This post contains affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases, at no extra cost to you.
Verdict: A tense, gritty military survival romance with one of Radclyffe’s most complex heroines, let down by a love story that declares itself within days and a stateside second half that never matches the siege that opens the book.
Best for: Readers who want action and danger first, a damaged military heroine, and Radclyffe’s dependable mix of competence and heat, and who do not need a slow-built romance.
Heat level: ★★★☆☆ (3/5 — open door, two or three scenes)
Rating: ★★★★☆ (3.7/5 — a 4.06 Goodreads average across 950 ratings, docked for a rushed romance and a lopsided structure)
Tropes: Forced proximity, survival under fire, military medic and aid worker, hurt/comfort, PTSD and survivor’s guilt, opposites attract, rescue mission, political conspiracy, standalone in a series.
Taking Fire by Radclyffe is the fourth novel in her First Responders series from Bold Strokes Books, published in 2014 and, like the rest of the series, a standalone — a lesbian romantic suspense novel in which a Navy medic days from the end of her last tour is sent to evacuate a Red Cross team in Somalia, and ends up fighting to keep its stubborn leader alive.
It holds a 4.06 average across 950 Goodreads ratings, with only a few dozen written reviews — an older backlist title with a quiet, steady following. Readers agree on the strength of the opening and divide on almost everything after it. Both halves are worth hearing before you start.
What Is Taking Fire About?
Taking Fire is an action-driven romance built in two parts. The first is a survival story: a humanitarian camp overrun during an uprising, a bunker, a siege and an extraction. The second takes the leads home and turns to the aftermath — recovery, the cost of what they went through, and a political subplot involving the intelligence services. Readers often describe it as grittier and angstier than Radclyffe’s usual fare.
Max de Milles is a Navy medic who has lost too many people and is counting the days until she can leave. Rachel Winslow leads a Red Cross team and refuses to abandon her work, or her people, just because it has become dangerous. The book is a classic forced-proximity setup under fire, and Max’s guilt and trauma give it its emotional weight.
What Makes This Sapphic Military Romance Work
- The action: The most praised element by far. Around twelve readers single out the tension and the camp siege, and several call it a page-turner.
- Max: Around eight readers praise her as complex, flawed and vulnerable — even readers who panned the book liked her.
- The medical and military detail: Several readers, including one with a military background, found the detail vivid and convincing.
- Radclyffe reliability: Fans describe her books as a dependable brand, and this delivers the competence, heat and heroism they expect.
- Grit: A few readers welcome a darker, angstier Radclyffe — a strong pick for lesbian military romance fans who want danger on the page.
Book Synopsis
Max de Milles has done her time. After two years of tending wounded troops and losing too many of them, she is four days from the end of her final tour, and all she wants is to go home without watching anyone else die. Instead, she is sent on one last mission: evacuate a humanitarian team caught in the middle of an uprising.
Rachel Winslow did not ask to be rescued. She runs a Red Cross team that has worked through danger before, and she is not inclined to walk away from the people depending on them. When the camp comes under attack and the team is cut off, the argument about leaving becomes irrelevant. Max and Rachel are trapped together, hunted, and responsible for keeping each other alive.
Under fire, the walls between them come down quickly. But surviving the attack is only the beginning. Back home, both women have to deal with what the mission cost them — and with questions about who put them in harm’s way, and why, that someone powerful would prefer stay unanswered.
My Review
The opening half is the reason to read this, and it is genuinely gripping. Radclyffe writes danger well — the camp under attack, the improvised bunker, the long wait for extraction — and the claustrophobia of two strangers keeping each other alive gives the book a pulse most romances never reach. Readers who call it a page-turner are mostly talking about this stretch.
Max is the other strength. She is exhausted, guilty and fiercely competent, and Radclyffe lets her be vulnerable without making her weak. The medical detail is vivid and the war-zone texture feels researched, which gives the heroics real weight.
Where it struggles is the romance and the structure, and these are consistent complaints rather than isolated ones. Around seven readers say the love story is rushed — the declarations come after only a couple of days together — and that the ending arrives too quickly, with no epilogue. About as many found the chemistry thin or the romance more lust than bond. Around four found the intelligence-service subplot confusing or abandoned, and a similar number winced at cheesy dialogue and formulaic sex scenes. Several readers wished the survival section had lasted longer instead of giving way to a slower stateside half, and a couple flagged military and medical details they found implausible.
One expectation to reset: the blurb sells a survival thriller about being hunted by extremists, and the rescue happens earlier than many readers expect. If you came for a long trek through danger, calibrate; if you came for a short, sharp siege followed by a story about what comes after, that is what you get.
My honest note: A taut first half and a strong heroine, in a romance that moves faster than it earns. If you need a slow-built bond, it will feel thin. If you want Radclyffe at her grittiest, the siege alone is worth it.
| Element | In Taking Fire |
|---|---|
| Central relationship | Max de Milles & Rachel Winslow — a Navy medic at the end of her last tour and a stubborn Red Cross team leader |
| Core tropes | Forced proximity under fire, rescue mission, hurt/comfort, survivor’s guilt, opposites attract, political conspiracy |
| Setting | A humanitarian camp in Somalia during an uprising, then back in the United States |
| Heat level | 3/5 — open door, two or three scenes |
| Series | First Responders book 4 — every novel in the series is a standalone; no cliffhanger |
| Content notes | Combat violence and an attack on a humanitarian camp, gunshot wounds and graphic medical treatment, death of troops, grief and survivor’s guilt, explicit sexual content (from reader reviews; StoryGraph has no crowd-sourced warnings) |
How Spicy Is Taking Fire?
A 3/5. I could not get a romance.io reading for this title, so the number comes from readers: one describes medium spice with two or three detailed scenes, others call them steamy or fireworks, and Audible listeners note that the focus stays on action and survival rather than sex — something one called refreshing. The scenes are explicit and on the page, but they are not the point of the book.
The one thing readers flag is the language in those scenes, which a couple find clichéd. No reviewer mentions kink content. If you want a military or medical romance at a similar level, Golden Hour sits in the same open-door band, and Radclyffe’s own Crossroads runs a little hotter.
Who Should Read This Book?
You’ll likely love it if: you want danger and action in your romance, you love a damaged, competent military heroine, you enjoy hurt/comfort, and you already read Radclyffe for her reliability.
You may want to skip it if: you need a slow-built bond, instant declarations of love feel unearned to you, you want the survival story to last the whole book, or clichéd sex-scene dialogue bothers you.
In short: a tense, gritty siege romance whose love story moves faster than its action.
What Readers Are Actually Saying (October 2026)
This is a quiet backlist title from a prolific author, and its readership reflects that. It has no viral moment, no trade reviews that I could find and no Reddit or BookTok conversation; it is read by Radclyffe’s long-standing audience and found through the First Responders series. The numbers: a 4.06 average across 950 Goodreads ratings but only 41 written reviews, 3.79 across 10 StoryGraph reviews with a 1% did-not-finish rate, and 4.5 from 526 Amazon ratings. It is tied for the lowest-rated novel in its series, though the whole series sits within a narrow band. The audiobook, narrated by Abby Craden for Audible Studios, runs about 8 hours and holds 4.6 stars from 421 Audible ratings, and listeners praise her performance. Some of the warmest written reviews come from review blogs and from a fellow Bold Strokes author, so weigh them accordingly.
Why readers love it (according to the discourse): The action, first and by a distance — around twelve readers praise the tension and the camp siege. Then Max, whom about eight describe as complex and vulnerable. Several readers value Radclyffe’s dependable formula and the vivid medical and military detail, and a few say this is her grittiest and most angst-driven book in years.
What readers argue about and complain about: The romance and the ending, roughly tied — about seven readers each say the love story is rushed, the chemistry thin, or the final stretch too quick. Behind those: a confusing or dropped intelligence subplot (about four), cheesy dialogue and formulaic sex scenes (about four), and a survival section that ends too soon (about three). Readers genuinely split on Rachel — some see a passive figure to be rescued, others praise the mutual self-reliance between the two women — and on pacing, which one reader calls well judged and another slow.
The standalone question worth asking first: it stands alone, like every First Responders novel, and ends with the couple together and no cliffhanger. The rest of the series rates in a similar range, led by Trauma Alert at 4.23. If you liked the military-medical setting, If I Don’t Ask is a slower, more emotional take on doctors in a war zone.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do you need to read the First Responders series in order?
No. The series page describes every novel as a standalone, and Taking Fire follows its own couple.
How spicy is Taking Fire?
A 3/5. There are two or three explicit, on-page scenes, but the action and survival story take centre stage.
Is Taking Fire more thriller or romance?
Both, in two halves. The first half is a survival thriller in a war zone; the second turns to the aftermath and the relationship, with a political subplot.
Does Taking Fire have a happy ending?
Max and Rachel end the book together after declaring their love, with no cliffhanger, though some readers found the ending rushed and wanted an epilogue.
Is there an audiobook?
Yes — narrated by Abby Craden for Audible Studios, running about 8 hours, with a 4.6 average on Audible.
If You Loved Taking Fire, Read These Next
For another war-zone medical romance with far more pining, If I Don’t Ask is the natural next step. If you want more Radclyffe, Crossroads brings her medical expertise to a different kind of high-stakes romance. And Wounded Souls is another military-medical romance on our list, with more heat.
For more like this, browse our list of lesbian military romance books or the full Book Reviews collection.
The Bottom Line
Taking Fire is a book whose opening outshines its ending. The siege is genuinely tense, Max is a heroine with real depth, and the medical and military texture makes the danger feel earned. It is also a romance that declares itself too fast, a second half that loses momentum, and a subplot that never quite pays off. If you want a gritty, action-led Radclyffe and do not mind a quick romance, it is a satisfying read. Check Taking Fire on Amazon →
The Eikna Overall Ranking
On the Eikna scale, Taking Fire ranks as a solid small-press sapphic military suspense romance — tense, gritty and carried by its heroine, held back by a rushed love story and a lopsided structure, and best approached for the siege and the action rather than the romance.
The Evidence Scorecard
Overall ★★★★☆ 3.7/5
- ✓ 4.06 average across 950 Goodreads ratings
- ✓ 4.5 from 526 Amazon ratings
- ✓ 1% did-not-finish on StoryGraph
- ✓ Rushed romance the main complaint
Romance ★★★☆☆ 3.3/5
- ✓ Forced proximity under fire sparks
- ✓ Hurt/comfort beats land
- ✓ Mutual self-reliance praised by some
- ✓ Love declared within days
Characters ★★★★☆ 3.7/5
- ✓ Max complex, flawed and vulnerable
- ✓ Rachel principled and stubborn
- ✓ Supporting cast serviceable
- ✓ Rachel reads as passive to some
Writing ★★★★☆ 3.6/5
- ✓ Siege scenes genuinely tense
- ✓ Vivid medical detail
- ✓ Reliable Radclyffe craft
- ✓ Cheesy dialogue in places
Emotional Impact ★★★★☆ 3.7/5
- ✓ Survivor’s guilt gives weight
- ✓ Danger feels real
- ✓ Grittier than her usual
- ✓ Second half loses momentum
Heat Level ★★★☆☆ 3/5
- ✓ Open-door, explicit scenes
- ✓ Two or three scenes
- ✓ Action stays in focus
- ✓ Sex-scene language clichéd for some
Ending ★★★☆☆ 3.3/5
- ✓ Couple together, no cliffhanger
- ✓ Standalone within the series
- ✓ Love declarations resolve the arc
- ✓ Rushed, with no epilogue
Re-read Value ★★★★☆ 3.6/5
- ✓ Craden audiobook rated 4.6
- ✓ Siege rewards a revisit
- ✓ Series offers more standalones
- ✓ Thin romance limits a return
Affiliate disclosure: Lesbian Romance Reads is a participant in the Amazon Associates Program. If you buy through the link below we may earn a small commission, at no extra cost to you.