# Three Book Minimum?



## David Ivanov (Jun 24, 2012)

So is it just me, or is every new break-out fantasy writer expected to launch with a trilogy or at least three titles in the same series?  It's getting very hard these days to be able to buy a single stand-alone novel in the fantasy genre -- kind of feels like I'm marrying every new author for the duration of three volumes at least.  I understand publishers figure they need multibook deals to turn a profit on new talent, but is it even feasible anymore to accomplish that with separate unrelated novels?


----------



## Christopher Wright (Jun 24, 2012)

Well, it's probably a lot harder than it used to be.

The thing is, readers tend to like series, assuming they like the first book, because readers like to revisit the characters they... er... like. This is awfully convenient for publishers because it makes it easier to sell subsequent books, assuming the first does well.


----------



## Rikilamaro (Jun 24, 2012)

There does seem to be an awful lot of new series out there. And perhaps it is really all about the money - series sell. 

I don't know how you work, but if I read a new author and I like their work, I'm going to pay attention when I see other books by them - whether or not they're in the same series. But, the problem is that I like to have series all lined up shiny on my shelves. Having unrelated books in a row (even by the same person) just doesn't flow well with my decor. So I may wait to get the book from the library instead of adding it to my personal stockpile. Maybe I'm weird like that?


----------



## TWErvin2 (Jun 25, 2012)

I guess I would be guilty of the 'three book series minimum' as I am now working on the third novel in the First Civilization's Legacy series.

However, I wrote the first novel (Flank Hawk) as a stand alone novel. It had a complete story arc and could have ended there. But there was room for the story of the main character to continue. My publisher asked if I had a second novel planned. I did and wrote it (Blood Sword). It took me a long time to figure out how to write because I wanted it not only to have its own story arc, but have it independent of the first novel. I wanted to write Blood Sword such that a reader would not have had to read the first novel (Flank Hawk) to enjoy the Blood Sword. However, I also wrote it so that it would solidly compliment Flank Hawk, for those who read it. I hope that makes sense.

I see writing a series as different than writing a three book trilogy. With a trilogy, although each novel in the trilogy may have an individual story arc, the novels really do not stand alone as they're not structured to. They were written with that intention.

To be honest, I have ideas for a total of five novels in my First Civilization's Legacy series, but after completing the third (working title: Soul Forge), I plan on branching out with another novel. It'll be written as Flank Hawk was, a standalone novel, but with the potential to be continued.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jun 25, 2012)

As a reader, I much prefer series.  I'm less likely to buy a stand alone book.


----------



## Steerpike (Jun 25, 2012)

I'm the opposite, if the series isn't done. I've got to the point where I am unlikely to buy a book from a new author if it is book one of a series and can't stand on its own.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Jun 25, 2012)

Dang, I hope steerpike will make an exception for me


----------



## Steerpike (Jun 25, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> Dang, I hope steerpike will make an exception for me



I'll make an exception for any MS member. I do make exceptions from time to time browsing in the store (Acacia being the last one). But I don't want to get into too many series that author's stretch out over a decade to get any kind of plot resolution


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jun 25, 2012)

The great Fantasy novel _The Neverending Story_ by Michael Ende (the original is in German) is only one book, and still the story is told in a very satisfactory way without the need to be a trilogy or a series =)

Maybe the concept of writing Fantasy series was started by Tolkien and his friend C.S. Lewis with _The Lord of the Rings_ and _The Chronicles of Narnia_, which is why many writers are following their example, so today most Fantasy is written in at least three books.

I want to expand my first Fantasy trilogy to transform it into a seven-book series, my second series has five and I am currently writing the last novel of my Joan of England trilogy.


----------



## Steerpike (Jun 25, 2012)

I thought Tolkien actually wrote "The Lord of the Rings" as a single-volume work, and the publisher split it into three.


----------



## Ireth (Jun 25, 2012)

That's correct, Steerpike. If I recall correctly, it was because of a paper shortage and the opportunity to make more money by splitting it up.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jun 26, 2012)

I did not know that Tolkien intended _The Lord of the Rings_ to be a single book, thanks for this piece of knowledge Steerpike and Ireth!! =)

Those three books put together would make a monster book, I think it was a wise decision to split and create a trilogy for whatever reason that they did it... I bet that some _A Song of Ice and Fire_ books are larger than the entire _Lord of the Rings_, but maybe in Tolkien's times it was unusual to publish such large books.

Was Narnia intended to be a seven-book series since the beginning??


----------



## David Ivanov (Jun 26, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> I'm the opposite, if the series isn't done. I've got to the point where I am unlikely to buy a book from a new author if it is book one of a series and can't stand on its own.



I've had some pleasant surprises with some newer authors writing series initial novels that are very strong independently of their follow-ons.  Some that come to mind are John Scalzi's "Old Man's War" (a sci-fi novel rather than fantasy) and Scott Lynch's "The Lies of Locke Lamora."  I ended up reading their second novels, which I enjoyed immensely, but didn't feel compelled to go beyond that unless the mood strikes me.  And in Lynch's case I'm definitely looking forward to his next offering.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Jun 26, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> I'll make an exception for any MS member. I do make exceptions from time to time browsing in the store (Acacia being the last one). But I don't want to get into too many series that author's stretch out over a decade to get any kind of plot resolution



I promise, my NIP is the first in what will be absolutely no longer than a three-book series. First one has taken me about a year to write (on the final revision pass now and waiting on cover art to be finished, then I'll be publishing it). Presumably #2 and #3 will take about the same amount of time (well, hopefully less, since I'm a little better at this than I was a year ago). I mean I know exactly where I want the story to go and I have no intention of letting it get out of hand. I have too many other ideas I want to write to let this one spin out of control.


----------



## Ireth (Jun 26, 2012)

I'm defying the 3-book minimum by having my first series be a duology rather than a trilogy. XD My vampire novel might become a trilogy, but no more than that.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jun 27, 2012)

My first Fantasy novel could very well stand as a single book, and when I started to write it that was my intention- However, I fell in love so deeply with my characters, my world and my Magic that I just could not resist the desire to write the second book, then the third... 

And now I want to expand it to seven!!

Maybe that's why Fantasy literature is more commonly found as trilogies or series, instead of a single book? =)


----------



## ThinkerX (Jun 27, 2012)

Most of my recent efforts seem to be turning into Novella's...a genre for which the market appears to be extinct.


----------



## MichaelSullivan (Jun 27, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> I'm the opposite, if the series isn't done. I've got to the point where I am unlikely to buy a book from a new author if it is book one of a series and can't stand on its own.



Many people are like this, and it's one of the reasons why I wrote all the books of my series before publishing the first one. I also was fortunate that Orbit released The Riyria Revelations in three back-to-back months. The result was all three books were "on the street" within 60 days of one another - something that is quite rare in fantasy these days.


----------



## MichaelSullivan (Jun 27, 2012)

Is this new?  I can think of very few "stand alone" fantasy novels. I think  "series" are pretty much a time honored tradition of the genre.


----------



## julidrevezzo (Oct 17, 2012)

I'm not sure ....In my reading experience almost everything I've ever read has been part of a series. The harder thing is finding ones that standalone. In fact, that only one that comes to mind is ...The Barbed Coil by J.V. Jones and that was....a while back.  My book stands alone.  I may be stubborn but I like to have a nice solid ending to my stories (there are certain authors who I used to read who didn't and decades on, I'm still waiting for those final books to come out *grumbles*), so I don't want to do that to my readers. But yes, I did turn it into a series at the behest of my editor and critique pals, and am almost done with the first draft of book two. But I promise, they stand alone. Really...


----------



## Kim (Oct 26, 2012)

As a reader, I don't really mind if a book is a stand alone or the first in a serie, although I might not buy a book that is from a series that contains more than three books, before I read something about it that made me really, really curious.

As a writer, my first novel is a stand alone. That is also the story that will be translated in English first. My second story is a trilogy. I didn't plan it that way, it just was what the story needed. At this point I think my new story will be a duology (which might end as a series of six books, as every story so far became three times longer then I thought... help...)
I like the idea of publishing a stand alone first, so people can get to know the kind of stories I write, without having to wait on a sequel to know how the story ends.


----------



## glutton (Mar 28, 2013)

My main series is going to be 8-9 books long plus at least one short story collection. I'm dead serious as most of these books are already written in draft form... the first one is published, second is set for official release on 4/3, third is near final draft, and fourth is halfway edited.

My other books so far are standalones though, but some of them may get a sequel.


----------



## glutton (Mar 28, 2013)

And reading wise I prefer books that stand alone even if they are part of a series... what happened to the edit function.


----------



## skip.knox (Mar 30, 2013)

True about LoTR. And the Gormenghast books date from about the same time (early 1950s).


----------



## wildjlady (Apr 18, 2013)

In my opinion, if you've got a very detailed and expansive world, then coming up with multiple stories should not cause a problem. If you only have a limited world, then you do have a problem. My particular situation is I have a expansive world, but most of my stories are short-story length and I have to work on them to fill them out to book length, or otherwise see if I can get them published as a collection.


----------



## Addison (Apr 21, 2013)

i think what a writer writes, and how many, depends equally on them (do they see it as a series? Or solo?) and the publisher. I believe that when a publisher signs a publishing contract for the presented book the author, in turn, signs a book contract that includes future books. Some contracts say two books, three, four, five....it's up to them.


----------

