Stand-alone or Trilogy?

Stand-alones are easy to make into series.
A series is difficult to make into a stand-alone.

Just don't kill off too many characters!

Or, at least, don't kill them off permanently.

My approach is loosely connected standalones, much like David Gemmell's Drenai books. Same world, overlapping history, but not a single unified story arc across multiple novels.

There's also the Steven Brust approach to writing novels about the same people and places that have enough story to stand alone, with interspersed bits that tell a much broader story (in this case non-sequentially).

deathwizard said:

Just don't kill off too many characters!

Or, at least, don't kill them off permanently.

Click to expand...

You mean death isn't permanent?!

Most often, I've seen something that's originally a stand alone, but then has two sequels produced afterwords; the sequels usually link up to one another, with the same problem, but different from the first book, which had it's own problem that was solved within the first novel.

Each book in a series should stand alone. However, it's expected that in such a series, the same characters (most if not all of them) appear in the same (or similar) settings in each volume.

And it's expected that to obtain the highest enjoyment of reading the series, they should be read in the order the author intended (not all series are written in the same chronological order as the story).

But as mentioned above, your chances of selling the story to a publisher are orders of magnitude greater if you propose the project as "a novel, complete, with possible sequels in the works."

Good luck.

Here's a current thread on NaNo discussing much the same issues:

http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/node/3478296

This always confuses me.
How the heck can an author know that story X is a "trilogy"? If you split it by 500 page chunks, maybe it's a 4 book series. If you split it by 1000 page chunks, maybe it's one damn book. The real question is,
a)Are you writing 3 stories under 1 arc?
b)Or are you writing 1 story?
c)Or are you writing 3 separate stories?

My advice, in any case, is to write A story. If it is too long, you can decide (or the agent/publisher will help you decide) how to split it. Setting out to write A trilogy specifically in my opinion, is silly. Unless you're an experienced/published author already in which case you already know what makes sense from a marketing perspective.

Sorry if this sounds like a rant (which it is, in part, since nothing pisses me off more as a reader/buyer when I see yet another god damn Book I in NEW AWESOME SUPER RAD YET UNFINISHED TRILOGY from author I don't know).

My advice to you: Make your own path. JR Rowling was beginner, and she did not start out with a stand alone. I am a novise too, and I am writing a trillogy, because my character will not accept anything less. making my main character less, is hurting the story. Believe in yourself, dont let an editor stand in your way.

Capital said:

This always confuses me.
How the heck can an author know that story X is a "trilogy"? If you split it by 500 page chunks, maybe it's a 4 book series. If you split it by 1000 page chunks, maybe it's one damn book. The real question is,
a)Are you writing 3 stories under 1 arc?
b)Or are you writing 1 story?
c)Or are you writing 3 separate stories?

Click to expand...

I've wondered that too, like with King's Dark Towers series, how did he know would write 7 books (he says there might be more). That's one hell of a long story!

I guess it's the author's love for the characters, continually generating new storylines and plots to place them in. Although Herbert's Dune series didn't have the same characters in each book (they only stuck around for maaaaaybe two books before the cast was changed), so in that case, the series was set in the same universe and he kept rehashing the dune name, but the any established character never stuck around.

Hmm... there's so many ways to go about a series.

Capital said:

This always confuses me.
How the heck can an author know that story X is a "trilogy"?

Click to expand...

Honestly, I think a lot of the "I'm writing a trilogy" decisions come from looking at what's popular in fantasy and what other authors have done. Folks love to use Tolkien as an example (even though LOTR wasn't technically a trilogy, but we have bukoo threads on the topic, so let's not debate that here). You can also look at new authors like Brent Weeks who've had success with trilogies.

Thing is, though, they are HARD TO SELL. Any book by a new author is a risky investment for a publisher. There's no guarantee the first book in the contract will sell.

In a standalone series, if the first book doesn't sell and the publisher terminates the contract (rare, but it happens), readers aren't left as bereft without the rest of the books. If you only get books one and two, say, of a planned trilogy, then the third is canceled for bad numbers, you'll have a few pissed off readers (this happened recently, but for the life of me I can't remember the author).

Vahana said:

JR Rowling was beginner, and she did not start out with a stand alone.

Click to expand...

Actually, she did. Would the story arc have felt as complete had books 2-7 never been published? Impossible to say. Sure, book one had open threads and possibilities of continuation (that's what a good, standalone, first book in a series does), but if all we'd ever gotten was the first book, it would have stood alone just fine.

Vahana said:

My advice to you: Make your own path. JR Rowling was beginner, and she did not start out with a stand alone.

Click to expand...

Her first novel stood alone quite well. Each of the books has its own arc, and adds to the arc of the entire series. I think hers is a good example. Make the first book a satisfying read in its own right.

defcon6000 said:

I've wondered that too, like with King's Dark Towers series, how did he know would write 7 books (he says there might be more). That's one hell of a long story!

Click to expand...

It's worth noting that King started writing the first book very early in his career. It didn't get published as a novel until after he sold several standalone novels, and after they became huge bestsellers. At the time The Gunslinger was published as a novel, it had already been published as a series of short stories, and had established an audience for the world and characters.

The advice I've always heard is that if you're writing a Fantasy trilogy (like LOTR--one big storyin 3 books), then you finish the entire thing before attempting to market any of it.

If you're not writing a Fantasy trilogy, then each book should contain a complete story, even if that story can or is planned to be part of a larger story arc going into other books. Then you can market the first book when it's done.

The challenge is that, even if you sell the first book in a planned series--and the publisher is interested in the series--whenever the numbers tank, the series ends. Even just after the first book. (I have a friend who signed a multiple book contract and the first one tanked so bad they canceled the rest of the contract.) There's no guarantee in the numbers game.

OTOH, if you have a standalone and it's suddenly popular, you'll be pressed to write more in the series. This happened with Dune, IIRC. Herbert had no plans for a series, but a new Dune book would pay better and/or he couldn't sell a different book without piggybacking it with a new Dune book in the contract. So it's not bad to have a standalone with room to grow into a series. (I have another friend who sold her first book and it was popular enough the publisher pressed her into a series that she didn't plan for, which ruined the series and almost tanked her career.)

Personally, I think ahead, but I don't plan ahead. I don't plan on writing a series or a trilogy because I want all the good ideas and focus to be in THIS book and not to make it set-up for the NEXT book, which I may never get to get to. That doesn't mean that I'm not aware of what could be spun into a sequel, should that be desired.

Vahana said:

My advice to you: Make your own path. JR Rowling was beginner, and she did not start out with a stand alone. I am a novise too, and I am writing a trillogy, because my character will not accept anything less. making my main character less, is hurting the story. Believe in yourself, dont let an editor stand in your way.

Click to expand...

Nobody’s suggesting you make your character “less”, whatever that means. They’re just saying that because everyone other aspiring author and their grandma is writing a trilogy, that doesn’t mean you have to or you should. Obviosuly you could. It’s not like the Novel Police(NoPo) are going to come to your house and put your masterwork through the shredder.

The way to decide whether you’re writing a trilogy is not to say, “I’m going to write a trilogy. Now, what will it be about?” It’s to write the story you want to write. Then, once it is done, you can look back and say “Gosh, this looks like it might work better as a trilogy than a single book.” Or, your editor might say: “Wow, that first book sold a lot of copies…” or “We really like this…” “…Maybe it could use some sequels."

Liosse de Velishaf said:

The way to decide whether you’re writing a trilogy is not to say, “I’m going to write a trilogy. Now, what will it be about?” It’s to write the story you want to write. Then, once it is done, you can look back and say “Gosh, this looks like it might work better as a trilogy than a single book.”

Click to expand...

Bingo. Well stated.

We've had threads on this before. My opinion is still identical to MattW's: standalones are best, and I appreciate seeing standalones set in the same secondary world with no intervolume continuity. Unfortunately, few writers do this. Multibook continuities are practically standard in f/sf, and the financial allure is undeniable. That's my opinion as a reader.

As a writer, I'll do whatever I have to do.

defcon6000 said:

I've wondered that too, like with King's Dark Towers series, how did he know would write 7 books (he says there might be more). That's one hell of a long story!

Click to expand...

I think it's pretty simple, really. Your character has goals, throughout the entire series. Many people only plan three main goals to do trilogies because that's what they believe is popular/expected. With near flawless outlining, it's really easy to see exactly where you're going for the entirety of the series, not just the book.

ChaosTitan said:

Bingo. Well stated.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

M.Austin said:

I think it's pretty simple, really. Your character has goals, throughout the entire series. Many people only plan three main goals to do trilogies because that's what they believe is popular/expected. With near flawless outlining, it's really easy to see exactly where you're going for the entirety of the series, not just the book.

Click to expand...

You're giving planning way too much credit. “No outline survives the first draft."

Okay, that’s an exaggeration, but the more books you have, the more likely this is to happen.

“Near-flawless outlining?” Ideals, ideals.

.

SoloArtist - If the pregnancy is an attempt at ending the book on cliffhanger, don't do it. Leave it off, end the book. If you sell it and your editor wants a sequel/series, then it's a good time to say, "Well, I have this idea to tweak the end of book one..."