• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Evolving vs Static Goal?

Shashiri

Acolyte
Is one better than the other? I know that most people will not understand what I mean by this since I’m more than likely not using the proper technical term, so I’ll give examples for clarity.

What I mean by Evolving Goal is a story where the goal changes throughout the story. The character consistently reaches/fails to reach their goals which leads to new ones being created. In this sense, the end goal of the character is not in mind from the beginning of the novel, and evolves as the story goes on. These stories For example (a very basic and awful one at that), MC is tasked with slaying a dragon, said dragon turns out to be trying to help people, MC realizes the people giving them the task are the “true” antagonists, after killing them they realize that the people he killed weren’t the ones pulling the strings and were being deceived themselves, MC redeems themselves with the help of the dragon by killing the people pulling the strings. An actual series example would be ASOIAF.

What I mean by Static Goal is a story where the MC has an end goal in sight by the beginning of the novel and they have to go through numerous hurdles to get there. For example, protagonist wants to kill antagonist that murdered their family, protagonist must acquire training to be able to fight, protagonist must retrieve a legendary sword to kill the antagonist, protagonist kills the antagonist. A series example would be the Six of Crows duology.

The reason why I ask this is I seen a YouTube video a while back that detailed how books with static goals are lazy/basic storytelling, and since then I’ve been trying to contour my outlines towards having static goals. What I realized the more novels I read, is that an equal amount of great fantasy novels have the “static goal” structure as do the “evolving goal” structure. Although I’m no literary professor or expert, what I take away from the novels I’ve read is that many stories with “evolving goal” structure are more heavily focused on plot (something to be expected considering a lot of the goal’s evolutions rely on plot twists) whereas many stories with “static goal” structure are more heavily focused on character progression. But that’s aside from the argument that there is no such thing as plot-focused and character-focused novels, which is a different argument entirely.

I’ve seen a lot of knowledgeable writers here, what are your takes on this? Is one better than the other? Is there an actual difference? Do you have a preference?
 

Shashiri

Acolyte
Do you have a link to the video in question?

I watched it roughly two years ago so I doubt I could find it. But I do remember it using an example along the lines of this, paraphrased of course.

“Say a protagonist’s goal is to defeat the antagonist, but to do so, he must first acquire an artifact that allows him to defeat the antagonist, he then must traverse a dangerous mountain to reach the antagonist, and before he can beat the antagonist just yet, he also has to get the armour required to beat the antagonist. This slows down the pacing of your story and is boring etc etc.”

I remember it was a video on how to properly pace novels so that they don’t read as boring, but I don’t recall who wrote the video. I think it might be Hellofutureme’s video on pacing, only due to him being the YouTube I get most of my writing content from, but I may also be mistaken. I’ll see later today if I can find the video.
 

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
I’ve seen a lot of knowledgeable writers here, what are your takes on this? Is one better than the other? Is there an actual difference? Do you have a preference?

There's definitely a real distinction between these two goals, but I wouldn't say that one is better. In particular a book has lots of characters who may all have multiple goals. There's plenty of room for a book to have a main plot goal while, for example, relationship goals keep changing. And there are other ways to surprise readers than with shifting goals.

Finally a lot of people hate stories where the dragon turns out to be a good guy. You're at risk of breaking the promise about what kind of story you're telling. I came here for a good dragon romp, and you cheated me out of that.

But then, I think a lot of people make this mistake. A dynamic goal, or any other kind of plot twist, doesn't have to be so blatant. Even the tiniest twist will do. I once wrote a fight scene between a knight and an evil wizard who was holding a town hostage. Just as the knight is about to lose, the wizard gets stabbed in the back by a peasant with a spear, and the other peasants beat him to death. Just having the peasant do it instead of the knight is enough of a twist to be interesting. Other things equal the big spin-around subversion twists are neither more creative nor more interesting. It's just a technique like any other. Readers love subtlety, too.
 
Last edited:

Chasejxyz

Inkling
Both are good, it just depends on the type of story and types of characters. For example, in a death game or man vs nature-type story, the goal is static, "get out of here and not die." In Heavy Rain there's the primary goal (save your son) and secondary goal (not die) but as the story goes on, there's also "mini goals" (don't get into a car accident, escape the police, survive the specific ordeal) that need to be passed to achieve your primary goal. And anything besides a short story is going to have "mini goals" which may or may not have to do with the primary goal, but the completion of the mini goal or scene should add SOMETHING to the story.

Characters tend to have internal vs external conflicts, or wants vs needs. The external goal is something that someone else is doing to keep your character from getting what they want, such as the evil dark lord is threatening to take over the kingdom, and our hero just wants to be a humble turnip farmer. These tend to be on the more static side but might become more clear as the story progresses (defeat the dark lord ==> get the mcguffin crystal to the king's army so they can beat the dark lord in the big final battle). An internal conflict is something that your character has to figure out, it's something that they NEED to be truly happy, and they're going to do this by going on this adventure instead of going to therapy lol. The need usually isn't explicitly stated from the get-go like the want but it's revealed to the reader as they get to know your character more.

Example: your character gets kidnapped by some psycho and is put into a death game; their want is extremely clear, which is to get out of here alive. The other characters in this situation also want that, too, but due to the rules of the game, not everyone can, so there's your external conflict. But over the course of the story, your character learns that they need to trust and see the good in others. They were a nihilist and had only acted in their own self-interests pre-this story because [insert emotional wounding incident here] and they can't keep going on that way, both for their own mental health and also to not die in this trap. So maybe their need/internal goal grows to the point where they're happy to die so the other people escape, so the external goal is no longer the primary goal, and they're okay with that since they fulfilled their internal goal. Or maybe someone betrays them because the mastermind was among them the whole time and the theme of the work is "actually people are terrible and you're an idiot for trusting anyone in the first place." Or maybe no one has to die because the theme of the work is "humans are all inherently good."
 

skip.knox

toujours gai, archie
Moderator
>...seen a YouTube video a while back that detailed how books with static goals are lazy/basic storytelling, and since then I’ve been trying to contour my outlines towards having static goals.

There are other YouTube videos that will detail how books with static goals are great. If you had seen one of those first, would you have been simliarly persuaded?

I'm guessing a bit here, but bear with me. You see a video and it sounds right to you. Right enough that you actively try to change how you approach writing. I think a person doesn't do that unless they already have doubts about their writing. In this case, the core point isn't about goals, it's about pacing. So, maybe you feel your WIP is dragging.

That's fine. We've all felt that about one (or every!) of our stories. But to fix the problem, it's best to identify it clearly. In this case, I'm suggesting the OP take a step back and try to assess what problem they're trying to solve.

Also, very generally, statements about writing that involve a choice between two options are generally wrong. Or, rather, the answer tends to be the same for all of them; namely, that both options are right sometimes and wrong sometimes, and that there are very likely third and fourth options hiding in the bushes.
 
I think there are actually very few truely static goal novels out there. A novel is too long to never change the goal even just a little bit. Exceptions probably are episodic stories, where the overarching goal always is "do X", but each episode is its own mini adventure.

Just to reflect on two stories which might classify as more static: Lord of the Rings and Star Wars episode 4 (a New Hope). In LotR, the goal is pretty static if you look from a distance. From start to finish it's "defeat Sauron and save Middle Earth". However, if you look at the actual story then you will see an aweful lot of mini twists in there. Goal 1: escape from the Shire in one piece. Goal 2: get the ring to Rivendell. Goal 3: reach Mordor, Goal 4: find an alternative route into Gondor.

Same with Star Wars: The overarching goal is always: defeat the empire. However, the original goal for Luke is "Get the plans to the rebels". It then changes in a twist to "Blow up deathstar".

As such I don't think there's just static and dynamic stories. There's a continuum with stories all over the place.

As for personal preference, I like knowing at least roughly what the plot is. If there isn't at least some static plot then I tend to get lost in the story and it just becomes a string of random chapters which show me something but I have no idea how it all ties together. It's an issue I had with the last two Song of Ice and Fire books. I couldn't find the actual plot of the novels. And while the different scenes themselves were interesting and well written I couldn't tell you what those books were actually about.
 

Shashiri

Acolyte
There's definitely a real distinction between these two goals, but I wouldn't say that one is better. In particular a book has lots of characters who may all have multiple goals. There's plenty of room for a book to have a main plot goal while, for example, relationship goals keep changing. And there are other ways to surprise readers than with shifting goals.

Finally a lot of people hate stories where the dragon turns out to be a good guy. You're at risk of breaking the promise about what kind of story you're telling. I came here for a good dragon romp, and you cheated me out of that.

But then, I think a lot of people make this mistake. A dynamic goal, or any other kind of plot twist, doesn't have to be so blatant. Even the tiniest twist will do. I once wrote a fight scene between a knight and an evil wizard who was holding a town hostage. Just as the knight is about to lose, the wizard gets stabbed in the back by a peasant with a spear, and the other peasants beat him to death. Just having the peasant do it instead of the knight is enough of a twist to be interesting. Other things equal the big spin-around subversion twists are neither more creative nor more interesting. It's just a technique like any other. Readers love subtlety, too.
I can agree with all of you’re saying. I personally don’t have a preference which is why I asked y’all to see what people generally like.

And yeah, subtle twists are something I’d categorize as largely underused as unappreciated. Scene sounds sick by the way.
 

Penpilot

Staff
Article Team
I agree with a lot of what's been said here, and I'll add. A lot of times, it's not about which is right or wrong, better or worse. It's about the right tool for the job. You have to understand what type of story you're telling and use the tools that will allow you to create the best story of that type. Also remember, there are different levels to this. There are plots and subplots, each with their own goals. One plot/subplot may have a static goal. Another plot/subplot may have a dynamic goal.

If you look at Star Wars, Luke goes from one goal to another leading him from Tatooine, to Alderaan, to the Deathstar, and finally to the rebel base. Each is a step along the main plot. BUT, Luke also as a very personal subplot. He's looking for familial connection, specially to his father, and he's chasing that goal via wanting to be a pilot, and later on, a Jedi like his father. That subplot goal never changes through three movies.
 

Rob Arnold

Dreamer
Is one better than the other? I know that most people will not understand what I mean by this since I’m more than likely not using the proper technical term, so I’ll give examples for clarity.

What I mean by Evolving Goal is a story where the goal changes throughout the story. The character consistently reaches/fails to reach their goals which leads to new ones being created. In this sense, the end goal of the character is not in mind from the beginning of the novel, and evolves as the story goes on. These stories For example (a very basic and awful one at that), MC is tasked with slaying a dragon, said dragon turns out to be trying to help people, MC realizes the people giving them the task are the “true” antagonists, after killing them they realize that the people he killed weren’t the ones pulling the strings and were being deceived themselves, MC redeems themselves with the help of the dragon by killing the people pulling the strings. An actual series example would be ASOIAF.

What I mean by Static Goal is a story where the MC has an end goal in sight by the beginning of the novel and they have to go through numerous hurdles to get there. For example, protagonist wants to kill antagonist that murdered their family, protagonist must acquire training to be able to fight, protagonist must retrieve a legendary sword to kill the antagonist, protagonist kills the antagonist. A series example would be the Six of Crows duology.

The reason why I ask this is I seen a YouTube video a while back that detailed how books with static goals are lazy/basic storytelling, and since then I’ve been trying to contour my outlines towards having static goals. What I realized the more novels I read, is that an equal amount of great fantasy novels have the “static goal” structure as do the “evolving goal” structure. Although I’m no literary professor or expert, what I take away from the novels I’ve read is that many stories with “evolving goal” structure are more heavily focused on plot (something to be expected considering a lot of the goal’s evolutions rely on plot twists) whereas many stories with “static goal” structure are more heavily focused on character progression. But that’s aside from the argument that there is no such thing as plot-focused and character-focused novels, which is a different argument entirely.

I’ve seen a lot of knowledgeable writers here, what are your takes on this? Is one better than the other? Is there an actual difference? Do you have a preference?
Is one better than the other? I know that most people will not understand what I mean by this since I’m more than likely not using the proper technical term, so I’ll give examples for clarity.

What I mean by Evolving Goal is a story where the goal changes throughout the story. The character consistently reaches/fails to reach their goals which leads to new ones being created. In this sense, the end goal of the character is not in mind from the beginning of the novel, and evolves as the story goes on. These stories For example (a very basic and awful one at that), MC is tasked with slaying a dragon, said dragon turns out to be trying to help people, MC realizes the people giving them the task are the “true” antagonists, after killing them they realize that the people he killed weren’t the ones pulling the strings and were being deceived themselves, MC redeems themselves with the help of the dragon by killing the people pulling the strings. An actual series example would be ASOIAF.

What I mean by Static Goal is a story where the MC has an end goal in sight by the beginning of the novel and they have to go through numerous hurdles to get there. For example, protagonist wants to kill antagonist that murdered their family, protagonist must acquire training to be able to fight, protagonist must retrieve a legendary sword to kill the antagonist, protagonist kills the antagonist. A series example would be the Six of Crows duology.

The reason why I ask this is I seen a YouTube video a while back that detailed how books with static goals are lazy/basic storytelling, and since then I’ve been trying to contour my outlines towards having static goals. What I realized the more novels I read, is that an equal amount of great fantasy novels have the “static goal” structure as do the “evolving goal” structure. Although I’m no literary professor or expert, what I take away from the novels I’ve read is that many stories with “evolving goal” structure are more heavily focused on plot (something to be expected considering a lot of the goal’s evolutions rely on plot twists) whereas many stories with “static goal” structure are more heavily focused on character progression. But that’s aside from the argument that there is no such thing as plot-focused and character-focused novels, which is a different argument entirely.

I’ve seen a lot of knowledgeable writers here, what are your takes on this? Is one better than the other? Is there an actual difference? Do you have a preference?

No preference. Like so many other things it's not what is done, but how well it is done. The most popular fantasy novel of all time, Lord of the Rings has a very static goal. Destroy the ring.

What isn't static is all the forces around the goal. I think when a goal is static, it is alright if that goal is so massive or perhaps even virtually impossible (or seen that way)

I view evolving goals as interesting. Like unreliable narrators they are a relatively new and fascinating development in story telling. They are both similar, in that they show the reader something that in a more "static" world would be taken at face value, but then hey presto! Things have changed, the goal as moved.

Again like newer developments in stories they are great when they work. But it must always be acceptable to the reader. If the goal changes, but to a ridiculous extent, then you lose me.

For example say the dragon needs to be slayed, but then we suddenly find it is a nice dragon. Unless this is a children's book...I m going to need some good reasons to suddenly accept that and then the new evolved goal will also have to make sense.
 

Helen

Inkling
Is one better than the other? I know that most people will not understand what I mean by this since I’m more than likely not using the proper technical term, so I’ll give examples for clarity.

What I mean by Evolving Goal is a story where the goal changes throughout the story. The character consistently reaches/fails to reach their goals which leads to new ones being created. In this sense, the end goal of the character is not in mind from the beginning of the novel, and evolves as the story goes on. These stories For example (a very basic and awful one at that), MC is tasked with slaying a dragon, said dragon turns out to be trying to help people, MC realizes the people giving them the task are the “true” antagonists, after killing them they realize that the people he killed weren’t the ones pulling the strings and were being deceived themselves, MC redeems themselves with the help of the dragon by killing the people pulling the strings. An actual series example would be ASOIAF.

What I mean by Static Goal is a story where the MC has an end goal in sight by the beginning of the novel and they have to go through numerous hurdles to get there. For example, protagonist wants to kill antagonist that murdered their family, protagonist must acquire training to be able to fight, protagonist must retrieve a legendary sword to kill the antagonist, protagonist kills the antagonist. A series example would be the Six of Crows duology.

The reason why I ask this is I seen a YouTube video a while back that detailed how books with static goals are lazy/basic storytelling, and since then I’ve been trying to contour my outlines towards having static goals. What I realized the more novels I read, is that an equal amount of great fantasy novels have the “static goal” structure as do the “evolving goal” structure. Although I’m no literary professor or expert, what I take away from the novels I’ve read is that many stories with “evolving goal” structure are more heavily focused on plot (something to be expected considering a lot of the goal’s evolutions rely on plot twists) whereas many stories with “static goal” structure are more heavily focused on character progression. But that’s aside from the argument that there is no such thing as plot-focused and character-focused novels, which is a different argument entirely.

I’ve seen a lot of knowledgeable writers here, what are your takes on this? Is one better than the other? Is there an actual difference? Do you have a preference?

I would ignore the whole "static goals are lazy/basic storytelling" thing. It's nonsense.

You may have an end point, for example, how you want the character to change and that may link with a parallel goal or multple tasks.
 

zethren117

New Member
Depending on the story you are writing, and its intended length and content, personally I feel like it's best to have an overarching static goal with smaller evolving goals to support it. Those smaller evolving goals should, in some way, push the character(s) towards the main static goal most of the time. But how interesting does it get when those smaller goals come into conflict with the character's main, overarching goal? Very interesting.
 

pmmg

Myth Weaver
I would like to have something super pointy and thoughtful to put here, but I am just not finding the thing worth dividing into two subsets here. I think these aspects are symbiotic, in that stories will probably have much of both as they progress. I suppose I can only say my experience has been that many of the things the characters do are more on the fluid side of story development, but the larger story still has what would be considered a static goal--beat the bad guy, or cause the change. Even if the story did not have the static goal at the start, I think it would appear as the story progressed. Sooner or later something has to happen to causes the story to end. Unless its marvel...then every story is just a pitch to have the next one.
 
I tend to write in 4 or 5 Acts, but most of my work follows (kinda) the three act structure.

The reader knows early what the main goal is but as the scope of the story opens up they get a completely fresh insight into the true/full nature of the goal and/or the forces standing in the way.

As Homer Simpson says in an episode I can't remember... "If this story were a three Act structure, this would be the end of Act 2..."
 
Actually, if you want to see a perfect example of the Three Act structure in a Simpsons episode... Lemon of Troy.

Pretty funny also.
 
Top