Reviews tagging 'Sexual content'

His Grace, The Duke: A Regency Reverse Harem Romance by Emily Rath

6 reviews

klsreads's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous funny hopeful lighthearted fast-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? It's complicated
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

I maintain that this series is for silly billies. Emily Rath knows what you want and delivers, but the plot suffers, and the book is too long. There are some great moments, though, and I legitimately laughed when we discovered who was behind the ugly paintings from book 1. I did love the polyam and bi male MC (x3) rep. It's a good time if you can suspend disbelief to enjoy a silly reverse harem.

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

greylandreviews's review against another edition

Go to review page

emotional hopeful lighthearted tense medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

2.5

This was okay. I still don't believe Rose truly loved any of these men. Sexual chemistry is there but, no romantic notions. There was also some small plot holes that didn't get filled.

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

annick's review against another edition

Go to review page

emotional funny slow-paced

3.0

Some hot scenes but the last 1/3 grew tiresome.

 I took this as fantasy. Not realistic of how someone could get away with a MMMF arrangement in this period.  Brushed over the potential SDIs, pregnancy, discomforts, etc -  I let the fantasy be. 

 Rose is a rather good narrator of this kind of book, for the dialogue and erotic moments. 

Dan Calley wasn’t good enough. Not enough sensuality. And the accents were jarring for this historical setting. 

The writing was hit and miss. So much sex that it got ludicrous. I was impressed the FMC had a mixed history of sex (by choice and not so). 

The historical setting wasn’t realistic - the cover and descriptions initially implied regency England in late 1790s or early 1800s but the later references to the americas and the fashion descriptions imply 1760-1780s. And yet the evening black and white fashion of men’s evening dress wasn’t in tune with history.  

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

smithrachaelynn's review against another edition

Go to review page

emotional hopeful medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.75

I just loved seeing these characters for more time! There was a lot more spice in this one, which was fun. But the story itself took a lot of time to develop. But a great ending for these characters. 

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

iamsammie27's review against another edition

Go to review page

emotional funny lighthearted tense fast-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.75

Note: this is not a stand alone, you need to read Beautiful Things (book 1) first before starting this book.

This duology is wonderful. Its' a Regency Romance with a twist. Rosalie will not be trapped by the cage that is marriage. James, Burke & Tom are three best friends. The developing love between the four of them is deep and delightful. The slow-burn of book one paid out in book two. The second book turns up the heat (and the kink) from the start.

I received an ARC in return for an honest review.

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

laura_rheads_too_much's review against another edition

Go to review page

emotional funny hopeful fast-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

5.0


Expand filter menu Content Warnings
More...