Kicking it off with a battle.

[Abbas-Al-Morim]

After putting some thought into my narrative, I've come to the conclusion that the logical starting point for my story is actually a big battlefield scene. It's a turn point in the lives of two of my point-of-view-characters. Dietmar's father dies in the battle and another character of mine is an officer in that army. The stories of the other point-of-view-characters (I have five permanent point-of-view-characters for the entire story so far, but I will more than likely tell certain chapters from the point of view of "one time only" point-of-view-characters).

Now I'm a bit worried about this. Most books don't start off with an epic battle. Some readers don't like reading fight scenes (and by extent battles). I'm worried it might put off some readers. Or that it will be too confusing to follow if I don't give the necessary information beforehand.

It's not a typical battle either. At first, it will seem like the army of Tannenberg is winning against the Timuvians. But the force they've been fighting is actually bait to lure them out of formation. When that happens, the Timuvian heavy cavalry charges from the tree-line and obliterates the scattered Tannenberg army. The father of my main character dies and one of my point-of-view characters has to run for his life (in the direction of foreign and inhospitable lands).

Because of the scope of the battle, I'd use different viewpoints. I'd use the officer as the standard point of view but I'd shift to the main character's father for his last moments and I'd shift to the army's tactician's a couple of times to let the reader know how the different regiments are doing and what's happening to the army as a whole. The scene would end with the officer running into the forest, trying to save what's left of his company as the Timuvians give chase.

As you can see, this isn't some small battle. It has several fazes and I'll have to use different viewpoints. In total, I think it'd be at least fifteen pages long (could be a lot more). It won't be easy giving the reader the necessary information while maintaining the hectic feel of the battle.

Is this the worst opening ever? Or am I totally wrong and would it be a good opening scene? Also - as a side note - it would be the only large battle in the first part of the story as it focuses on intrigue and plot rather than large battles (there would of course be other fight scenes and smaller battles). Later (if I ever get there) there would be more battles. It's large project and right now I reckon it would take at least three books of 500 pages each to complete (though I can't be sure because I've never managed to write anything longer than 8000 words without losing heart. Still, I've been preparing this story for quite some time and I haven't lost interest yet. And I'm taking the Sanderson summer classes to keep me on track.)

So what say you?

 

[Feo Takahari]

You haven't presented any alternative starting point. If you don't have one, start with the battle, and revise later if you have to.

I don't think it's a good idea to use the main character's father only when he's about to die. If you want to build sympathy for him and have his death feel meaningful, you need to give the reader time to get to know him.

I also don't think it will matter to the reader how the overall battle is going. Your readers aren't from Tannenberg, and short of a lengthy history dump, they have no reason to care one way or another who wins the war. You'll have better luck getting the reader to hope that the officer makes it out alive.

 

[Abbas-Al-Morim]

You haven't presented any alternative starting point. If you don't have one, start with the battle, and revise later if you have to.

I don't have one yet, but if the consensus here is that it will scare off readers, I will investigate the matter even further.

I don't think it's a good idea to use the main character's father only when he's about to die. If you want to build sympathy for him and have his death feel meaningful, you need to give the reader time to get to know him.

I'm not trying to build a sense of sympathy really. I wasn't really certain I was going to shift to his viewpoint or that of someone riding near him. I just want to let the reader know where my main character's father died without having to do an info dump later when I'm writing from the point of view of said character.

I also don't think it will matter to the reader how the overall battle is going. Your readers aren't from Tannenberg, and short of a lengthy history dump, they have no reason to care one way or another who wins the war. You'll have better luck getting the reader to hope that the officer makes it out alive.

You're right, it might not matter to them really... but I think the scene will be too confusing for the reader (with the bait and whatnot) if I don't share a few glimpses of a strategic view of the battlefield from time to time.

Still on the fence, but thank you for sharing your thoughts.

 

[Sparkie]

I think it could work, but I'd advise against using too many POV's unless you plan on using most or all of them throughout the book.

Also, I wouldn't worry too much about scaring away readers with a battle. I like well written battle scenes and I know others who do as well.

 

[Feo Takahari]

You're right, it might not matter to them really... but I think the scene will be too confusing for the reader (with the bait and whatnot) if I don't share a few glimpses of a strategic view of the battlefield from time to time.

This leads to an interesting question: should the reader be confused? Maybe the officer thinks everything's going well, and suddenly what just happened everyone's dying what the hell is going on! (Then again, you could instead build foreboding by having the tactician realize the trap too late to stop the soldiers from walking into it.)

 

[Ankari]

I started a new WIP last week, and the first chapter is a battle. The thing is to keep the reader interested by not heaving tons of background information at their eyes. You also want to reduce the amount of pronouns while creating characters that the readers can identify with.

In short, it has to do what all first (or beginning) chapters do; ease the reader into the story while hooking them.

 

[Abbas-Al-Morim]

This leads to an interesting question: should the reader be confused? Maybe the officer thinks everything's going well, and suddenly what just happened everyone's dying what the hell is going on! (Then again, you could instead build foreboding by having the tactician realize the trap too late to stop the soldiers from walking into it.)

I was actually contemplating the whole foreboding idea by starting off the scene with a quick (one page or something like that) scene from the point of view of the Timuvian commander. I'm still contemplating how to tackle the battle itself. I might even write it out in three different ways and then try them out on readers.

 

[Butterfly]

I think, I'd skip the battle and start with the officer trying to escape.. the battle can then be back story. It just seems like an interesting and challenging point to start from, well to me anyway.

 

[Jamber]

Hi Abbas-Al-Morim,

If the battle scene is about the father dying (essentially so we feel something for the son, not the father), it doesn't seem to have much narrative investment beyond avoiding later exposition. My feeling is you'd struggle to make it gripping. Then again if it's also about having colour and movement up front, you might find a way to do it that grabs (e.g. exaggerating the sights, sounds, treacheries, shocks). Still, it doesn't seem to have much going for it in relation to the rest of the story beyond 'dad died'.

Are you sure you can't introduce other things as well (an arch-enemy, politics, home treachery)? In other words make the death about more than just the fact of a son bereaved. Better still would be to have the boy involved in the death implicitly or explicitly (as a hostage, a distraction, or telling the entire battle from the boy's POV -- he's nearby and can hear it, he's cowering with his mother and sees the survivors gallop past in retreat, he feels guilty for not having polished the sword properly and thinks he doomed his dad, he cursed his dad during a heated argument the night before, whatever -- some way of connected the son to the father to the death). How you use POV to tell all this is also up for grabs. (Don't settle for 'Dad died in battle, kids don't go to battle, so I have to tell it from a participant's POV'.)

But if all this is too much given that death's low weight in the narrative (i.e. if the battle itself doesn't set a political terrain or introduce an arch-enemy or involve deep core themes like treachery or power play the son is going to have to handle later), I wouldn't write a battle scene at all, but find looser, more suggestive ways to spell out that his father died. They're in a tavern after a cheap win; he's drinking ale; a troubadour starts to sing a song that's about the battle his father died in (though we don't know this); the singer butchers the song (or, worse, makes it about noble sacrifice when it was far more tawdry); our hero throws his chair back and assaults the singer; his friends drag him off; somewhere along the line it slips out that the epic loser in the battle song was his father.

That might or might not be anything like what you intend to do with the character, and it could be I'm coming at this too heavily from the MC's point of view -- you might have a heap of other things you want to do with that battle, like set up tone (shocking realism) or bring a later arch-enemy to the fore in his early savagery (the man who killed the boy's dad is going to cop his wrath later), or set out the terrain and politics. If so, great. I'm just working with the idea that you're only trying to colour in some backstory -- my feeling is an opening isn't the best way to do that, whether or not you write battle scenes well.

best wishes
Jennie

 

[TWErvin2]

I'd decide and focus on what you believe is important in the battle, and not the epic scope. The reader can get that. Too many view point characters, as the reader is trying to move into the story/world can be a turn-off. The reader needs to connect and understand things in context. Too much jumping, trying to get too much in at once, early on can do more harm than good.

Is there a reason only a small part of the battle, the father dying and the MC Officer nearby witnessing it, would that be enough? Why is it necessary to express the big scope...being multiple places all at once?

 

[BWFoster78]

A couple of considerations:

1. Most fantasy follows the Hero's Quest format. Typically, this format starts with the Normal Life. It's important to show what life is like before a big change occurs. If your big change occurs during the battle, you might want to consider starting before the battle.

2. Nothing has a big impact on the reader until they're invested in the character. If it's your intention to make the reader feel something for the character based on a loved one's death, early in the book is a bad place to do it. The reader hasn't had time yet to establish any connection.

Hope that helps!

Brian

 

[Abbas-Al-Morim]

Hi Abbas-Al-Morim,

If the battle scene is about the father dying (essentially so we feel something for the son, not the father), it doesn't seem to have much narrative investment beyond avoiding later exposition. My feeling is you'd struggle to make it gripping. Then again if it's also about having colour and movement up front, you might find a way to do it that grabs (e.g. exaggerating the sights, sounds, treacheries, shocks). Still, it doesn't seem to have much going for it in relation to the rest of the story beyond 'dad died'.

The battle scene is more about the other character (the captain) and the beginning of his story line. But since it's also the battle my main character's father dies in, I'd like to show that to the reader too. It is about color and movement too. In essence, it's a bit like the beginning of the gladiator. The only issue is that A) I'm writing a book not a movie and B) my story isn't set in a historical world we all know. For the MC, this won't really introduce his arch-enemy (it actually will in a sense but it's not really relevant until much further in the story. The first book will be about the character Dietmar growing as he ventures south to stop another threat - instead of north where the Reich is at war).

In other words make the death about more than just the fact of a son bereaved. Better still would be to have the boy involved in the death implicitly or explicitly (as a hostage, a distraction, or telling the entire battle from the boy's POV -- he's nearby and can hear it, he's cowering with his mother and sees the survivors gallop past in retreat, he feels guilty for not having polished the sword properly and thinks he doomed his dad, he cursed his dad during a heated argument the night before, whatever -- some way of connected the son to the father to the death). How you use POV to tell all this is also up for grabs. (Don't settle for 'Dad died in battle, kids don't go to battle, so I have to tell it from a participant's POV'.)

No it won't work like that. For one thing, I don't want sympathy for my main character in the beginning. For another, he's got no business being near that battle at all. His father is a knight and he hasn't been squired yet. Therefor, he doesn't go to war. Dietmar also isn't the type to cry or cower with his mother. He's more of the let's-get-irrationally-angry-at-crucial-times-and-act-like-a-total-pain-type. (A bit like a woman is for one week of the month - sorry couldn't resist, no offense intended).

But if all this is too much given that death's low weight in the narrative (i.e. if the battle itself doesn't set a political terrain or introduce an arch-enemy or involve deep core themes like treachery or power play the son is going to have to handle later), I wouldn't write a battle scene at all, but find looser, more suggestive ways to spell out that his father died. They're in a tavern after a cheap win; he's drinking ale; a troubadour starts to sing a song that's about the battle his father died in (though we don't know this); the singer butchers the song (or, worse, makes it about noble sacrifice when it was far more tawdry); our hero throws his chair back and assaults the singer; his friends drag him off; somewhere along the line it slips out that the epic loser in the battle song was his father.

The son will get the news by letter (after the battle I'd make a time jump of a month or two for the MC's story, with occasional chapters - the ones of the officer - still set right after the battle. At the end of the first book, the officer's story would have caught up with the MC's and things should then move chronologically). That's what I was thinking of at least. I wouldn't even write the scene where he actually receives the letter, I'd show his sadness and loss in a different more subtle way (by having him be erratic etc.).

That might or might not be anything like what you intend to do with the character, and it could be I'm coming at this too heavily from the MC's point of view -- you might have a heap of other things you want to do with that battle, like set up tone (shocking realism) or bring a later arch-enemy to the fore in his early savagery (the man who killed the boy's dad is going to cop his wrath later), or set out the terrain and politics. If so, great. I'm just working with the idea that you're only trying to colour in some backstory -- my feeling is an opening isn't the best way to do that, whether or not you write battle scenes well.

It's also about setting a tone yes. I want to give the reader a sense of "shit is going down". This isn't some static world that has been waiting for the story to start. There are already plenty of problems but things are about to get a whole lot worse. It's also important for the officer because A) it shows the Reich's military system and B) it gives the reader a sense of what kind of leader he is. I could just say "he's a smart and courageous man and a good leader". Instead, I'll try to show that during the battle.

best wishes
Jennie

Thank you for your advice, Jennie. You've given me a lot to think about.

I'd decide and focus on what you believe is important in the battle, and not the epic scope. The reader can get that. Too many view point characters, as the reader is trying to move into the story/world can be a turn-off. The reader needs to connect and understand things in context. Too much jumping, trying to get too much in at once, early on can do more harm than good.

Is there a reason only a small part of the battle, the father dying and the MC Officer nearby witnessing it, would that be enough? Why is it necessary to express the big scope...being multiple places all at once?

You're right, too many viewpoint characters would be a mess. Therefor I've decided to tell the entire battle (except for a small scene before the battle starts, from the viewpoint of the Timuvian commander) from the point of view of the officer. This way, I can actually use the sense of chaos and confusion to my advantage.

A couple of considerations:

1. Most fantasy follows the Hero's Quest format. Typically, this format starts with the Normal Life. It's important to show what life is like before a big change occurs. If your big change occurs during the battle, you might want to consider starting before the battle.

2. Nothing has a big impact on the reader until they're invested in the character. If it's your intention to make the reader feel something for the character based on a loved one's death, early in the book is a bad place to do it. The reader hasn't had time yet to establish any connection.

Hope that helps!

Brian

1. I don't really like that format. For one, it's overused. It's also incredibly dull in the beginning and lots of writers discourage dull beginnings. I don't really want a "a day in the life of a peasant about to become a hero" scene. Usually those end with a raid on the MC's village and the death of his family. However, I will include a slice of the (not-so-ordinary-) life of my MC after the battle and before his actual quest starts. Though it won't be an ordinary day either.

2. I fully understand that but that's not what I'm trying to do. As I said, I don't want sympathy for the MC at first. I just think a battle is the only way to A) show what the officer is like and what kind of leader/person he is, B) add some color and movement to the book right away and C) start off the officer's own story.

While writing this post, I've decided to go with the battle. If it doesn't work out, I can always revise later. Thank you everyone for your advise. I'll give everything some thought and then get to writing. I'll probably post the scene on this site (thought it won't be out before June me thinks, since I'm going to participate in the Brandon Sanderson's summer class) for you to read. If you'd like, I could send you a PM when that happens.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

I know you say you've decided to go with the battle scene as your opener, and if you can pull it off all the more power to you, but from your descriptions of what you're trying to do, I'm not sure that that is where the beginning of your story actually is. It sounds like your MC actually has very little to do with the events surrounding the battle (you say he's not present, he's actually going in the opposite direction, and that you're not introducing your antagonist), and that you will be focusing a lot of attention at the outset on a character who is not your MC. Is he a secondary MC? And if not, why is it important to launch your story with his perspective?

Curiously, I just read an article that specifically addresses NOT starting your fantasy with a battle - Writer Unboxed » What NOT to Do When Beginning Your Novel: Advice from Literary Agents To quote - “Cliché openings in fantasy can include an opening scene set in a battle (and my peeve is that I don’t know any of the characters yet so why should I care about this battle) or with a pastoral scene where the protagonist is gathering herbs (I didn’t realize how common this is).”

 

[Ireth]

Interesting topic. My latest WIP also starts with a fight, though not really an epic-scale battle, just a skirmish between a few dozen participants (and a really one-sided battle, at that). The MC is present, and his best friend is fatally injured (the only casualty on their side); this kicks off the plot when the MC takes misguided revenge on the healer who fails to save his friend, and realizes his own problems are small potatoes compared to the potential threat to his home and his people, which has to do with the enemies he and his dead friend had just killed.

 

[Jamber]

Dietmar also isn't the type to cry or cower with his mother. He's more of the let's-get-irrationally-angry-at-crucial-times-and-act-like-a-total-pain-type. (A bit like a woman is for one week of the month - sorry couldn't resist, no offense intended).

Er, I'll bow out at this point.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I think, I'd skip the battle and start with the officer trying to escape.. the battle can then be back story. It just seems like an interesting and challenging point to start from, well to me anyway.

I agree with Butterfly. It seems as if everything of importance happens because of the battle but the actual battle scenes aren't really necessary. Sometimes you'll get more bang by what you don't show.

Imagine the engagement of a reader witnessing someone running for their life, another character's emotional reaction to the loss of their father, another POV strolling the field littered with enemy and friendly corpses alike (men he may have known).

My first thought as a reader seeing this all unfold... Who are these people? Why did they fight? Will someone catch the runner & if so will it be a friend or foe? These are the kinds of hooks that grab at the imagination. When the story begins with a big battle, if I don't know the why behind it...if I haven't yet come to care about the characters involved...it will not pull me in. I'd much rather you start off where the real story begins...in the aftermath.