Spinoff: Single vs. multiple book deals

The first novel that an author sells typically has to be able to stand on its own. It can be the first part of a series, and that should be mentioned to your agent -- who will probably welcome it.

A popular example is Harry Potter (just for the sake of argument.) If Rowling had only made the Sorcerer's Stone and then gone on to another work, then the book would still have been able to stand alone. It leaves the prospects for future books open, and makes you want to learn more of Rowling's world, but it has all points that a complete novel needs.

If "the story doesn't really start until book two" then it probably won't work. After you finish the first novel, you also need to get to work on the second; often times having the next book out relatively quickly boosts the sales of your first.

TLDR: Series are good, but focus on your first book before delving off into other things.

It depends on the genre, too. Very often in urban fantasy, paranormal romance, fantasy, and mysteries, editors are looking for a series. These genres lend themselves well to a series format, and a lot of debut authors in these genres have sold a first novel as part of a series (myself included).

Other genres don't necessarily need to be part of a series, even though you can still get a multi-book deal. You'll just be turning in standalone novels as part of the deal, instead of Book Two, Book Three, etc...

A sequel is worth nothing if the first book doesn't sell.

No. Both are equally hard. There are other factors that can determine how many books are purchased as well. Your agent (or lack thereof) and how they negotiate with the editor. The advance. Rights being offered. How profitable the publisher feels the book might be. And keep in mind that a publisher might make a three-book deal and do very little marketing, and do a one-book deal with a ton of marketing, and vice versa. How many books has little to do with how they market it. Remember, there's years between books, and whatever marketing they did for book one is long been forgotten when book two comes out. And if book one tanks, they're stuck with printing book two to honor their contract. There are pros and con either way.

I used to write stories with multi-books in mind and those books went nowhere. They just weren't good because I was thinking too big and not giving the reader a satisfying one-book story. I switched to stand alone books, keeping an eye out for any series potential. I sold one as a trilogy. I got one-book offers and three-book offers, so it could have gone either way. (And yes, there are times when a one-book deal might be better than a three-book deal).

My new book ideas are almost all stand alone, though I do have a couple that I think have the potential to make a good series. When I write those, I'll write them as stand alones, but pitch them as a possible series to my agent.

I think the smart bet is to write the best one-book story you can, and it goes bigger, great, if not, you still have a solid story you can sell.

Personally, I'd love for my WIP to be a series. However, the realistic side of me knows that selling my first stand-alone will be enough of a challenge.

I wrote my first novel as a stand-alone with the potential to be a series for one reason- I don't like books where all the loose ends are tied up and you're left with a nice tidy little package. I want to see a satisfying conclusion, of course, but I also like stories that resemble real life. So when I ended my book I answered the main questions, but left some little ones unanswered to give myself room to build a second book if I'm so lucky as to publish the first.

I think TTCleveland's example of Harry Potter is good; at the end of Sorcerer's Stone we find out Quirrell, not Snape was the bad guy, so the big mystery of this book is solved. But we still don't know why Voldemort wanted to kill Harry in the first place- the question that makes us buy the next book.

So I guess I don't let what sells better, series or stand-alone, influence what I write, because I like a little mystery or doubt lingering at the end of an otherwise satisfying story.

I could be wrong on this, as I certainly haven't any facts to back this up, but it seems when placed into the context of the history of literature, series of books is a relatively recent trend. This has become even more of a fad since the Harry Potter books took off. Now it seems just about everyone who writes in that genre is doing so with the intention of making their book into a series in hopes their series will follow along the same suit as HP. When I sat down to write my first book, I thought it would be a brilliant idea to turn it into a series as well, even going so far as to begin writing the sequel while I tried to peddle book one. Needless to say, book one never sold, book two never got finished, consequently I headed in another direction and am firmly entrenched in writing books that begin and end within the 100k word +/- guideline I set up for myself. Like others have said, if you're an unknown, don't compromise on your first effort assuming you can bolster your marketability by proclaiming it's only the first book in the series.

This, of course, is all just one dude's opinion.

Danthia said:

Remember, there's years between books, and whatever marketing they did for book one is long been forgotten when book two comes out.

Click to expand...

Unless your contract states book two will be released within six months of book one. But that's also more the norm for books sold as an ongoing series, rather than individual titles.

Charlie Horse said:

I could be wrong on this, as I certainly haven't any facts to back this up, but it seems when placed into the context of the history of literature, series of books is a relatively recent trend. This has become even more of a fad since the Harry Potter books took off. Now it seems just about everyone who writes in that genre is doing so with the intention of making their book into a series in hopes their series will follow along the same suit as HP.

Click to expand...

Sorry, no. HP did not start the current trend of ongoing series, it just brought it out into the mainstream light a little more. HP is not the start-all, be-all, or end-all of fantasy literature. It's an impressively best-selling series that sparked the imaginations of children all over the world, so it deserves a lot of props.

I'm not writing a series because of HP (never read them). I'm writing a series because I have a lot of stories to tell within this universe, with these particular characters. I'm writing a series because I love reading series'. Any writer who writes with the hopes of rising to the level of a cultural phenomenon isn't writing for the right reasons, IMHO.

Ironically I find myself in a bit of a dilemna. On the one side, possibility of sending in massive single manuscript. On the other side, trying to sell it as more than one book. I'm personally considering writing the large manuscript and dividing it into 'Parts' to leave the option of either Big Single or Small Multiple. >_>;

My understanding is that a debut novelist almost never sells multiple books at once. It's almost always a stand-alone first. The reason for this is simple: Agents and editors are less likely to take the time and financial risk on an author who has not yet proven that he or she can sell books. So one at a time, to start with.

Libbie said:

My understanding is that a debut novelist almost never sells multiple books at once. It's almost always a stand-alone first.

Click to expand...

Again, it depends on the genre.

In urban fantasy, a debut author selling a two book or three book deal is the norm, not the exception. Book one is usually a standalone only in the sense that the plot is wrapped up at the end of the book, but plenty of room is left for further adventures featuring the same characters, with a further exploration of their world.

Libbie said:

My understanding is that a debut novelist almost never sells multiple books at once. It's almost always a stand-alone first. The reason for this is simple: Agents and editors are less likely to take the time and financial risk on an author who has not yet proven that he or she can sell books. So one at a time, to start with.

Click to expand...

I'm a debut novelist, three-book deal, high advance, major house. And guess what? I was a slush pile query to boot.

Agents and editors and looking for great books. As long as you write a great book, you have just as good a chance as anyone else.

ChaosTitan said:

Sorry, no. HP did not start the current trend of ongoing series, it just brought it out into the mainstream light a little more.

Click to expand...

I'm no scholar of literary history, but I'd say the tradition in fantasy and science fiction dates at least to the pulp serials of the Twenties and Thirties (e.g. Conan). In mystery, Doyle published the first Sherlock Holmes story in 1887.

So it's been a "fad" for a long time.

Danthia said:

I'm a debut novelist, three-book deal, high advance, major house. And guess what? I was a slush pile query to boot.

Agents and editors and looking for great books. As long as you write a great book, you have just as good a chance as anyone else.

Click to expand...

That's why I said "almost" never.

Libbie said:

That's why I said "almost" never.

Click to expand...

Libbie said:

My understanding is that a debut novelist almost never sells multiple books at once.

Click to expand...

You did say almost never, yes. However, just based on personal experience, the deals announced here in our Goals forum, and the debut deals announced weekly on Publishers Marketplace, debut novelists selling multiple books at once is more the norm than the exception. So it isn't "almost never." It's closer to "more often than not."