Writing a Series

[Demesnedenoir]

Not entirely true. If you're writing epic fantasy there is a different expectation, and deals are made for two or three books with new writers. It's a bit like Hollywood... if you think you've got a hit, you lock in actors, writers, and crew for sequels... in the long run it saves you money. If a pub likes a writer, signing them for multiple books keeps you out of bidding wars down the road if the book/writer is successful. And let's face it, a new writer is going to get what up front? 5k per novel? 10k? If you sign a 3 book deal 15k up front, 5k now, 5k on second, 5k on third, with no guarantees of pub without meeting their sales/quality, what risk have they really taken? Now, pubs jumping on a fifteen book freight train? Well, no, but you don't want them to, you want to renogitate after the first few take off, heh heh.

Whether or not a reader looks for a payoff in the first book is debatable depending on definition. A cliffhanger would be horrible (IMO) but there are lots of ways of having a satisfying ending without a classic Star Wars IV stand alone option.

When readers buy a series, it's because they're looking to invest time and emotion into a work of fiction. But they still want complete and wholesome payoff at the end of the first book. It's pretty much essential that the first book be able to act as a stand alone, and for your question about publishing the answer is no. Publishers pick up the first book and see how it sells, and how the readers enjoy it.

That's the danger you're facing. The complete, isolated arc should be able to connect with the next book, but that should not be it's selling point. Only if the first book is successful, then the publisher will keep running with the series.

I'd recommend listening to the Grim Tidings podcast to hear how many successful authors have gone about their first books (you may even recognize a fellow Scribe). The above cautionary tale recently happened with Michael Fletcher's Beyond Redemption. I haven't finished it so I can't comment on the payoff, but he's still looking for someone to take his second book, or he'll self-publish.

For the original question, I'd recommend the complete edit, but with some hesitation. I've been planning a series for years and writing novellas and short stories within its Universe just to explore it. But as I do that, I world-build, and I get more intimate with the world, and I'm constantly discovering new things. These inform the overarching quartet, and important changes come up every once in a while. Even the occasional epiphany. Whatever you do, just be prepared to edit (and I know you are! )

Edit: Of course, this post assumes an intent to publish, which you state may not be your goal.

 

[Creed]

Not entirely true. If you're writing epic fantasy there is a different expectation, and deals are made for two or three books with new writers. It's a bit like Hollywood... if you think you've got a hit, you lock in actors, writers, and crew for sequels... in the long run it saves you money. If a pub likes a writer, signing them for multiple books keeps you out of bidding wars down the road if the book/writer is successful.

Those big deals absolutely happen, but that is the exception in today's market, not the rule. The rule is that author's get signed on for one book with the publisher getting the right of first refusal for a sequel. This way they avoid both bidding wars and commitment to a risky new series. Risk is the enemy in a business dependent on the public's ever-oscillating desires. Another way to minimize risk for the OP: maybe having the series (semi-)completed before handing to a publisher would be best.

I should add that this is mostly the rule for new authors, though the Grim tidings podcast features many "old hats" with first books in a series, with a sequel not signed yet. Just last Friday, for example, Anthony Ryan and his Draconis Memoria trilogy/quartet (he's not even sure how many books it will be). You can be rest assured that Steven Erikson got signed on for the whole Kharkanas trilogy, though.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

It's all a crapshoot. But you have to write the story how it works, first and foremost. Having partials on books 2 & 3 in a trilogy is a good bet, this is one place where outliners would have some advantage, too. If they love your writing, and they can see the how you plan to finish this thing, they are more apt to buy in. If I sent in my book 1, and they said, ok, clearly this leads to something, but what? I can send them the MC's end of the trilogy, here's the last 30 pages of the MC in the trilogy... It's finite, and they know whether I have an ending they think works. Even though I don't have an outline, per se, I could also send the start of book 2, the end of book two, the start of book 3 as well as the end of book 3. If you write well enough, they'll probably trust you to fill in the blanks.

The biggest question is how complete does a first book need to feel? That's what makes me nervous. My first book has both a clear sense of ending, and continuing. This part of the story is over, it has arced, it is complete, there's a tragic heroine, the MC loses her, loses his island, but between them they have saved the people to fight another day... but there is no doubt whatsoever that the greater arc isn't finished. I'm not entirely sure how it will play, LOL.

I really wanted to write a true stand alone, but it just wasn't the story burning a hole in my head at the time. So, if I can't interest folks on the first books because it's a trilogy set up, my next project will be the stand alone.