I've read this book years ago, at the end of the rest - so obviously I didn't mind the series. But I'm wondering if Book 7 was a particularly low point!
Sure, Lieber has created a distinctive world, with some distinctive characters. The mythology underpinning it (of mercurial and at times petty gods) is refreshingly original, and now and then our heroes find themselves caught up in some dreamlike event utterly beyond their control. He creates his own mood.
But, blimey, the prurience. Like, really seedy, man. Sure, I could handle the comic 007/Capt. Kirk style antics of swooning bikini clad babes turning up at the most unlikely (and frequent) intervals - as long as they merely work as props/scenery, taking up, say, as much space as the next tavern or horse, and don't distract from the strengths of the book, such as characters, nice genre ideas, and novel plotting. But perhaps Lieber was still caught up with that 70s, Hugh Hefner is cool - everyone else is repressed nonsense. It's not quite 'The erotic adventures of Fafard and the Grey Mouser', but at times he devotes several pages to gratuitous soft porn about bondage and orgies.
Were the earlier books quite as bad as this? I don't think so: I read The Swords of Lankhmar a year or so ago and don't remember such extended voyeurism (nor, however, do I remember much in the way of plot). Maybe I excused it before on the basis of the immediately read earlier books, but now I'm quite happy to get rid of the book, even if it jeopardises my chances of having a full set. Like Julian May's Golden Torc series, better to leave some holes.
Oh, and I noticed the cover has a ringing endorsement from Michael Moorcock - a very good anti-endorsement in my book. Moorcock was only good when I was 13, and metamorphosed into similarly prurient dross upon re-reading post-puberty.