Number of Characters--How many can YOU handle?

[Makai_Lightning]

So it's been pointed out to me--and for the most part I already suspected as much--that I tend to run around with a lot of characters.

One of my current projects is pretty limited in number of characters, another has more than I've ever used.

I do fuse characters that can be fused, or cut out otherwise useless ones, but I still tend to have a lot. But then, I wondered how many was actually a lot and what was considered "normal."

Some people can handle writing a ton of characters and keep them distint, where for others that's harder. I'm not sure which I would be, only that I do have a tendency to write a lot in and sort it all out. I think I had 34 for one, and 15 for another (that's including minor characters, and 15 is just a guess, since I haven't gotten around to writing all the parts the characters might or might not be in yet--I tend to create characters as I go if one I have doesn't fit, then mold them together afterward. Some get subplots, and I try to make them worth their time showing up). One of my WIPs is probably going to end up with 70 if I'm not careful.

What occurs to me is there's certain ways the characters are handles that makes a book more able to handle a lot of characters. I personally hate going through character lists at the front or back of books. I feel like if I can't dicern from the text who the characters are, there's something wrong with it and it's not my job to do the extra work to figure it out. I don't mind them if they're just for reference, in case I want to remind myself of minor details, but the characters themselves should be distinct.

In my personal opinion, besides character distinctness, the proximity of characters to each other in scenes, the sorts of scenes they regularly appear in, and what their purpose is will mostly define whether or not it's working to have as many characters as a book does --however many that may be.

Different books may have different capacities for characters, but I was simply wondering at the idea.

So, basically;
What is it that you think that allows a book to contain so many (or so few) characters, and what provides the character distinction?
To you, personally, how many is too much or not enough?
What is generally considered a lot of characters for any type of book?

[gothicangel]

I think it depends on the story. A crime novel requires more than a romance, for example.

I have three major characters and six minor characters.

[Linda Adams]

I like using lots of characters myself. If I've counted right, my current project has a main character, three more major characters, four secondary characters, three bad guys, and at least six minor characters. The WIP has a thriller-style complex storyline, which requires their presence. at the moment, I'm writing a scene with seven characters in it.

What is it that you think that allows a book to contain so many (or so few) characters, and what provides the character distinction?

Genre and storyline. You're never going to see 30 characters in a romance novel. But you might see 100 in a thriller (though I'll admit when I saw a list of characters at the beginning of that book, I sent it back to the library).

To you, personally, how many is too much or not enough?

Depends on the story, and how the writer carries them off. I've read thrillers with huge casts that I didn't have any problems with because they were involved in the story in such a way I knew who was who. But I've seen some mysteries with maybe seven to ten characters, and when the bad guy was revealed, my first reaction was 'Who is that?"

What is generally considered a lot of characters for any type of book?

When the reader feels like they need a scorecard. Even with a huge cast of chracters, if the writer does it right, the reader shouldn't have trouble following the characters.

[Stunted]

In my opinion, a lot of characters creates a kind of reality, while only a few reenforces silly fantasy world.

Now, as much as most of us hate JK Rowling, she does a great job having a lot of easily differentiable characters. I think her trick is for every character to do something crazy and memorable the second they show up, and they can all be boiled down to a sentence or two. Mean teacher. Asshole. Crazy teacher. That fat kid...

[Exir]

Now, as much as most of us hate JK Rowling

Er... I think JK Rowling is actually relatively well-received in writerly circles... You'd find lots of JKR fans around here (like me :))

[gothicangel]

Never read a HP book or seen one of the films - don't want to either.

Why? Don't like the writing.

[Wiskel]

I read a lot of fantasy and i'm a big fan of George RR Martin. Fantasy tends to have large scale as well as personal conflict. Politics and wars often need quite a few characters on each side. He uses lots of POV characters but manages to define his MCs very well, in my opinion. Long character lists don't put me off a book.

I also like the idea that being alive at the start of a chapter is no guarantee of being alive at the end of it, so he sometimes passes the torch from one character to another, meaning both have to be fairly well devleoped.

I'm trying to use a similar style myself so I'm juggling quite a few, and while the character list might grow longer, the number of active characters is likely to stay under ten at any given time.

Craig

[Danthia]

Clarity is a big issue. When a writer does their job, you can tell who you're supposed to pay attention to and who is a throwaway character. I don't mind walk ons since I know I don't have to remember them. The trouble comes when a walk on is given a lot of clues that they're important, such as extra description, or the protag focusing too much in them or some aspect of them. All the writerly devices that say "remember this person." If it's clear you don't have to remember them, then you can get away with more.

Anything over three characters in one scene tends to get problematic just due to logistics. I've found my beta readers start to get confused around five or six in one scene at a time.

The other thing to ask yourself is why you need so many characters. Too many could be an indication that the story is more exploring a premise or situation than the traditional "protag has a problem, protag tries to overcome problem" structure.

[Charlie Horse]

Never read a HP book or seen one of the films - don't want to either.

Why? Don't like the writing.

Not to derail this thread, but how do you know you don't like the writing if you've never read one of her books?

As to the question at hand: Lots of characters are fine as long as they are distinct and serve a purpose. Obvious answer I guess, but I've read stuff where there were so many characters that all seemed to run in together so much so that it was hard to keep them straight. In the end I never really understood what the purpose for most of them were.

[Exir]

I personally favor small casts, because I like to keep my plots short, simple and sweet. Large casts often result in more complicated and "crafty" plots, which is good in its own right, but I'm just not as good at writing them.

[gothicangel]

Before I commit myself to buying/reading a book I'll read the first chapter. I didn't like the writing - far too wordy.

More of an Ernest Hemingway gal (or Angela Carter to the other extreme!)

[tehuti88]

What is it that you think that allows a book to contain so many (or so few) characters, and what provides the character distinction?
To you, personally, how many is too much or not enough?
What is generally considered a lot of characters for any type of book?

I'm the type who lurves tons of characters. If handled right. The book I'm currently reading likes to introduce characters, spend enough time developing them as individuals, then kill them off within a few chapters of their introduction, and it really irks me. If the writer's not going to keep the characters around that long, then don't name them or give them interesting personalities or even bother introducing them in the first place. It's okay now and then, but this writer seems to love doing it, so they seem extraneous. Ugh.

Anyway, to answer the questions--I think if a writer develops the characters well enough, AND the characters have a distinctive purpose within the story, that's what determines if a lot of them can belong in one work. "Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell" did this pretty well. There were slews of characters in that, major and minor, but the writer, IMO, did such a good job making each of them a REAL CHARACTER that I was never confused by them all (even the ones with similar names--John Uskglass, John Segundus, Jonathan Strange). They struck me as real people, individuals, easily distinctive from each other and not hard to keep track of.

I do hope I'm the same way with characters in my work, since, being a writer of very long serials, I have slews of characters. :o

To me there is no such thing as too many, unless the writer fails to either distinguish their own characters or to provide ample reason for them being there in the first place (the latter refers to the writer whose work irked me earlier). Too few? I prefer lots of characters, but granted, in a shorter story you probably won't have many, maybe even just one. It depends. There's no such thing as too many or two few characters, just too many or too few for a particular STORY.

I couldn't say what's considered "a lot" of characters because it's so subjective to me that, if there were a hundred characters, I wouldn't even notice it's a lot if the writer did a good job with them. I'd only think it's a lot of characters for one book if the writer did a LOUSY job with them.

[djf881]

Never read a HP book or seen one of the films - don't want to either.

Why? Don't like the writing.

I tend to get really annoyed with fantasy authors who make up a lot of words and give characters names that are basically adjectives (Do you think Draco Malfoy is going to be an antagonist for our character? Duh). If I ever write a fantasy novel, I am naming my hero Maleficus Blackheart.

The other main objection that can be lodged against "Harry Potter" is that after book 4, Rowling had carte blanche to do whatever she wanted and her books bloated up. You could lodge the same objection against Stephen King.

But Rowling is very good at having interesting threads throughout the story that make it very hard to put down. She also tends not to string words together in a way that makes my teeth grind together. I tried to read a James Patterson novel and his use of language was so poor that I could not continue reading the book.

Rowling is also worth taking a look at for the way she creates a setting, and the way she structures her plots. I also like the way she takes a scenario that is straight wish-fulfillment fantasy ("Guess what, Harry? You're very special! Also, you're magic! And famous! And you're the new star quarterback of our flying football team!") and she twists it into a sort of nightmare.

[ChaosTitan]

It doesn't take a lot of skill to create a cast of fifty characters, but it does take skill to make each one different from the others. I don't care if a book has five characters, or fifty, as long as I can keep them straight.

Lord of the Rings has a huge main cast, but each of them is unique in their own way. Theoden and Denethor are both kings, sure, but you'd never mistake one for the other. The four hobbits have distinct personalities. The huge cast works.

Now if I'm reading a novel with five protagonists and their names are Joe, Bill, Jack, Pat, and Carl, I may have a problem keeping them straight. Five similar names, all too close in number of letters. Joseph, Billy, Jack, Patrick, and Carlson change up the pattern a bit. Not that they don't still need unique personalities, but names are just as important when creating the character.

[gothicangel]

I tend to get really annoyed with fantasy authors who make up a lot of words and give characters names that are basically adjectives (Do you think Draco Malfoy is going to be an antagonist for our character? Duh). If I ever write a fantasy novel, I am naming my hero Maleficus Blackheart.

The other main objection that can be lodged against "Harry Potter" is that after book 4, Rowling had carte blanche to do whatever she wanted and her books bloated up. You could lodge the same objection against Stephen King.

But Rowling is very good at having interesting threads throughout the story that make it very hard to put down. She also tends not to string words together in a way that makes my teeth grind together. I tried to read a James Patterson novel and his use of language was so poor that I could not continue reading the book.

Rowling is also worth taking a look at for the way she creates a setting, and the way she structures her plots. I also like the way she takes a scenario that is straight wish-fulfillment fantasy ("Guess what, Harry? You're very special! Also, you're magic! And famous! And you're the new star quarterback of our flying football team!") and she twists it into a sort of nightmare.

Sorry, I don't ever see it happening; alongside Gothic, literary linguistics is in area of interest (you don't want me dissecting JKR!)

[ccarver30]

My current WIP has 2 main characters and maybe 8 in total!

[scarletpeaches]

The WIP I'm working on at the moment has five main characters, and about the same number of secondary characters. There are many more people in the novel, but they don't have full names or personalities because they're there for colour, rather than texture.

At least one of my main characters appears in every scene; often two of them. The secondary characters appear in one or two scenes each, but still have parts to play in moving the main storyline along.

[ccarver30]

If I had 70, I think I would jump off the nearest cliff.
It would be hard to see the value in EVERY character's existence.

[scarletpeaches]

I'm already seeing characters I'm going to have to bump off before the second draft.

[bison]

Consider character dynamics, their interaction with one anohter.
If you have two, you have a dynamic of two (a with b and b with a)
If you have three, you have a dynamic of Nine (a with b,c; b with a,c; c with a,b.
Add a fourth and it goes to to SIXTEEN! Add more and do the math.
Dynamics spawns the dialogue and plot movement.
Only a very talented writer can handle the larger numbers, it's hard to do.
Personaly, I think Three main and around six minor is a load!

[Topaz044]

Having 70 characters suggests to me, and I could easily be wrong, that unless you plan on writing a 200,000 word manuscript, the plot itself is a little dull and requires someone new (I guess every chapter) to spice it up. The same handful of characters, no matter what genre, is supposed to react to different circumstances that revolve around them. If you are wanting to constantly introducing new characters, that tells me there isn't a lot happening with the plot at the time to keep them occupied.

Speaking personally, I had a novella with only two major characters and two minor characters in it, and a sci-fi novel with six major characters and about four minor characters.

[maestrowork]

I don't count characters... They're there because they're there and they're necessary to the story. Some are walk-on extras, some minor, some secondary and some major/main. I have a large cast, but I do keep my major/secondary characters to a manageable number (probably under 10).

[Prawn]

I think you can have lots of characters, just don't have lots of POVs. If you have 20 well written characters, people will follow you, but being in 20 different people's heads in the same book is much harder to do well, and is probably a mistake.

[foonting]

23 main characters in my fantasy WIP.....plus two or three non speaking parts! Probably only half of these are completely fleshed out with proper back stories, the others are mainly there for plot advancement/set dressing.

As an aside on the JKR/HP thing, I have always had a thing against characters with ridiculous names....or the gratuitous 'Dark lords' popping up at every twist and turn....however JKR's appealingly quirky plot lines and strong core characters kept me reading......even through the later word processor dihorea books. I contented myself with one major saving grace, that her elves never possessed bell clear voices or were impossibly beautiful (irritating gits).

I could suggest a fascinating exercise for all of you who want to pointlessly waste your time...Go through a duplicate copy of your favourite manuscript and use find and replace to change all your caracter names to such JKR-esque ones as Aliby Bumbletrousers, Psyco Earlobes Glum, or Dragonbreath Notparticularlyniceperson. I nearly became incontinent with myrth after trying that!

[scarletpeaches]

*does search/replace and changes her MMC's name to Ivarbiggun Longscrotum*

[DeleyanLee]

I think the most POV characters I've ever had is 16 (Fantasy) but generally run from 3-5. I generally have a cast list (of named characters) between 45-90 for my Fantasies and around 30 for Romances. Those lists don't include the various unnamed characters who are also out and about. I have a lot of named characters because if the POV char meets someone they should know the name of, that character gets a name. It's just really awkward to me when the lady's maid is always referred to as "her maid" and not her name, so they get names.

In the first draft, I put in as many characters as the story seems to need. When I reread it, I see where I can condense characters, but generally don't lose too many.

[maestrowork]

16 or 20 POV characters? Wow, maybe that's why I don't read fantasy. I'd limit POV characters in my own work to no more than 5. Six would be pushing it.

[Makai_Lightning]

Having 70 characters suggests to me, and I could easily be wrong, that unless you plan on writing a 200,000 word manuscript, the plot itself is a little dull and requires someone new (I guess every chapter) to spice it up. The same handful of characters, no matter what genre, is supposed to react to different circumstances that revolve around them. If you are wanting to constantly introducing new characters, that tells me there isn't a lot happening with the plot at the time to keep them occupied.

Speaking personally, I had a novella with only two major characters and two minor characters in it, and a sci-fi novel with six major characters and about four minor characters.
70 is not an actual figure--that one was an arbitrary guess. The reason there would be so many is because that WIP has a few POVs of characters that walk in different circles. There is some overlap with the other POVs, but each character has their own conflict, in a sense, as they've their own lives, and their own friends and adversaries. That would be with all major, minor, or otherwise named characters. It's also likely to end up a few shed afterward, since it is a WIP, and there arn't even 70 yet. It's not that I want constantly to add new characters. It's that the lack of them seems wrong, sometimes.

Trust me, I'm plenty occupied.


I tend not toward too terribly many POV characters. 1 or 2 main ones, usually, and sometimes diverting into a minor character's POV, but I prefer limited POVs. I'd rather more fully explore one person than only partially explore five.


Consider character dynamics, their interaction with one anohter.
If you have two, you have a dynamic of two (a with b and b with a)
If you have three, you have a dynamic of Nine (a with b,c; b with a,c; c with a,b.
Add a fourth and it goes to to SIXTEEN! Add more and do the math.
Dynamics spawns the dialogue and plot movement.
Only a very talented writer can handle the larger numbers, it's hard to do.
Personaly, I think Three main and around six minor is a load!

Which gives rise to another question; how many characters in one scene do you think you can handle, or is advisable? How much would be norm?

Personally, Most of my scenes would have 2-4 characters, usually 2-3. I know of one scene I had five characters, and that could have been problematic if they hadn't already split themselves off into one group of 2 and another group of 3 engaging each other simaltaneously. I've done a scene with 6 or 7, each coming in for a short while then off doing something chaotic, and scenes with more but them not engaging each other. Nothing immediatly comes to mind with more than that. Of course, I have scenes with just one character too.

There's a lot of ways to write a scene.

[DeleyanLee]

16 or 20 POV characters? Wow, maybe that's why I don't read fantasy. I'd limit POV characters in my own work to no more than 5. Six would be pushing it.

Just because a character has a POV doesn't mean they have a storyline. Sometimes they're just the best option for the POV character in that scene so I use them. I know some writers want every POV character to have their own storyline (however long or short), but I'm not one of them. *shrug* It's just a matter of what works for the writer and the story.

[Brindle Chase]

I try not to have more than a dozen, but it would really depend on the genre, story and plot... I wouldnt limit myself... whatever makes it work!

For POV...

I try very hard to keep my POV to 1, but usually end up with 2 because I so constantly run into a situation where I can't flesh out my second MC well enough from the first MC's POV. ug!!!

I dont think there is a limit, but... Tom Clancy tends to have a dozen or so as he flips the story around the globe, but thats the most I've ever read. Most seem to have 3 to 5 or less.

[dwellerofthedeep]

16 or 20 POV characters? Wow, maybe that's why I don't read fantasy. I'd limit POV characters in my own work to no more than 5. Six would be pushing it.

I don't think it's a necessarily convention of fantasy. It's one I certainly don't use.

Personally I like 10-20 characters total between minors and majors.

[Gynn]

Never read a HP book or seen one of the films - don't want to either.

Why? Don't like the writing.

I've read all seven books, but so much happens in the story that I have a hard time remembering what happened in which book.

As for the films, they're enjoyable (I actually like the movies more than the books), especially the first two.

[Gynn]

The other main objection that can be lodged against "Harry Potter" is that after book 4, Rowling had carte blanche to do whatever she wanted and her books bloated up. You could lodge the same objection against Stephen King.


"It" was over 1000 pages and had probably a dozen POVs, maybe more. My dad couldn't get through it because the constant character/time shifts were annoying him, but it's my favorite book of all time!

I love long books. I want to see everything in the character's heads, because that's what's important to me. I want to know how many fights he got into in 4th grade, what his first car was like, and what he did with Jimmy Finch's body after he garroted him behind the library one summer morning when the teen spurned his amorous advances.

But I can see where some readers would want to tell the author to get on with the damn story! To each his own.

[MDei]

In my first book I have, I have fourteen character. I honestly though it was more. In the next book I add more and end up with twenty-five. It's no big deal if you handle it right and make each character their own. It also gives me more room for plot twist and shocking happenings. I love doing those kinds of things. It depends on what you're writing though. A definite number can't be given. But they all relate back to the main character one way or another, so there's no problem with the points of view. It's third person, but I usually only focus on what's happening around the protagonist.

[Cyia]

I have tiers of character groups. Right now I have 3 main characters; 5 secondary characters and a handful of small characters.

[Telstar]

The other main objection that can be lodged against "Harry Potter" is that after book 4, Rowling had carte blanche to do whatever she wanted and her books bloated up. You could lodge the same objection against Stephen King.


I consider the 5th book to be her best. All those words were needed.

[Telstar]

In my opinion, a lot of characters creates a kind of reality, while only a few reenforces silly fantasy world.


I feel the same and I tend to have lots of minor characters.

Among the huge list in my notes, no more than 1/3 will actually be named in my WIP, but I like to have the whole picture.

[Storm Dream]

I was just thinking about a similar question, M.

In '08 I wrote two stories. The first one, written from Feb-April, had a very small cast. I think there were two main POV chars, and a couple supporting, but the POVs had 95% of the scenes and while there were other people running around...it worked.

In November (yay Nano) I wrote a sequel to that story with a MUCH larger cast. Brought back all of the originals + give or take a dozen others, and that's just with speaking lines (not necessarily POVs). And it didn't work. Not even after I split them up and put half of them in one place and half in another. Bah.

Looking at it, I think part of the reason I had a problem with the larger cast is that I was still trying to cram it into a 100k word limit -- if I'd said the hell with it and made it longer, larger, it might've worked out. I very much admire authors who can create lots of distinct characters and tie everything up in that limit. So far, I'm not one of them.

My key has been to stick to smaller casts, which I do think I'm more comfortable with. My old space opera story, which I haven't touched in a few years, has an obscene amount of characters, but it works out because I've never worried about length constraints.

I admit I've yet to figure it all out. :\

[Makai_Lightning]

I was just thinking about a similar question, M.

In '08 I wrote two stories. The first one, written from Feb-April, had a very small cast. I think there were two main POV chars, and a couple supporting, but the POVs had 95% of the scenes and while there were other people running around...it worked.

In November (yay Nano) I wrote a sequel to that story with a MUCH larger cast. Brought back all of the originals + give or take a dozen others, and that's just with speaking lines (not necessarily POVs). And it didn't work. Not even after I split them up and put half of them in one place and half in another. Bah.

Looking at it, I think part of the reason I had a problem with the larger cast is that I was still trying to cram it into a 100k word limit -- if I'd said the hell with it and made it longer, larger, it might've worked out. I very much admire authors who can create lots of distinct characters and tie everything up in that limit. So far, I'm not one of them.

My key has been to stick to smaller casts, which I do think I'm more comfortable with. My old space opera story, which I haven't touched in a few years, has an obscene amount of characters, but it works out because I've never worried about length constraints.

I admit I've yet to figure it all out. :\
I think I know exactly what you mean. The thing for me is, once I've established I can't get rid of or combine any more characters, I'll just do a lot of reworking until it works perfectly. My first readers will tell me what needs to be more fleshed out, or if something's less necessary, or if they can't immediatly remember a character they should. That doesn't mean that I can't eventually get there, it just means I need to go back and edit in a few things here and there.

Initially, the problem is the word limit. I've got a few changes I need to make to one piece, and the only reason they weren't made already was because of word limit. I already suspected I had to make them, but wanted to send it for a test drive first. The test drive verified--yes, I do have to make those changes, and I wasn't wrong. So that means another couple thousand words added, then another vigorous edit to take other words away. Fortunately, I think I can get rid of other things too.

If you're afraid of overgoing a word limit in the first place, see what happens when you do. When you comb through to make things tighter, edit, chop and hack away at the thing, you might find yourself at the desired limit anyway. (Advice I should probably follow myself. My excuse is I had it way above the word limit already since I have the tendency to write a lot, and I cut it down to size, and I didn't want to have to go through it all again.)

[Diamond Lil]

I have 2 main/POV characters, about 5 secondary/support characters and between 10-15 tertiary ones. It's a romance with some adventure, so I'm keeping the focus on the 2 MC's and their developing relationship.

[Calixus]

Interesting post....


Originally posted by Makai_Lightning
What is it that you think that allows a book to contain so many (or so few) characters, and what provides the character distinction?

My books tend to have a large number of characters too. My latest series has many because I am dealing with Large Packs of Were, Large clans of Vamps and several of the Witchey persuasion. My books are thriller/mystery in their plots as well as being romance and so there are numerous characters doing different things. I don't like being limited to just a handful of people that my MC works with or interacts with. None of us do so in real life and my MC doesn't do it in her's either.

Originally posted by Makai_Lightning
To you, personally, how many is too much or not enough?

When reading, I don't care how many characters so long as it makes sense and I can keep who is doing what straight through the whole story.

Originally posted by Makai_Lightning
What is generally considered a lot of characters for any type of book?

:Shrug: Beats me, I never bothered to count them....

[Sean D. Schaffer]

Snipped...

So, basically;
What is it that you think that allows a book to contain so many (or so few) characters, and what provides the character distinction?

I think the difference is whether it's a character-driven or a plot-driven novel. A character-driven novel focuses on the characters' lives, whereas a plot-driven novel focuses on the story.

To you, personally, how many is too much or not enough?To me, whatever amount of characters the book calls for, is just right. There is no too many or too few just from an objective standpoint. To me, the book itself should cast the deciding vote.

For example, my old PA book had, I think, several dozen characters. OTOH, my present WIP only has a handful. Everything hinges, to me, on what the work calls for.

What is generally considered a lot of characters for any type of book?I don't honestly know. I do know that there were a lot of characters in the Lord Of The Rings trilogy, and yet the author kept track of every single one. My guess, therefore, would be that too many characters would be whatever amount you as the author can't keep track of.


I wish I could give you a more solid answer than that, but because writing is such a subjective business, what I've given is about as good as I can give.
:Shrug:

[RunawayScribe]

Different for different stories. The most main characters I've ever had in one novel has been seven, and I wanted to rip my hair out at several points trying to keep that straight. There were secondary characters and extras all over the place too, and there were days I just wanted to have an identity crisis, because I thought it'd be easier.

My short stories usually have very few characters - one, two, or, in my most recent, three. I'm not sure why that is, but in shorts I feel like it's just a little scene, and I zoom in on one area of focus. That's the way I do it, personally. Not saying that's the only way to have a good short or anything :D

In my current novel, I have three real main characters and eight secondary characters. That's it. I really like this cast, actually. It's been working well for me, and I've had a good time fleshing them out. They've defied me and done their own things many a time, which, although frustrating, usually makes for a better product for me, so I'll take it.

[maestrowork]

Just because a character has a POV doesn't mean they have a storyline. Sometimes they're just the best option for the POV character in that scene so I use them. I know some writers want every POV character to have their own storyline (however long or short), but I'm not one of them. *shrug* It's just a matter of what works for the writer and the story.

I would wonder why you need to get into their POV if they're not important to have their story lines. Who do you want your readers to attach to?

[maestrowork]

I don't think it's a necessarily convention of fantasy. It's one I certainly don't use.

Personally I like 10-20 characters total between minors and majors.

I'm not talking about major/minor characters -- I have more than that in my WIP. I'm talking POINT OF VIEW characters.

Most novels I've read had fewer than four POV characters, whether first person or 3rd person.

(When we talk about omniscient, though, it can become wide open since omniscient means you can get inside the minds of any character -- I just haven't read a lot of fiction written in omniscient)

[Makai_Lightning]

I think the difference is whether it's a character-driven or a plot-driven novel. A character-driven novel focuses on the characters' lives, whereas a plot-driven novel focuses on the story.
...
I wish I could give you a more solid answer than that, but because writing is such a subjective business, what I've given is about as good as I can give.
:Shrug:

I think that is a good point. I think I tend to be more character driven, with a lot of characters, and then one of my recent projects seems more plot driven, but has far less characters, currently at 7 with actual names, and two sort of commetators who are semi-characters. I'll probably get a few more, but most additions to the cast will be minor roles, unless my plot changes.



Well, I'm not looking for a necessarily solid answer, specifically because writing is subjective. That's why I like asking questions, and seeing how other people view things. Lots of people can write lots of different ways, and see writing differently. I can usually come up with my own answers to my ponderings, but they usually seem like fun things to talk about.

In a lot of ways, everything about writing affects everything else. If you as a writer are good with dialogue, but not with description, you'll probably write using more dialogue. That will affect your pace and the sorts of scenes you can write, and the overall feel of your book. So, how then does someone who writes mostly dialogue compare with someone who does best in description, in this case, with handling characters, but there are other things to consider too. (To answer my own not-actual question; someone better with description can make their characters distinct by describing their actions and feelings and whatever, setting up the scene and all that jazz, where the person better at dialogue may just let the characters speak for themselves to make them pronounced. Or, I would say so).