How many characters is too many?

[ThinkerX]

Have you read A Song of Ice and Fire? There are 24 point of view characters in the series. 150 * 24 = 3,600.

GRRM had so many characters going in so many plot directions that he wrote himself into a dead end - a disadvantage of having a huge cast and no real outline (he killed characters he needed to properly continue the books)

 

[Devor]

GRRM had so many characters going in so many plot directions that he wrote himself into a dead end - a disadvantage of having a huge cast and no real outline (he killed characters he needed to properly continue the books)

I don't think he killed characters he needed. But by book five, you would think the story would narrow and gain focus with all the characters he's killed, but new bit players keep springing up their schemes out of the woodworks, and most of them are nowhere near as good as the ones he's killed.

 

[Finchbearer]

I feel like GRRM has simultaneously done both something pioneering and yet nothing new, if you look at the old Norse Saga’s there are many ‘characters’ who simply either fall into obscurity or die. It’s maybe a more modern storytelling convention we as readers want a nicely wrapped up story with a few main characters and a satisfying ending.

 

[skip.knox]

It's not a number. When the reader doesn't remember your characters, you didn't have too many, you had too few -- too few actual characters and too many underdeveloped.

I don't know this holds up well over time, but I like to think that if I made a list of all the characters in one of my books I could, once the book was finished, write at least something accurate about each of them. If I can't remember them, then maybe they didn't need to be in there.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

It's not a number. When the reader doesn't remember your characters, you didn't have too many, you had too few -- too few actual characters and too many underdeveloped.

I don't know this holds up well over time, but I like to think that if I made a list of all the characters in one of my books I could, once the book was finished, write at least something accurate about each of them. If I can't remember them, then maybe they didn't need to be in there.

This is an excellent point and, in my opinion, really the best measure of how much is too much/not enough? I've got over 500 people in my head. Names, faces, and general file location in the monstrosity we call a series bible. I can't remember my pets' names, but the invisible friends I've got down.

 

[Insolent Lad]

Many characters are just part of the landscape (or 'furniture,' as Evelyn Waugh called them). They don't need to be distinctive, they don't even need to be remembered, really, and a name, although perhaps unnecessary, makes them a bit more real for the moment they appear.

 

[Prince of Spires]

Have you read A Song of Ice and Fire? There are 24 point of view characters in the series. 150 * 24 = 3,600.

But that's not what the article says. That says there are 150 characters through which the story is told, and which need to be kept track of. Not 3600. So there are the 24 main POV characters, and in each chapter a handful of secondary characters that are developed, bringing the grand total to about 150 characters. All the others who get a name are just walk-on characters.

These 3.000 other people with names are people like Lyanna Stark or Jeyne Westerling. They get a mention. They might even appear on screen for a second or two and say a line. But they are not characters. They are talking bits of furniture. There to set the scene and point the story in the right direction.

 

[Devor]

But that's not what the article says. That says there are 150 characters through which the story is told, and which need to be kept track of. Not 3600. So there are the 24 main POV characters, and in each chapter a handful of secondary characters that are developed, bringing the grand total to about 150 characters. All the others who get a name are just walk-on characters.

This is what you quoted:

"Even the most predominant characters -- those who tell the story -- average out to have only 150 others to keep track of."

That is to say, each main character has to think about 150 other characters. And there are 24 main characters. Sure, there's overlap, but that's still a lot of characters.

These 3.000 other people with names are people like Lyanna Stark or Jeyne Westerling. They get a mention. They might even appear on screen for a second or two and say a line. But they are not characters. They are talking bits of furniture. There to set the scene and point the story in the right direction.

Lyanna's presence was a driving force in the backstory of Robert's rebellion and the backstory of several of the POV characters. She is NOT a "furniture" character, as you put it. Fans talk about her more than they talk about the main characters in most bestsellers.

Jeyne Westerling is King Rob Stark's fiance. We don't see a lot of her on the page because Rob, surprisingly, isn't a POV character, his mother is. But Rob was supposed to marry one of Lord Frey's daughters, so just Jeyne's existence is a big deal that drives key moments in the story.

To name these two characters of all the ones you could come up with really makes it feel like you haven't read the books. Are you basing your opinion on a scattering of second hand sources? You really shouldn't go this far on a story you haven't read. The number of characters who are active in the plot of ASOIAF is obscenely large, and if you've read it you'd understand. There's 2,000 named characters, and sure, that's for parts large and small. But these aren't deep history characters like with Tolkein. These are overwhelmingly people who directly affect the 24 POV characters.

 

[Prince of Spires]

Please don't make assumptions on what I have and haven't read based on the fact that I disagree with you.

I picked both precisely because they are furniture characters. The fact that they impact the story doesn't make them a fleshed out character in the slightest. I'm sure the silmarils get talked about more than main characters in most bestsellers as well, and they are also not characters (though they actually get more screen time than Lyanna, and actually display some personality in that time). A lot of things that aren't characters impact stories. Lyanna is a person, I'm not denying that. However, she's never seen on screen, never fleshed out as a character, never talks. She could just as easily have been a different event, or a ring, or any of the other million of possible events that cause someone to do something. She's a piece of window dressing, not a fleshed out character that acts in the story.

Jeyne Westerling is also just a piece of furniture that gets moved about and causes the plot to happen, who just happens to be a person. She's an important piece of furniture for sure. She kicks off a whole set of events and story line. But she's not a character in the sense of a person who sees development and wo the reader actually gets to know much about because of what we see happening in the book. We know the consequences of her existence, but that's not the same as knowing about her as a fleshed out character.

Yes, I could have also picked from a thousand named guards, people walking past, random persons getting a line or two here and there, as an example. But these two clearly show the difference between a person and a character in a story.

 

[tenebrae]

Well, War and Peace has like 600 characters, and that's a single book. Then of course the previously mentioned: ASOFAI.
Wheel of Time has a ton, as well as The First Law books and Kingkiller have high character counts.
I'm writing somewhat of a "family drama", so my book also has a lot of characters (4 main families plus everyone else). I'd estimate I'm around 60-70 characters, atm - so I tend to ask myself this question a lot as well, lol.

 

[Devor]

I picked both precisely because they are furniture characters. The fact that they impact the story doesn't make them a fleshed out character in the slightest.

No, no, we're not moving the goalposts.

A character is someone with agency in the story. It's someone who has at least the basics of their personality developed.

Both Lyanna and Jeyne made choices that affect the plot. These choices cannot simply be replaced by an object. They made choices that drive key events. That element of choice means they cannot just be swapped out for a ring or furniture or whatever.

And while Lyanna does not appear on the page, she is remembered and talked about often by a wide number of characters, telling us quite a bit about the "basics of her personality." Neither does Jeyne need a lot of page time for us to know the "basics of her personality" to be as a sweet and caring person, which is striking in Westeros.

I, uhh, I hesitate to mention this . . . but I can't help but notice that both of these characters are women who have traditionally feminine roles. It's easy for some guys to kind of shrug off the importance of romance, but there's nothing more human, and the urge to shrug it off is something to be overcome when interacting with those who do find it important.

Please don't make assumptions on what I have and haven't read based on the fact that I disagree with you.

I did ask, though. How far did you get in them?

 

[Ban]

My personal (soft) rule is that I only name characters if they are related to more established characters, thus building up the idea of them being more than just what is represented on the page, or if that character has more than three separate lines of dialogue. Otherwise they can remain nameless waiters, carriage drivers, or what not.

 

[Prince of Spires]

I did ask, though. How far did you get in them?

In case my comment wasn't clear enough, I read all of them, cover to cover.

Both this comment, and:

I, uhh, I hesitate to mention this . . . but I can't help but notice that both of these characters are women who have traditionally feminine roles.

this one I feel are ad-hominem attacks on me as a person. Where you make random assumptions about me. And then use that to attack me and argue against me instead of simply addressing the points being made. Besides being a jerk move it also makes me feel like you either think you're losing the argument and think this is the only way you have left to win, or you're a big ASOIAF fan and you feel like I'm insulting your beloved franchise. Neither of those is really helpful in the discussion here.

To adress your actual points. Lyanna is discussed in the same way a city that is never visited in a book is discussed. It's all tell, and no show. That doesn't make her a fleshed out character. That makes her a piece of history, a set of notes in the author's notebook. And you could replace her with any other static motivation Robert had for starting his rebellion, and the story wouldn't change at all.

Jeyne is again all tell, and no show. Replacing her with a different insult to Frey would have still resulted in the Red Wedding. Changing her personality completely would have also done exactly the same. She's again, just a thing moved around, not a full character.

As for them being all women, I could have just as easily named all the Targarean kings that get mentioned. They're no more characters in this story than the two women are. It has nothing to do with any traditional roles they are forced into, just with the role they play in this story.

Or, if you want, I'll give you a dwarf from my personal favorite tale, which shows that someone can be a character in one story and just a person in the next. Take Gloin in Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit (Gimli's father). In the hobbit, he's a complete character, with plenty of screentime and direct influence on the tale. Removing him or changing him directly impacts what happens on the page.

He also appears in the Lord of the Rings. However, there he is by no means a complete character. He's only in The council of Elrond chapter, and though he does get to speak a lot, all he does there is exposition dump on the reader. He could have been any other dwarf (or person) or had any other personality, and the story would have played out exactly the same.

In all these cases, the writers creates the illusion of depth, not actual depth itself, by giving the character a name and describing something basic about them.

 

[pmmg]

If book 3 is any indicator, getting a name dramatically increases your chances of not making it in one of mine. Just kind if happens that way.

 

[Devor]

In case my comment wasn't clear enough, I read all of them, cover to cover.

Both this comment, and:

this one I feel are ad-hominem attacks on me as a person. Where you make random assumptions about me. And then use that to attack me and argue against me instead of simply addressing the points being made. Besides being a jerk move it also makes me feel like you either think you're losing the argument and think this is the only way you have left to win, or you're a big ASOIAF fan and you feel like I'm insulting your beloved franchise. Neither of those is really helpful in the discussion here.

It wasn't my intention to attack you. I asked very early in the discussion if you'd read them. When you didn't answer, and chose the characters you did, I brought it up again. Posting a picture is not an answer. But okay, now that you've answered, I accept that. I'm always happy taking people at their word.

ASOIAF is a sprawling mess. It is ground breaking in many ways, and damn boring in others. Overall I like them, but I generally talk about ASOIAF, Harry Potter, and LOTR, because more people have read them, so it makes for a vital common reference. It's not because I'm a blinded fan.

But, of all the characters in A Song of Ice and Fire, you did pick two who are vital movers to the plot, with personalities that are in stark contrast to the rest of the story, and that continues to be very odd to me. I'm confused. I am trying to make sense of how these two characters are just furniture. How they aren't really characters. I mean, even early on, we know that Lyanna forced Ned to make her a life-changing promise - that's not a furniture move. That's a vital character move. That's a move that's filled with personality and passion. And Jeyne, while she doesn't get a lot of page space, does have a personality, and is important to the plot. Just suggesting that another insult to the Freys would do is to ignore her relationship with Rob and the emotion that alone creates for the reader (not to mention Lord Frey's entire character design, or the impact of forcing Lord Edmund Tully to marry a Frey instead).

Of all the characters in the book why would you come down so hard on two that - to me - seem like obviously poor examples?

I'm not trying to attack you. Honestly. And I'm far from worried about losing an argument (we've long since derailed from the topic, and I'm much more embarrassed about letting myself get caught up in a thing at all). I've just been trying to make sense of where you're coming from.

Don't answer. It doesn't matter. It's better to just let it go. Whether these two characters are "furniture" is only anecdotal to the question of those other two thousand characters anyways.

It's just, they were such noteworthy characters, that I really don't understand.

 

[Billybones]

No limit, but the more that get added, and the more we have to be cognizant that a reader might not be able to follow it. With skill, I am sure it can be worked out.

But...I'd still not want to have so many that its cumbersome to the story and taxing to the reader.

In my Current Book 3, there are a lot of POV characters. Its one of my questions, does it get too confusing as to who is who? But, I have helping me, two previous books that lets them all come into the story slowly. Perhaps, the hardest one to follow is a meeting between five kings. I find in that, I am doubling back on descriptions and who they are more than I would for a single character. I dont want a reader to be going....Um, what is he king of? So, I identify them several time to add clarity.

But...I think the answer will of course be, what is needed for the story, and execute well.

The character gets old, it gets killed off.
So the story goes.
In days of old, when
men were bold,
And castles dank and cold,
imprisoned ladies fair,
There mighta been
a few.
Old cold bones
In the iron maiden.
But this gots limits.

 

[Mad Swede]

I like books with loads of characters where I need to refer to the glossary / character list at least at the beginning to keep track of who's who. John Gwynne, Steven Erikson, George Martin all have loads of characters and large followings. One of the pieces of feedback a beta reader gave me was I introduce too many characters in some chapters. This got me to thinking is there a limit? Or is it like so many other things where "what is needed for the story is enough", and it's more about how / whether you can make it work.

In terms of literary analysis, a character is someone (or, as we're talking fantasy, something) who are named and needed to advance the story arc or plot. The key thing here is that the characters must be neccesary to help the readers understand plots and ponder themes in the story, and this is achieved by using the characters' stories to guide readers.

Characters can be dynamic, meaning that they develop across the story arc, or characters can be static, meaning that they don't change during the story. But, the characters must, through their choices, actions and reactions, trials and tribulations, and any lessons they may learn, bring some dynamic or conflict to the story which is then resolved as the story nears its resolution.

What that means is that you should have as many characters as you need to develop your story, there is no right or wrong answer. A very complex story, like the Lord of the Rings or a A Song of Ice and Fire, will have a lot of characters. Most of those are likely to be static with only the main characters being dynamic. As for how developed your characters are, they should be described sufficiently to enable the reader to understand those characters and how they affect the story as a whole - which is not the same as how much you the author have developed those characters.

 

[Jackarandajam]

"Furniture" sounds like a film or stage term: a crowd of unnamed people, for instance, or the people walking by on a busy street.

12 Types of Characters Every Writer Should Know

12 essential character types to know: which ones you need, how they relate to one another, and what they can do for your story.

blog.reedsy.com

From the article:

3. Deuteragonist​

Most stories have a primary protagonist and a secondary deuteragonist (or group of deuteragonists). This is the character who’s not exactly in the spotlight, but pretty close to it.

The deuteragonist’s comic book equivalent would probably be the sidekick. They’re often seen in the company of the protagonist — giving advice, plotting against their rivals, and generally lending a helping hand. Their presence and close relationship to the protagonist gives the story warmth and heart, so it’s not just about the hero’s journey, but about the friends they make along the way (awww). Of course, not all secondary figures are friends — some are arch-enemies — but even these less-friendly deuteragonists still lend depth to a story.

Deuteragonist examples: Ron and Hermione, Samwise Gamgee, Jane Bennet, Dr. Watson, Mercutio

4. Tertiary characters​

The reason that tertiary characters aren’t called “tertagonists” is because they’re not important enough to really agonize anything or anyone. They flit in and out of the MC’s life, perhaps only appearing in one or two scenes throughout the book.

However, a well-rounded story still requires a few tertiaries. We all have them in real life, after all — the barista you only see once a week, the random guy you sit next to in class — so any realistic fictional story should include them too.

In the following list of examples, we’ve put the sources of these tertiary characters in addition to their names, just in case you don’t recognize them. (We certainly couldn’t blame you.)

Tertiary examples: Mr. Poe in A Series of Unfortunate Events, Radagast in the movie version of The Hobbit, Padma and Parvati Patil in Harry Potter, Calo and Fabrizio in The Godfather, Madame Stahl in Anna Karenina