Good question. I'm not sure if people like him, or if they're just fascinated by his ambiguity. He's also about the only character in the Six Duchies books who gets any decent character development, from a foolish jester to a very powerful being. Whereas Fitz is just as whiny at the end of the Tawny Man trilogy as he was in Assassin's Apprentice.
Indeed the Fool I think is loved because of his mystery from when he first meets Fitz and says "Fitz fats Fool!" He is a wonderful mystery. I do like him but not as much as Nighteyes, his love for Fitz is daunting even though he knows FItz will never return it, imagine that the sacrifices his life for a love that can never be returned, I think this fascinates people.
Lets get one things clear -- Nighteyes is the best in the book!
Now that that is cleared up - I think like othere here so far - the Fool is a mystery and dispite 9 books with him in we still don't know much more about him. He is a mystery and a challenge to work out - whilst the other characters are laid out before us the fool is hidden.
Fitz is very much laid out bare before us - though sometimes people think he is a whiner all the time I would remind people that quite a bit of that is happening in his mind - and his thoughts - and we all winge like mad when we have to take the bins out (though we might not say anything at all).
I have to agree with what everyone has said so far - I like the Fool for his mystery, and also for the sacrifices he makes. Even when the last book of the Tawny Man trilogy finished, it felt like there was still such a lot left untold about the Fool.
The Fool is great. He is a great friend to Fitz. Loves him unconditionally (only one to do that besides Nighteyes) even though he knows he will never have the type of relationship he might want. He accepted Fitz for Fitz, and Nighteyes as well, he didn't shun him because of the gifts he was born with (like Burrich, Molly, Regal etc. did or would have). He was a true friend. We all want someone like that in our lives. The fact that he is so mysterious, just adds more flavor to Fool.
i must say i'm in-love with The Fool, i understood it at the end of the third book of the farseer. i think his anigmatic character, and being desired but unreachable as he is, makes his so facinating. as The faery queen said "i fancy him ". at the end of "fool's fate" my heart was broken and i wept for days finding out The Fool and Fitz cannot stay together, and when i read "the last dance"...oooohhh
how come i haven't seen anybody talks about that poem ?? or maybe i'm mistaken ??... (forgive my poor english, i read the books in a different language)
As the sceptre for the fool I do not like Conan's comment. Even though the Fool has discarded me long ago to sit in Buckeep Castle gathering dust I would never wish harm on him. (or as only I know for sure...her)
I don't like, nor hate The Fool, he/she is a decent character, but we've seen so little of them that I don't know enough of him to form and opinion of him. Though I look at him a little more favorably after the second and third trilogies.
Although Conan doesn't elaborate, I must admit I found msyelf thinking the same thing at the end of Fool's Fate. Even though the Fool foretells his own death, his end - an ignominious and tragic event that we only see through Fitz's discovery of the Fool, or what remains of him - was a brilliant, heartbreaking moment in the novel. I'm not ashamed to say I found a lump climbing in my throat as I read it.
The ressurection of the Fool felt a little like I was having that gorgeous tapestry of despair unpicked right in front of me. Would it have been so bad to have let him die and explore the hollowness that his absence would have left in it's place?
We all like happy endings, of course, but something in me yearnt for a bittersweet end to things in that instance.
That said, it's just my opinion, and in the grand sweep of things means nothing whatsoever. I still love all six novels of the series.