To be honest I'm only writing this review, that is likely to be lost in the sea of other reviews, because I don't see a lot of people actually reviewing the book. It was either people just going off on a tangent, labeling the their most frustrating scenes in the book, using a myriad of offensive words to describe it, or Just plain old white Knighting. There is also a large block of text dedicated to fans that are enjoying the book, which to be honest is pretty nice. At least I don't have to deal with a copiously long toxic comment with no constructive criticism to be seen. It also shows that a large portion of the community has some patience.Now (disclaimer!!!!!), I never really made it past the first 50 reviews. There are too many to read.Second (Disclaimer!!!), If someone is still reading this don't expect anything great I'm not a professional book reviewer.So to start off, this is a pretty interesting concept. Fairly original, and carves out it's own place in the reincarnation genre's inanimate object corner.The story "itself" is also well thought out. however the protrayel of the story isn't the "greatest". let me tell what I mean by that... The writer has this habit of telling and not showing. For the people who are not aware of what that means, I will describe it in a different way. When painting or drawing a picture for someone to see you usually flesh the image out give the picture depth and meaning in every stroke of the brush. I do not mean literally, like every square centimetre of paint has some kind of mystical meaning. It has meaning in the terms of portraying the depth of a video whilst it still being a still image. For example: shading, perspective, minute detail like pores on the skin or individual leaves on a tree. It gives the picture life. There is quite a bit of similarity between a painting and a book, in that they both try to describe a living scene, an entire world, on a still canvas.I'm sorry if my description still didn't help.? The point is the there is visible depth when you show, which isn't an effect you get when you tell. Telling is literally encapsulating the entirety of the scene in a couple of descriptive, but limited words. To show, is to describe the nuances of the scene, give the skeleton of the story flesh, describe what the author themselves see, to paint the picture in the readers' mind. As a writer you don't have to do this too often, you actually shouldn't. It's a device used when trying to really bring to life an important scene. However there is a difference between just right and too little.The entirety of that block of probably unnecessary text is me just saying the author's writing itself lacks depth. Not the story, just the writing. I think this is my last point. This is just my opinion on this one but, I feel like there is too much info dump, or the info dump is just not spaced out well enough, or the info dump just doesn't have any life. The last one might be on purpose seeing as it is just the characters grinding skills. Either way the writing isn't particularly well paced when around 60%(Not an exact meausrement) of 4+ chapters (Also not an exact measurement) straight is dedicated to an info dump. ? But again this easily remedied if you just give the info dump more meaning and life, I think... ?But who Am I to judge, I could just be spouting nonsense... Which makes this an immense waste of a morning that could have been spent watching Gawr Gura read Konosuba.Ah whatever, I enjoy the world the Author is trying to portray and I hope they continue to evolve the writing and the story.
