[andrew.v.spencer]

That's tough.

I love the new worlds/lands well defined and grounded in a believable history. To work for me they have to project a notion of awe and mystery. Gormenghast and LOTR are archetypes of how this can be done well. In some repsects the stars of these books are Middle Earth and Gormenghast Castle.

On top of this one should add the conflicted interesting major players on a very well defined character arc. The classic here is, I think, Thomas Covenant. Though Mervyn Peake's, Steerpike is an excellent bad guy. I think Erikson, Mieville and Martin also score well here. Here we should include naming conventions, for me nobody beats or will ever beat Tolkien, the very names of people and places are evocative.

A central clear story and plot attracts me. LOTR has that in spades, the stakes are high, the task is clear. Stephen King's Dark Tower also has a very good central theme, save the tower, save the worlds. A little ambiguity is fine, but the hook has to be there. This is where I lose a little sympathy with Erikson and Martin. The former because it is too ambiguous as to what is going on and why, and the latter because he seems to have forgotten or changed what his central theme was. I think Gemmell scores very well on plot drive and focus.

Dialogue is very important. I like the simple truism's of Gemmell's characters, I enjoy the humour and language in Erikson and Martin. This is where Tolkien and Donaldson often fall down.

I prefer relatively simple sentence structures that build to complexity, my favourite for this is Cormac McCarthy, not strictly a speculative fiction writer, though The Road and Blood Meridien are sci fi and a dark allegorical fantasy.

So a believeable elegantly named world, a rousing clear plot, troubled characters with a clear believable and internally consistent character arc and complexity from simplicity.