Starting the second book in an epic fantasy

Ambrosia · Sep 4, 2017

I am writing what I believe will be a trilogy in an epic fantasy.

I don't outline. I grab ideas out of the cosmos and those I like, I write down and expand upon. As a result, I have a vague idea where this book is headed and the tone of it. It is dark.

When I was working on the first novel, I reached a place where I had to send it off to betas after I finished it and wait for their comments. During that waiting period, I started on the second novel. I finished two chapters, and then set it aside when the comments from the betas came in on the first book. I have finished the revisions and polishing on the first book and sent it off for a final pass of copy-editing. Now that I've sat down with the second book again, I'm wondering if I'm starting in the wrong place.

I intend to show the inner workings of the antagonist in this novel as well as pick up with the other characters who were in the first book. And the thought has flitted through my head today that perhaps I should start showing the antagonist in those final moments of the last book instead of starting later in the story's timeline, as I had originally planned. It will mean pushing almost everything I have written in the first two chapters (the second chapter made me cry) to a later place in the novel, which is ok if this is the right decision.

Before I ask, I already know that 1) it depends on the execution and 2) you can only give generalized feedback since you haven't read it. Don't worry. I haven't read it yet, either.

I'm asking more for your thoughts than any concrete advice.

What do you think about starting a second novel at a time before the end of the previous novel, if done from the viewpoint of a character that hasn't had more than a brief introduction? Readers of the first novel will know him because he is integral to what happened at the end of the first novel. But I never went deep with his viewpoint. If the scene replays from his perspective, do you think the readers would be ok with that? Or would the repeat be tiresome? Would you be interested in reading a scene again if the viewpoint is changed to a different angle?

Thanks in advance for your comments. I am trying to figure out what chapter one should look like as opposed to what it currently looks like and I do appreciate your opinions.

Brightdreamer · Sep 4, 2017

I think it could work, if you're not just rehashing the finale of Book 1, but giving a fresh angle as a lead-in to Book 2.

mpack · Sep 4, 2017

Ambrosia said:
What do you think about starting a second novel at a time before the end of the previous novel, if done from the viewpoint of a character that hasn't had more than a brief introduction? Readers of the first novel will know him because he is integral to what happened at the end of the first novel. But I never went deep with his viewpoint. If the scene replays from his perspective, do you think the readers would be ok with that? Or would the repeat be tiresome? Would you be interested in reading a scene again if the viewpoint is changed to a different angle?

Peter Brett does this in his Demon Cycle. The second book covers much of the same chronology, but from a very different point of view. Book three continues the theme, with a third character covering many of the events from book two in a similar manner. He doesn't do so in chunks, but in chapters interwoven with the chapters of already established characters telling the "now" story as the new PoV catches up on the chronology. I thought it worked.

If the new PoV has a different voice and has a new perspective on the events, it can be very interesting to see the divergent perspectives.

relletyrots · Sep 4, 2017

It really depends on both the story and the execution, but you already know that.

Personally, I think it can be great if it sheds new light on the scene, which switching perspective often does. As always, I'd say, go with your heart. You can always revise later if it doesn't work. (Wow, I should really take my own advice.)

Anyhow, in the end, it all comes down to whether you can keep the reader hooked. I think that kind of POV shift would interest me, as long as it was more than a recap.

Esmae Tyler · Sep 4, 2017

Outside of the obvious "it depends" I think the POV shift makes sense as a place to break into the second story, especially if, as other posters have noted, it wasn't just a repeat of the same events told in a slightly different fashion. Seeing a pivotal moment unfolding from the antagonist's perspective and watching the story I'd just finished spin off in a new direction could be really fun.

Curlz · Sep 4, 2017

Ambrosia said:
What do you think about starting a second novel at a time before the end of the previous novel, if done from the viewpoint of a character that hasn't had more than a brief introduction?......... Would you be interested in reading a scene again if the viewpoint is changed to a different angle?

For me it would be interesting to see a side-character show up again and lead a different story. But if you are replaying a whole scene I'd expect to learn something new about the situation. If Jack and Jill go up a hill I don't really want to hear the same story from both, even if it will be a different perspective. A short recap would be okay, but it you do the full length scene again, something different should happen on the way - maybe Jill will notice somebody following them, maybe it will turn out that she plans to push Jack into the well that's on top of the hill, etc.

BethS · Sep 4, 2017

Ambrosia said:
What do you think about starting a second novel at a time before the end of the previous novel, if done from the viewpoint of a character that hasn't had more than a brief introduction? Readers of the first novel will know him because he is integral to what happened at the end of the first novel. But I never went deep with his viewpoint. If the scene replays from his perspective, do you think the readers would be ok with that? Or would the repeat be tiresome? Would you be interested in reading a scene again if the viewpoint is changed to a different angle?

In general, I'm not a fan of scenes being repeated from another POV. The exception might be if the new POV adds a startling new angle that actually changes the way I view the story.

Also, if this is going to be the beginning of a new book, you need to make it clear that the story has stepped back in time.

Hbooks · Sep 4, 2017

For me, it depends how much new information is shared. The times I've loved this in books were scenes that completely turned on its head everything we previously thought we knew about the plot. Less effective was basically line by line repeat of dialogue with the inner workings of a different character's head.

rwm4768 · Sep 4, 2017

I think it might work as a prologue. That way, you can show that it's going back a bit in time. The big thing is that you make it interesting. Don't just repeat the scene. Give us a completely new perspective on it (which I'm sure you're doing).

Ambrosia · Sep 4, 2017

BethS said:
In general, I'm not a fan of scenes being repeated from another POV. The exception might be if the new POV adds a startling new angle that actually changes the way I view the story.

Beth, what do you mean by changes the way you view the story?

BethS said:
Also, if this is going to be the beginning of a new book, you need to make it clear that the story has stepped back in time.

Even if the step back is just an hour or two prior?

Ryan, I'm not fond of prologues. So, I'm not likely to write one in this instance. This would be in chapter one, as it would be vital to the novel. For those readers who skip prologues, I wouldn't want this information lost to them. The scene would contain different information that happened "off stage" during the last book and would then be dove-tailed into the final actions leading characters from the first book to their new location. I believe I can weave it alright, and hopefully answer a few questions along the way for the reader by telling this scene from the antagonist's point of view.

I suppose I have nothing to lose except time by trying it and seeing what happens.

BethS · Sep 4, 2017

Ambrosia said:
Beth, what do you mean by changes the way you view the story?

Turns everything I thought I knew, or at least one or two things I thought I knew, completely on their head. Or opens up some new and really intriguing vista that was hidden before.

Even if the step back is just an hour or two prior?

Since a reader starting Book Two of a series is going to be expecting the story to carry forward from where it last left off rather than backtrack, yes. IMO.

JetFueledCar · Sep 9, 2017

I actually think this could work really well for a simple reason: it's a new book. Sure, you'll have people who go back and read the first book immediately before starting book two--but many people will grab the new book off the express shelf and trust you to catch them up on what they forgot in the year-plus wait between books. From the sound of it, you're planning to introduce new information and possibly signal thematic and character changes from book one by doing this, while catching them up on what they might have forgotten. As a reader, I would enjoy that.

The catch is, I might enjoy it less--perhaps a lot less--if I were starting the series when you released book three, and was reading one and two back to back. But it's a balancing act in series, IMO, to make it so people don't have to reread several hundred to several thousand pages to remember what happened, while still not overwhelming people who just finished the most recent installment an hour ago.

Disclaimer: this is all my opinion, and is skewed because I *hate* rereading for the purpose of catching up before a new installment. I will reread books because I liked them that much the first time, and for no other reason. So I rely on the authors I read to keep me caught up without making me do that.

MythMonger · Sep 10, 2017

How dependent is the plot line in the second book on the first one?

If the first plot line has completely ended, and you're starting a fresh story in the second book, then I wouldn't see any reason to rehash the ending of the first book. Just plow ahead into the second story.

If the plot line in the second book is heavily dependent on the ending of the first book, then I agree with BethS about the opening needing to change the reader's minds about what was presented in the first book. In general I don't like rereading the same scene twice, but sometimes it works.

Also, have you considered that you might be ruining the ending of the first book if someone decides to browse/read the second book first? I'm not one for reading books out of sequence, but in the past few years I've done exactly that: picked up the second book in a series and read that before reading the first. If I had been thrilled with the second books, I would've gone back to the first and maybe delved into the series. Admittedly, I wasn't reading them for normal reader reasons as I was hoping to get some technical writer help on specific issues that these books seemed to address.

Ambrosia · Sep 10, 2017

JetFueledCar said:
I actually think this could work really well for a simple reason: it's a new book. Sure, you'll have people who go back and read the first book immediately before starting book two--but many people will grab the new book off the express shelf and trust you to catch them up on what they forgot in the year-plus wait between books. From the sound of it, you're planning to introduce new information and possibly signal thematic and character changes from book one by doing this, while catching them up on what they might have forgotten. As a reader, I would enjoy that.

The catch is, I might enjoy it less--perhaps a lot less--if I were starting the series when you released book three, and was reading one and two back to back. But it's a balancing act in series, IMO, to make it so people don't have to reread several hundred to several thousand pages to remember what happened, while still not overwhelming people who just finished the most recent installment an hour ago.

Disclaimer: this is all my opinion, and is skewed because I *hate* rereading for the purpose of catching up before a new installment. I will reread books because I liked them that much the first time, and for no other reason. So I rely on the authors I read to keep me caught up without making me do that.

Thank you for your opinion.

I wouldn't really be catching readers up. I would be continuing the scene from this character's perspective. (Though you have given me thoughts on whether I should include a prologue or not.)

He is the antagonist. And the second book is much darker than the first book. His viewpoint will help further develop that tone in book two. I don't have to start the second book at the point I was thinking about starting it, which is early than the ending of the final scene for one of the protagonists. I just think it would help readers to "get" how bad the bad guy really is. You know?

And, fwiw, there is nothing easy for me in writing from the pov of this character. It feels icky to be inside his head.

MythMonger said:
How dependent is the plot line in the second book on the first one?

If the first plot line has completely ended, and you're starting a fresh story in the second book, then I wouldn't see any reason to rehash the ending of the first book. Just plow ahead into the second story.

This character, and the story line, is crucial to both book two and book three. Book one could be a stand alone. If someone read it and stopped, they would be fine (I think) with the ending. I hope the reader, knowing a second book is in the offing, would want to read the second book to continue with the story and find out what happens to the characters in the story.

MythMonger said:
If the plot line in the second book is heavily dependent on the ending of the first book, then I agree with BethS about the opening needing to change the reader's minds about what was presented in the first book. In general I don't like rereading the same scene twice, but sometimes it works.

Except, it isn't quite the same scene. What is happening with the protagonists and what is happening with the antagonist is a bit different. And there is heavy protective magic involved that the readers of the first book may very well wonder how the heck the antagonist overcame it. I want to address that question, because as a reader it actually frustrates me when things don't make sense. And I could see me reading the scene in the first book and saying, "ok but what about that? He wouldn't be able to get in!" As a reader I would be very pleased if in the first chapter of the following book, that particular question was answered. That is why I am considering starting earlier. I could, however, address that question picking up with the antagonist after the protagonists scene.

Still pondering it, tbh.

MythMonger said:
Also, have you considered that you might be ruining the ending of the first book if someone decides to browse/read the second book first?

No, and I won't. I have read second books first due to availability. And have never blamed the author for "spoiling" scenes from the first book if I went back and read the first one. Authors who put in prologues that give a generalized playback of what happened in the first book could be said to be spoiling the first book for readers who choose to start the second book first. Should they not write the prologue? Of course they should, if they choose to do so. I'm not responsible for people who read ahead. Some people read the end first to see what happens and then read the book. Not responsible for them either. :tongue

nahath · Sep 13, 2017

I can second a lot of the comments above about how it can be really cool if it adds major new perspectives. The catch, though, is that adding major new perspectives by repeating events is often something that's awesome at the end but a little bit of a chore to read.

To me, the solution is to present a conflict and tension that the reader does not know the ending of. To give a random example, if you're repeating the scene where the demon armies attack the city, you can't create tension by threatening the city or any of the individual characters who the reader knows the fate of. Give them something to be worried about that they didn't know needed any concern when they were reading the first book.

wirehead · Sep 13, 2017

Science Fiction not fantasy, but if you look at the two books in the Wayfarrers series by Becky Chambers, she does pretty much exactly as you describe and I really enjoyed it as a reader, especially compared to the more standard way that one does an epic fantasy series of sixteen books.

Ambrosia · Sep 13, 2017

nahath and wirehead, thank you both.

wirehead, I will check her books out. I like space operas.

MythMonger · Sep 14, 2017

Ambrosia said:
there is heavy protective magic involved that the readers of the first book may very well wonder how the heck the antagonist overcame it. I want to address that question, because as a reader it actually frustrates me when things don't make sense. And I could see me reading the scene in the first book and saying, "ok but what about that? He wouldn't be able to get in!" As a reader I would be very pleased if in the first chapter of the following book, that particular question was answered.

This quote gives me the most concern. I don't know if you're dealing with a sequel to an already published book, but you should answer these types of questions in the first book, not the second, IMO. It might be very frustrating for the reader, otherwise.

FWIW, I'm not sure answering these questions in the second book makes up for the lack of answers in the first book. I also don't think it should color how you approach the second book. In other words, don't make the second book worse to try and correct the problems of the first book.

Hope that didn't sound too harsh. You know your work best.

Ambrosia · Sep 14, 2017

Thanks for the thoughts, MythMonger. I'm not sure why would would assume that what I am thinking of doing in the first chapter of the second book would make the book bad. I would never make the second book "worse" by trying to answer something in the first. It's not a problem from the first book, per say. More an open question.

I did not dive into the pov of the antagonists in the first book. Doing so in the second will answer some of the questions that only the antagonist would know the answers to.

frimble3 · Sep 16, 2017

Don't see why it wouldn't work, if the antagonist from the first book are interesting in themselves, and not just stock villains. I don't know if (frex) I'd want to read a whole GoT book from the perspective of the Boltons. But the Freys, maybe.

Ambrosia · Sep 17, 2017

I can guess the reference, but I've never seen GoT. :greenie

Thank you, Frimble. I appreciate your thoughts.

frimble3 · Sep 17, 2017

Ambrosia said:
I can guess the reference, but I've never seen GoT.

Thank you, Frimble. I appreciate your thoughts.

Sorry, a brief, generalized explanation: the Boltons are violent, sadistic thugs - I have no interest in seeing the inside of their heads. While Old Walder Frey instigated the Red Wedding (murder of groom and bridal party, the MC Stark family) he had reasons, which made sense in an 'I will not be insulted' kind of way.

JoB42 · Sep 17, 2017

This is a really hard question. Obviously, it can work to do this, but the question is how to make it work. Because it can also be a bit of a turn-off if the scene isn't done well.

Hopefully, it's 1) short, and 2) provides a unique perspective on the scene that propels the plot of the second novel. But even that's tricky. As a reader, I don't like feeling cheated. What I mean is that whatever the new perspective shows of the scene has to stand without ruining the first novel. If some new information is revealed, then does that information contradict what happened in the first novel? More importantly, how does it play with the first novel's resolution?

I'm not sure I'm getting across what I mean to say. The only example I can think of at the moment is the scene in Misery where Annie Wilkes is telling Paul Sheldon not to cheat the reader. She references an old cliffhanger film. It ended with a character in a car going over a cliff. The next week, it picked up where it left off. Only now, the MC got out of the car just before it went over the cliff. Annie Wilkes didn't like this because it cheated the audience. He didn't get out of the cockadoodie car.

That's a simple example. Feeling cheated can be caused by something a lot more subtle, imo. Does the new POV character notice something in this scene that the old POV character should have noticed? A facial tic, a reaction, a bit of nuance, maybe a discarded necklace in the shadowy corner. Personally, I think it's best to write both scenes at the same time. That way the POV scenes can play off one another. In other words, the first scene can hint at a bit of recognition of what's happening in the second scene, maybe even hanging a lantern on something that might prove to be important.

Anyway, good luck with this. I'm probably overthinking it. It's all storytelling. If the storytelling voice is good and the characters are interesting and the setting is defined, I think you'll be fine.

Ambrosia · Sep 17, 2017

frimble3 said:
Sorry, a brief, generalized explanation: the Boltons are violent, sadistic thugs - I have no interest in seeing the inside of their heads. While Old Walder Frey instigated the Red Wedding (murder of groom and bridal party, the MC Stark family) he had reasons, which made sense in an 'I will not be insulted' kind of way.

Thank you for the additional info. I'm sure the antagonist's reasons will make sense, even though those reasons lead him to evil actions.

JoB42 said:
This is a really hard question. Obviously, it can work to do this, but the question is how to make it work. Because it can also be a bit of a turn-off if the scene isn't done well.

I think that's true of any scene in a book.

JoB42 said:
Hopefully, it's 1) short, and 2) provides a unique perspective on the scene that propels the plot of the second novel. But even that's tricky. As a reader, I don't like feeling cheated. What I mean is that whatever the new perspective shows of the scene has to stand without ruining the first novel. If some new information is revealed, then does that information contradict what happened in the first novel? More importantly, how does it play with the first novel's resolution?

The length will be what the length will be. I won't know until I write it.

I am a stickler for continuity. So there will be continuity from book to book. And, it won't actually play with the first novel's resolution. It will shine light on the dark side, so to speak. :tongue

What I will be doing is showing the antagonist's motivations and how his magic works and how that magic affects the protagonist's magic and leave a hint of how that will further affect the upcoming conflict between them.

JoB42 said:
I'm not sure I'm getting across what I mean to say. The only example I can think of at the moment is the scene in Misery

Misery! Great story! Loved it. :greenie

JoB42 said:
where Annie Wilkes is telling Paul Sheldon not to cheat the reader. She references an old cliffhanger film. It ended with a character in a car going over a cliff. The next week, it picked up where it left off. Only now, the MC got out of the car just before it went over the cliff. Annie Wilkes didn't like this because it cheated the audience. He didn't get out of the cockadoodie car.

You don't have a sledge hammer, do you? :scared:

JoB42 said:
That's a simple example. Feeling cheated can be caused by something a lot more subtle, imo.

I hope that my readers never feel cheated. I will endeavor to make sure that doesn't happen.

JoB42 said:
Anyway, good luck with this. I'm probably overthinking it. It's all storytelling. If the storytelling voice is good and the characters are interesting and the setting is defined, I think you'll be fine.

Thank you for your thoughtful comments. Greatly appreciated.

Layla Nahar · Sep 17, 2017

The Narnia books are all over the map chronologically.

Starting the second book in an epic fantasy

Grand Duchess

Just Another Lazy Perfectionist

Swooping is bad.

The One Who Tells The Story

This & That

cutsie-pie

practical experience, FTW

Grand Duchess

tiny hedgehog

Willing to Learn

Grand Duchess

Grand Duchess

Willing to Learn

Grand Duchess

Heckuva good sport

Grand Duchess

Heckuva good sport

Grand Duchess

Seashell Seller