC being the prime example...
As for Lindon: he demonstrates agency in book 1 to get him on the journey, then he's picked up by Aethon and becomes a bouncy ball of being told where to go, what to do. Yes, he has many qualities and perseveres to become powerful but before he's eliminated from the tournament, he doesn't get to make real choices anymore - it's all one powerful group forcing things on him after another. He also lacks open or even hidden "rebellion" against all his constant oppression until very late: contrast lots of other MCs that are similarly confronted with way more powerful and malevolent entities and don't back down.
Guessing you meant Eithan the character, not Aethon the publisher.
Well yeah, audiobooks and all that.
What are you even talking about. Book 1 villains are kinda basic ok, but...
Book 2 villain is kinda of a victim of a system imposed by someone higher than him.
Book 3, is a father trying to kill someone who killed his son, nothing wrong with that in my book.
Book 4 is kinda meh of villains, is more of a system against the protagonist.
Book 5 is where there are villains who are friendly and "friends" who are actually villains.
Book 6 there is literally no villain... there are some bad people but literally no "villain"....
Book 7 when we start to get the whole Good x Evil thing.
And from then on the world is no more black and white and characters move for their own interest and tbh there are no villains except maybe Reigan Shen... and even him make some really good points after what happens in book 10.
The agency thing is fairly classic for cultivation novels; a major principle of the genre is that weak characters (early cultivators) are always at the mercy of the strong.
Yeah definitely fair criticisms, I especially agree with the ‘evil organization/sect’ trope. I think the writing for some of the supporting characters offsets that a bit to me, but it definitely falls into some obvious xianxia tropes that I could do without.
I do think Lindon’s lack of agency for most of the series is very intentional though, and for me adds to the progression elements of the story once he finally gets past it. I understand how many would find it frustrating over a long series though.
I can definitely agree with the side characters offsetting the core issues. Aethon and Yeren in particular are amazing.
Because Cradle is fantastic and far more nuanced than good vs evil.
Perfect RUN
A similar but different kind of timeloop to MOL
bog standard only 21 its absolutely robbery. you going to hell for this mate.
Lmfao it is bog standard after all… I definitely enjoyed the series, but I also found myself frustrated by the MCs class selections (which is rare for me).
I like your list, but for me Cradle has literally the best pacing in progression fantasy, unless its 4,5 because it could have been slower? If the latter books were Wintersteel kinda of pacing that would be great, but at that point it was too late to slow it down.
I clearly adore Cradle, but Unsouled and Skysworn both had some slower pacing issues to me, and the last few books were a little quicker than I would’ve liked. It’s still my go-to recommendation to get friends into the genre though!
I don't now... i think both of the books have a plot problem not really a pacing problem.
And that "plot problem" is only a problem if it's your first time reading them.
Battlemage Farmer, Ultimate Level 1, Mark of the fool and Welcome to the Multiverse all at the bottom?
Uhh I guess this is indeed a list then...
If it even made it onto the tier list then it means that I liked the series enough to read most/all of the books tbf!
Given the categories, what would you rate those books?
Battlemage Farmer: 4.5, 4.75, 4, 4, 4.5, 5
Welcome to the Multiverse: 4, 4, 4.5, 4, 4, 4.5
Ultimate Level 1: 4.5, 4, 4, 3.5(but only later in the series), 4, 4.5
I don't see Perfect run. I think it would rank highly for you. Personally, one of my all time favorites
I feel validated with your defiance of the fall rating. I dropped it midish book 2. I enjoyed the non cultivation parts of it but God damn if my brain didn't glaze over all the meridian chi bullshit. Granted I just don't care to go into the nitty gritty of those aspects in the cultivation genre. I almost dropped beware of chicken for the same but they somehow managed to keep me engaged enough for me to have finished what's out so far.
Lol @ 3.5 worldbuilding for DoTF. Sorta depends what you call plot and what you call worldbuilding, but the series is filled with minor worldbuilding threads laid out over hundreds of chapters. In that regard there is nothing that matches it.
Yeah I may have to bump the worldbuilding up for DotF. It was one of the earlier series I read so I haven’t caught up since 2022/2023.
With that being said, I would expect the scope of worldbuilding for a 15 book series that spans the entire universe to have significantly more elements than something like Mother of Learning that is centered within a few cities. The depth of immersion is a huge factor for me, and that’s a lot harder to pull off with a broad scope and frequent setting changes.
Feel like azarinth healer should get higher on writing, considering the rewrite.
but it also should get way lower on plot.
Not a single 5 for pacing ? Seems like you like fast-paced stories but if even Cradle, Skill Grinder and Hell Difficulty Tutorial aren't getting 5 i have no idea what will. Perhaps an AI summary of each book?
Chrysalis and Primal Hunter both got a 5 in pacing. The first book of Cradle and Skysworn both had some pacing issues for me. Skill Grinder was a bit too OP to have real narrative tension in the story. And Hell Difficulty may in fact deserve a 5.
I have no idea how I missed that, read through the list twice!
I haven't read/listened to all of these, but based on the ones I have these pacing numbers are basically nonsensical. I would personally probably put DCC's pacing a 5 - I never feel like I've listened to it for a few hours and nothing's happening.
Whereas they rank Primal Hunter's pacing a 5 and when I used to listen to that I frequently got the feeling that I wanted something to finally freaking happen.
Pacing is pretty subjective, yeah. Also, I’m reading all of these and never do audiobooks so that definitely affects pacing.
For DCC, I didn’t particularly enjoy the train or playing card floors as concepts. Without those, it would easily be a 5 for pacing. But I was really relying on Matt’s writing and characters to pull me through both of those books — which it did.
Primal Hunter should probably get a lower pacing but I personally don’t mind lengthy skill descriptions or similar minutiae so those common complaints don’t bother me.
This is one of the worst tierlists I've ever seen. Way too generous with a bunch of these books. How is The primal hunter anything above a 15?
Awesome, thanks for your very informative feedback and recommendations!!
I have Primal Hunter at lower B- tier with writing and characters cited as glaring flaws. Many tier lists have it listed as S-Tier, but I’m sorry that I offended you with my detailed and subjective ‘worst tier list’ you’ve ever seen lol.
I'm not offended. I appreciate your consideration for my feelings though. I just believe you overate the plot and pacing and writing of the book a lot.
The plot is essentially level up . With different vistas acting as set flavouring. And fights tend to be rather
boring and samey. Oh this enemy is super strong. I use poison to weaken it and use a powershot to kill it.
The pacing of the book is also terrible.
I believe the word count could be reduced by a quarter if a bunch of random filler fights and repeated scenes of Jake just grinding would be reduced.
Also the writing is.... Abysmal to say the least. Poor SPAG with at least a couple misspellings ever chapter and the prose is less than servisable. It's just there , a vehicle on which the many level up notifications can be delivered. A 2.5 is an average score. Primal hunter is below average, a bunch of the books you mentioned are below average in that respect.
Enjoyment.. I can't argue enjoyment. Other people's tastes are not to be judged.
I appreciate you placed it lower than S tier but that doesn't make your assessment right. Just less wrong.
Also primal hunter's world building is not good. It's literally progression fantasy cliche system apocalypse coupled with gods.
Something like "Godclads" is a 4.5 world building. primal hunter is just basic.
Apart from enjoyment and primal dopamine release, progression fantasy in general Excels at, primal hunter is bad to mediocre.
Saving it, but the plot of Hell Difficulty Tutorial is much higher than 3.5/5 imo. It starts simple but builds itself to be a lot more epic, while also setting the foundation for the ultimate goals of the story
The elements that I love about Hell Difficulty Tutorial fit better into the pacing and worldbuilding categories, I think.
A 3.5/5 is about as high as I’d go for a well written group-isekai / tutorial / tower climber. It’s a bit too many tropes to put the plot much higher.
It's fine, although you could just delete everything except the enjoyment column and plot everything on a 5 point scale for that metric. These are all subjective measures so there's not really a significant difference between them for an audience that isn't you.
I hate when people have an enjoyment score separate from their final score. The enjoyment score is the score.
I mean, that totally depends on how you’re ranking the books… I enjoyed Stubborn Skill Grinder more than A Practical Guide To Evil but I certainly wouldn’t say it’s a better book.
I think the way I have it structured is a happy medium between a more ‘objective’ scoring and the intangibles of my personal enjoyment
These are all slop, though. You don't need to be objective about them. None of them benefit from objective analysis. If you like ssg more than pgte, then ssg gets a higher score.
It sounds like you just don’t like the genre then lol.
I’m not comparing these books to Tolkien, but if you really can’t tell a difference between these authors then there’s no point in arguing.
Genuinely please suggest some series if you think this is all slop.
I do like the genre. The genre is all webnovel slop, tho.
So then you must agree with op rating enjoyment separately, no?
If you read ""webnovel slop"", but you enjoy reading it, then the quality of a novel must be separate to the enjoyment.
Breaking the review down the way op has let's people recommend him series better. I can tell immediately that op prefers books that have zero downtime in their narrative, because PGtE has a low pacing and low enjoyment despite high everything else. I wouldn't recommend them Worm, because it's also a series prone to taking its time to digest concepts and ideas.
Side tracking but, honestly, without a breakdown of methodology numbers are worthless in a review.