Multiple novels set in the same setting or make each one completely unrelated?

[UltimaBahamut93]

I can't make up my mind on how I want to approach this. I have several ideas for stories that are all versions of dungeons & dragons campaigns I designed. They are all distinct and unique but they all operate by the same rules, within the same setting, and with the same magic system. I have changed things around to make them my own original flavor to not overly resemble d&d, even before I decided to transpose these into novels instead of homebrew campaigns.

But now I have several stories I want to write and I am not sure if I should keep them in the same "universe" or not. They would not be related to each other in except through lore and systems. I spent a lot of time crafting my own world and setting and lore so that it would be easy for me to continue making more campaigns. I am thinking it would be better to make these stories in their own separate settings but what I am afraid of is that they will be seen as too similar to each other, which is because they originally were designed to work in the same setting.

What are your thoughts regarding this?

 

[FifthView]

You can go either route.

If it were mine, I would keep them in the same world but also keep them distinct—at least until I decided to write any crossovers heh.

Given that the lore, magic system, and so forth are the same, this would be easiest. Plus, you can always develop a following who like that particular set of circumstances, and you can market each as "Set in the world of _______________."

Another question to consider would be what you possibly have to gain by separating them into separate universes? Probably not much, I'd guess, unless you have in mind epic world-changing events in one story you don't want to affect all the other stories.

 

[Jackarandajam]

Yeah, building a series of unrelated one-hitter novels with just "a Bright Red Sky novel" or whatever somewhere on them is, I feel like, something people don't do often enough. It gives you a chance to regulate how you want the world at large to work without having to immediately tie the stories together as a series. You can eventually, but there's no pressure. That's my vote.

 

[Gurkhal]

Go for a single setting that is explored all the more through different stories.

 

[Finchbearer]

There are many authors who have written unrelated novels set in the same universe, or same setting, but at different periods in time etc. so it can be done and it wouldn’t be at odds with a readers experience at all. Terry Pratchett is probably the best example I can think of who did this very successfully. As someone else points out, it can create its own type of fandom, when a reader recognises something from another book it can be a fun element to act as a selling point. I think people in general are attracted to ‘franchises’ and ‘universes’ in storytelling because it’s a familiarity and something that attracts some serious fandom.

The only thing with turning a campaign > a novel is that it is a fairly niche genre if you’re intending on writing for a potential audience, unless you make your stories unrecognisable from that franchise, which I would have thought is not quite the point. But writing them just for fun is another thing altogether.

 

[Prince of Spires]

You can do whatever you want. There are examples of all different situations that have been succesful. Raymond E. Feist did more or less what you suggest. 1 world with multiple different stories (though there are a few characters that keep showing up). So did Terry Pratchett. For a non Fantasy example, Clive Cussler's Dirk Pitt series features a bunch of characters that go through a lot of different, completely unrelated adventures (similar to James Bond). David Gemmel is also similar, with lots of unrelated stories in the same world with the occasional character showing up.

You could also go the Brandon Sanderson route, with multiple loosly connected worlds and an overarching plot and a few cross-over characters. They can all be read independently of each other, but they sort of tie together.

On the other hand, plenty of writers create a lot of different new worlds that are not connected at all.

A few considerations:
- if you want to publish your stories, how would you want them published? In indie publishing it's very common to have novels tied together somehow, since it's easier to sell your next novel to your readers if it's connected to the one they just read. For traditional publishing however, I think a publisher would be hesitant to accept such a vast world. They would publish 1 first and see how that does. No guarantee that they'll accept the second one.

- What do you enjoy about writing Fantasy? If everything is set in the same world, would you get tired of that world or do you want to keep digging deeper?

- You could also do both of course. Write three or four novels in one world, then a stand-alone in the next and a trilogy in a third. There is no rule that you have to do one or the other.

- Since you're a beginning writer (assumption here), consider that your world may not actually be all that good or perfect. My first world certainly wasn't. If you now lock yourself in to a specific world and system and 2 books down the line you discover that you made some bad choices, you don't want to be stuck with them. Maybe you'll find that your magic system is held together by tie-wraps and duckttape, or that the amazing history you came up with is impossible or whatever. Or maybe you just find that writing about the same kinds of knights and magic is boring. In my experience, you only learn these kinds of things once you start writing.

So my advice would actually be to just write the first book and not worry about what comes after. See if you enjoy writing in the setting and if it actually works. Then see if you want to write your next novel in that same setting or if you want to do something different. There's no point in trying to solve it now, since there are too many unknowns.

 

[pmmg]

I can't make up my mind on how I want to approach this. I have several ideas for stories that are all versions of dungeons & dragons campaigns I designed. They are all distinct and unique but they all operate by the same rules, within the same setting, and with the same magic system. I have changed things around to make them my own original flavor to not overly resemble d&d, even before I decided to transpose these into novels instead of homebrew campaigns.

But now I have several stories I want to write and I am not sure if I should keep them in the same "universe" or not. They would not be related to each other in except through lore and systems. I spent a lot of time crafting my own world and setting and lore so that it would be easy for me to continue making more campaigns. I am thinking it would be better to make these stories in their own separate settings but what I am afraid of is that they will be seen as too similar to each other, which is because they originally were designed to work in the same setting.

What are your thoughts regarding this?

What would be the fear of keeping them in the same universe you've been running games in?

If you keep them in game, and have success, you could have some synergy, such as characters stat write ups for readers who wanted to use them in their own games.