There are probably 500 threads titled, "Prologue! Should I Use One?!" The anti-prologue responses are usually, "I never write prologues, I hate them with a passion" and other absolutes. The pro-prologue responses are usually more passive: "Use it if you feel it within your soul" or "Pray to God and ask him whether or not you should use it. No man can tell you." (I exaggerated a bit there) I recently read the prologues of Game of Thrones Books 1 and 4. They were good, a bit slow in the middles, but I definitely continued reading. It's worth mentioning that 5 - 7 chapters into these large works, I still have no clue how they tie into the story at all. I'm just reading what's in front of me and if it's good and the plot is moving, I keep reading. It's that simple -- and I suspect this is how the majority of readers feel, whether they are aware of it or not. I stumbled upon an article that stated that the 7 Deadly Sins of Prologues are as follows: 1) prologue is vehicle for massive info dump 2) if your prologue has nothing to do with the overall main story 3) prologue's sole purpose is to "hook" the reader 4) prologue is too long 5) "prologue is written in a totally different style and voice that is never tied back into the main story" 6) prologue is über-condensed world-building 7) prologue is there solely to “set the mood…” The very first question I asked myself was, "do any of these rules apply to chapters of a book in general?" I mean, do you want overly-long chapters, uber-condensed with world-building that's just to set the mood? Interestingly, I skipped the prologue in LOTR1 because it seemed awkward. Was I the only one who skipped it? Probably not. But I don't believe that that alone is reason enough to say take it out altogether. I probably haven't read enough books, but I just haven't come across the prologue that made me go, "Oh hell nawl! I'm putting this book down right the f#ck now!" If it can be executed this well this often, then why is it such a point of contention?