Forum: Author Hangout

Prequesls and Series Numbering

Vincent Berg 🚫

I'm in a bind. Midway through editing my latest story, I'm looking around for my next and figured, why not a prequel?

I know that "chronological order" relates to the order published, but ... my prequel occurs a millennium or two prior to the first book, and while the first has all the modern scientific explanations (auras, energy medicine, etc.), the second will likely describe the same info in simpler (non-educated) terms and in Gaelic, so while it should be easy to jump to book 2, starting with it should prove fairly difficult.

How does you folk feel about a non-consequential numbered sequels? Is it a turn off, a personal dislike, or no big deal?

Replies: Dominions Son Ernest Bywater Switch Blayde palamedes REP bk69 Uther Pendragon Mushroom

Dominions Son 🚫
Updated:

@Vincent Berg

I know that "chronological order" relates to the order published,

That might be the publishing industry standard, but I find that annoying as a reader.

I would find it preferable if it is simple to tell from the title and or cover what the correct order is in terms of the series/story chronology, not the publication chronology.

If I encounter something like that, once I've figured out the correct chronology, I would set the whole series aside until it fades from memory a bit and then come back and start over from the prequel.

ETA: There is one thing that might make that kind of sequencing acceptable. Some explicit setup at the start of the prequel such that one character in the main series is telling the prequel story to another.

Ernest Bywater 🚫

@Vincent Berg

How does you folk feel about a non-consequential numbered sequels? Is it a turn off, a personal dislike, or no big deal?

not a big deal if each can stand on its own.

Replies: Crumbly Writer

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@Ernest Bywater

not a big deal if each can stand on its own.

That's the idea, but due to the lack of technology/knowledge and ancient languages, switching the order would mean the new first story would be incredibly harder to read (i.e. lose more readers). I'm not sure how to rectify that IF I publish it on a time-based (not chronological) sequence. In that case, it's probably not even worth writing in the first place.

The way I intend it, the first story establishes the universe, while the sequel traces the story's ancient roots (to better understand how the 'abilities' developed/evolved over time). But actually, since it deal with ghosts, an ancient setting would probably be stronger since with ancient battles, where would be a LOT more gristly haunted left behind.

Replies: Dominions Son Keet

Dominions Son 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

One thing that would make that work for me would be to explicitly make the start of the prequel about someone from the main series timeline discovering/learning that history.

Replies: Crumbly Writer

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@Dominions Son

One thing that would make that work for me would be to explicitly make the start of the prequel about someone from the main series timeline discovering/learning that history.

I'll have to consider that, but at this early planning stage, it's difficult to imagine it, considering how underground these people have been throughout history. But it's definitely an interesting angle to consider. Maybe a 'I wonder what those like us did back before these traits were as widespread as they are now' reflection/introductory piece?

Keet 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

not a big deal if each can stand on its own.

That's the idea, but due to the lack of technology/knowledge and ancient languages, switching the order would mean the new first story would be incredibly harder to read (i.e. lose more readers).

What you are saying means it can NOT stand on it's own because to understand it you need information from the 'later' book. As a reader I have no problem reading a prequel after reading the 'later' book. If knowledge is the only thing required and the prequel in itself is a stand alone story it should not be a problem, but the logical reading order should be pointed out so the reader knows to read the prequel after the other book. In other words, the reading order puts the prequel after the other book.

Replies: Crumbly Writer

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@Keet

If knowledge is the only thing required and the prequel in itself is a stand alone story it should not be a problem, but the logical reading order should be pointed out so the reader knows to read the prequel after the other book. In other words, the reading order puts the prequel after the other book.

That's pretty much the definition of chronological (vs. time-based) series, as it's the order the author intends the story to be read in.

That said, I'm reluctant to go the old 'Reading the first book is necessary to ..." in the second book's description, as that usually keeps me from investigating most stories I'm not familiar with.

Switch Blayde 🚫
Updated:

@Vincent Berg

In the Jack Reacher series, Reacher is a former Army MP. Former, as in he's no longer in the military.

In a recent Jack Reacher novel I read, he was still an MP in the Army. In fact, it tells why he left the Army. I don't know the numbering of the books, but it was somewhere in the middle of the series. I guess it's a prequel because it takes place prior to the others (I haven't read them all, so maybe before a lot of the ones that preceded it).

But it's a standalone novel.

Replies: Crumbly Writer

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@Switch Blayde

But it's a standalone novel.

That's usually the kicker. While ever book you publish seems your other books, they're more likely to buy after finishing your newest (i.e. the one you're currently marketing).

It's not that readers won't be able to start with the second, it's just that the second will likely be denser given the language and knowledge constraints in the ancient timeline.

palamedes 🚫

@Vincent Berg

My 2 cents is I don't have a problem with prequels no matter what the order it is placed in.

Replies: Crumbly Writer

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@palamedes

My 2 cents is I don't have a problem with prequels no matter what the order it is placed in.

Thanks, your and Ernest's were the responses I was hoping for, but it sounds like there's also a negative contingent to non-sequential chronological series.

REP 🚫

@Vincent Berg

If it can't standalone, so I think the best way to go is, to use DS's suggestion of having one of the current characters in the series narrate the prequel as the next story in the series.

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫

@REP

to use DS's suggestion of having one of the current characters in the series narrate the prequel as the next story in the series.

That's not necessarily what I was suggesting. It could be done that way, one main timeline character telling the story to another.

Another way to do it would be to have a main timeline character discover a tome written a few years or decades after the events of the prequel, then fade into the prequel, such that in effect, the reader is reading it along with the main timeline character. This way it's not really the main timeline character narrating the prequel.

Replies: Crumbly Writer

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@Dominions Son

Another way to do it would be to have a main timeline character discover a tome written a few years or decades after the events of the prequel, then fade into the prequel, such that in effect, the reader is reading it along with the main timeline character. This way it's not really the main timeline character narrating the prequel.

Again, given the historical constraints, but given what happens in Book 1, it could trigger a new historical revelation from an older historic excavation, connecting the two events. If packaged with several of the more recent characters discussing it, and reflecting on their shared past, it could work, but I'll have to flesh it out to see just how well it does.

Again, the who basis of a 'standalone' novel is that you don't need to read the first book, which is beneficial, since historical fiction novels typically sell to an entirely different genre than does my typical sci-fi readers, potentially broadening my base.

Replies: Switch Blayde Dominions Son

Switch Blayde 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

it could trigger a new historical revelation from an older historic excavation, connecting the two events.

Or you can simply write/publish them out of order. Star Wars did that.

Star Wars began with Episode 4. Then he released 5 and 6 which completed the trilogy. But then he went back in time with Episodes 1, 2, and 3.

The story of A New Hope (Episode 4) gave no context of the futuristic world in the film, throwing viewers straight into the action without any background knowledge. Doing so would later give Lucas the opportunity to go back and provide some context in the prequels.

Then, of course, he jumped forward again with Episodes 7, 8, and 9.

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫

@Switch Blayde

Star Wars began with Episode 4. Then he released 5 and 6 which completed the trilogy. But then he went back in time with Episodes 1, 2, and 3.

That was done for purely pragmatic reasons.

The special effects tech did not exist at the time to properly implement his vision for episodes 1-3. And even with A New Hope, compromises had to be made. They couldn't get the Jabba muppet to work in time and had to use a human actor stand-in for a cameo scene where Jabba appeared with Han Solo when A New Hope was originally released. They used CGI to substitute the "real" Jabba when the digitally remastered version of A New Hope was released in the lead up to the premier of episode 1.

Replies: Switch Blayde

Switch Blayde 🚫

@Dominions Son

That was done for purely pragmatic reasons.

The reason doesn't matter. They released a movie and then later released the prequels. So I don't see why Crumbly would have an issue with the prequel. It's just something that happened before the first novel published. The backstory which isn't needed to understand the first novel. It sounds to me like he's looking for a problem that doesn't exist.

Replies: Crumbly Writer

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@Switch Blayde

A bit late to my own party, but …

The backstory which isn't needed to understand the first novel. It sounds to me like he's looking for a problem that doesn't exist.

It's not so much a problem that doesn't exist, as I'm fully aware that it's commonly done. Instead, I was merely asking how readers typically react to such things, so I'll know how best to present/handle it.

Dominions Son 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

Again, the who basis of a 'standalone' novel is that you don't need to read the first book, which is beneficial, since historical fiction novels typically sell to an entirely different genre than does my typical sci-fi readers, potentially broadening my base.

Then the prequel should in my opinion be outside of the numbered series. Again, as a reader, I find it annoying when a numbered series is not in story chronology order and/or the series as a whole has no or a weak chronology to it.

Even if all the books can stand alone in story terms, there should still be growth of characters across the series and development in background events. A character that dies in an earlier book should not show up in a later book.

Throwing a prequel into the middle of a number series is something that could make me drop the series completely.

bk69 🚫

@Vincent Berg

Meh.

L.E.Modesitt wrote multiple stories in the Recluce saga that the action predated the first novel. After a while, he had a story where the ancestors of the main protagonist group arrived (following a space battle and encountering some kind of anomoly) and then later than that wrote novels about the main group of antagonists trying to terraform and settle the planet, only to lose all their technology.

Personally, if I had the choice, I'd read in sequential order of occurrence rather than order of publication, but that's not always easy to determine.

Replies: joyR

joyR 🚫

@bk69

Personally, if I had the choice, I'd read in sequential order of occurrence rather than order of publication, but that's not always easy to determine.

I agree that sequential order is preferable, but with a caveat.

Some authors write out of sequence and then write an 'origin' book. If the reader is invested in the story then the 'origin' is welcome, but often the origin book is less a story than a data dump, which if read first is unlikely to 'hook' the reader into the following books.

For example, few people I know who read 'The Silmarillion' went on to read The Hobbit and LotR. Then again, few who read the popular two go on to read 'The Silmarillion' anyway.

Replies: awnlee jawking

awnlee jawking 🚫

@joyR

Just to muddy the water, Enterprise was a sort of prequel to Star Trek but quickly became non-canon. It was probably better to watch Star Trek first.

AJ

Replies: joyR

joyR 🚫

@awnlee jawking

It was probably better to watch Star Trek first.

Even better... Don't watch either of them, ever..!

Replies: awnlee jawking

awnlee jawking 🚫

@joyR

Even better... Don't watch either of them, ever..!

I'm currently watching Deep Space Nine on network TV. 'Could be good,' I thought, 'if it combines the best of Babylon 5 and Star Trek'. How wrong I was - it's more soap opera than science fiction. (Appropriate it's on at 6pm - daytime TV!) Okay, a handful of episodes have been quite decent but I can't fathom how it got renewed for series after series. And looking at the episode guides, the daily episodes on Freeview have reached less than two thirds of the way through.

It's quite amusing that the cast didn't have a pronunciation guide - it it mar-key or makie, baydjor or bayzhor?

AJ

Uther Pendragon 🚫

@Vincent Berg

The site lets you play with series numbering. I don't think they leet you do that with serials.

Replies: bk69

bk69 🚫

@Uther Pendragon

I don't think they leet you do that with serials.

Maybe with spree killers, tho?

Mushroom 🚫

@Vincent Berg

I know that "chronological order" relates to the order published

Wrong there. It relates to the order in which the stories occur in relationship to each other. What you are describing is "Published Order".

Classic example, the Recluce saga. Which takes place over almost 2,000 years. Book 1 is actually one of the last chronologically, but is the first published. The author then jumps back and forth, through thousands of years and rarely does any one book follow the one before it.

Book 1 is in the "book year" 1850, but there is a book that occurs in Year 1 (book 10), in what is already an ancient civilization in decay.

Replies: mauidreamer Crumbly Writer

mauidreamer 🚫

@Mushroom

Classic example, the Recluce saga. Which takes place over almost 2,000 years. Book 1 is actually one of the last chronologically, but is the first published. The author then jumps back and forth, through thousands of years and rarely does any one book follow the one before it.

Book 1 is in the "book year" 1850, but there is a book that occurs in Year 1 (book 10), in what is already an ancient civilization in decay.

Actually, it is more than 2000 years, as "Year 1" was just arbitrarily chosen to be concurrent with the appearance of Lorn in Book 10 ... although various references or flashbacks indicate that the actual appearance of the crippled Rationalist fleet in that universe and later landing on Recluce occurred more than two centuries before we meet Lorn ...

also, don't look for true consistency thru-out the stories as LEM has shown a bit of MZB-itis "to have a better idea"...

Replies: Mushroom

Mushroom 🚫

@mauidreamer

Actually, it is more than 2000 years, as "Year 1" was just arbitrarily chosen to be concurrent with the appearance of Lorn in Book 10 ... although various references or flashbacks indicate that the actual appearance of the crippled Rationalist fleet in that universe and later landing on Recluce occurred more than two centuries before we meet Lorn ...

But that is the earliest story written. As I said, it was already an ancient civilization in decay when the oldest of the stories was written. Magi'i of Cyador is in year 1, Magic of Recluce is 1855.

There is nothing before or after.

Replies: mauidreamer

mauidreamer 🚫

@Mushroom

There may not be any stories based before Magi'i or after 'Magic', but there certainly was something before "Year 1". LEM just hasn't told us yet ...

A guess at 'prehistory' would include "Arrival of the Rationalists, landing and utilizing their ships' power cores and other technology to settle and conquer at least the western third of Candar, pushing out the former inhabitants and creating the need for a large standing army to protect the borders, etc.

Not sure I'd call it an ancient civilization in decay as 2 centuries is not much of a history.
... of course some could say that would also describe the US ...

Replies: bk69 Mushroom

bk69 🚫

@mauidreamer

Not sure I'd call it an ancient civilization in decay as 2 centuries is not much of a history.
... of course some could say that would also describe the US ...

The 'ancient civilization' would be the one that colonized the planet, not the one formed by the colonists.

Replies: mauidreamer

mauidreamer 🚫
Updated:

@bk69

Well then, as far as is known, the Anglorian Unity is probably still going strong.

also, for both the "Rats" and the "Angels" ... not "colonists" but more of castaways or shipwreck survivors, ala Robinson Crusoe ... making best use of their available tech for as long as it lasts ... and slowly adapting (or not) to local conditions ...

Replies: bk69

bk69 🚫

@mauidreamer

It's been a while. I was under the impression the Rats had colonized (originally in Cyador?) but the wild magic of the (jungle?) fought the technology trying to limit it. The was quite a bit of technology they had, compared to what the Angels had when they landed near Westwind centuries later.

Replies: Mushroom

Mushroom 🚫

@bk69

It's been a while. I was under the impression the Rats had colonized (originally in Cyador?) but the wild magic of the (jungle?) fought the technology trying to limit it.

I think that all related to the biomass.

One settled in a dense thriving tropical type ecosystem, the other in a harsh Alpine one. As in that "world" all life had levels of order and chaos, the more biomass in the environment meant more resistance when the balance was not being kept. And by nature, chaos upsets the balance more as it works by breaking bonds, not making or strengthening them.

One of the themes that seems to permeate the stories is that the places where most Order and Chaos users settled were rather austere. Deserts, tundra, sparse woodlands, only the Druids sought out places like jungles with large amounts of biomass.

The only exception were the Rationalists in ancient Cyador. And when that fell, the remainders fled east to found Fairhaven.

Replies: mauidreamer

mauidreamer 🚫

@Mushroom

The only exception were the Rationalists in ancient Cyador. And when that fell, the remainders fled east to found Fairhaven.

Not quite. LEM is in process of telling us the founding of Fairhaven (books 19-21) by - ironically - adherents of Order around 675-680. Not yet published Book 22 (in 695) may be the beginning of the Chaos arriving in Fairhaven.

Regarding the biomass, Cyad compressed the Accursed Forest into an area about 50 by 100 miles so that they'd have more than 1000 miles of land for settlements and farms from Summerdock eastward. When the towers fell a millenium later, the Forest expanded to an area 800 by 500 miles, and nearly as large became the Empty Lands. Plus, the actual percentage of Magi'i in Cyador was very low, no more than 2-3%.

Replies: Mushroom

Mushroom 🚫

@mauidreamer

Not quite. LEM is in process of telling us the founding of Fairhaven (books 19-21) by - ironically - adherents of Order around 675-680. Not yet published Book 22 (in 695) may be the beginning of the Chaos arriving in Fairhaven.

Regarding the biomass, Cyad compressed the Accursed Forest into an area about 50 by 100 miles so that they'd have more than 1000 miles of land for settlements and farms from Summerdock eastward. When the towers fell a millenium later, the Forest expanded to an area 800 by 500 miles, and nearly as large became the Empty Lands. Plus, the actual percentage of Magi'i in Cyador was very low, no more than 2-3%.

Not all that ironic, if you remember that even in the time of Ceryyl the Great and before in the old empire, those who used Order still had a place. Chaos had the most "power", but they certainly did not exclude those who used Order. And until the fall of Fairhaven, Order and Chaos both had a place in their society.

Ironically, of all the "Nations" of that world, Recluce is the one that was actually the most fanatical and resistant to accept anything that did not follow their absolutist beliefs. Even kicking out very powerful Order Mages, simply because they dared to question the status quo.

A lot of this goes back to the concept of "False Narrative". This is hinted at in even the first book, where Justin tells Lerris that not everything he was told is true. And that Chaos is just as important as Order.

During most of the stories, the POV character is from Recluce so you tend to root for them. But as more and more books came out, I especially started to realize they were actually almost as evil if not more so than the White was.

Which is why many like me place the Angels (their founders) as the descendants of the "Revenants of the Prophet" from Parafaith. And the Rationalists being very similar to the Eco-Tech Coalition in that series, more interested in striking a balance then controlling everything.

Mushroom 🚫
Updated:

@mauidreamer

Not sure I'd call it an ancient civilization in decay as 2 centuries is not much of a history.

... of course some could say that would also describe the US ...

And they were not even the first, simply the most recent as humans were already on the planet when they arrived.

And we saw the same thing in the backstory of the "Fall of Angels" and then Creslin. What centuries later is distorted legend being told as it was then. One thing about Modesitt, he loves putting in a "legend", then later fleshing it out and letting the reader understand that the legend was quite often very wrong.

In fact, if you compare the backstories of both sides, they almost line up with those in the Parafaith War books. Many of us have speculated that the Eco-Tech Coalition and the Revenants of the Prophet in that later evolved into the Rationalists and Angels.

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@Mushroom

Classic example, the Recluce saga. Which takes place over almost 2,000 years. Book 1 is actually one of the last chronologically, but is the first published. The author then jumps back and forth, through thousands of years and rarely does any one book follow the one before it.

I need to ask Lazeez whether it's possible to create two separate series for the same books, one in chronological order and another in publication (or the sequence the author originally designed) order. It'll take up more 'space', but it would allow readers to pick how they want to read a series (like viewers typically do with the Star Wars movies).

Then again, maybe it's a user-selectable option? I've been creating ordered series for years, but never tried monkeying around with it yet.

Replies: Keet palamedes

Keet 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

I need to ask Lazeez whether it's possible to create two separate series for the same books, one in chronological order and another in publication (or the sequence the author originally designed) order. It'll take up more 'space', but it would allow readers to pick how they want to read a series (like viewers typically do with the Star Wars movies).

Then again, maybe it's a user-selectable option? I've been creating ordered series for years, but never tried monkeying around with it yet.

Sorting could solve that too. If you have titles starting with "Book 1 ...", "Book 2 ..." sorting by title will give a chronological order. If sorted by date it will give the order in which the books were uploaded to SOL, i.e. the publication order. Not foolproof, but close.

Replies: Vincent Berg

Vincent Berg 🚫

@Keet

Still, reordering or setting up a separate series for a two-book series seems a bit excessive.

Replies: Keet

Keet 🚫

@Vincent Berg

Still, reordering or setting up a separate series for a two-book series seems a bit excessive.

Yes, that's why I suggested that the reader can use the ordering to achieve the same. No need to set up anything. Besides, with 2 books you could mention the reading order in a foreword or something.

palamedes 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

I don't remember the authors name off the top of my head or whether it was a series or universe but when you clicked the link for page of stories you would get the list of stories in the published order. At the top of the page was a listing of the authors suggested order of reading which was different then the order in which he written and published the stories. then there is authors like bluedragon where at the bottom of their story page you have this

"Please also note that I have a few running series: The Billionaire and Ordinary Sex Life stories must be read in order. E-Beth follows The Book of David. And the Twins in San Francisco follows The Sorority House."

Replies: mauidreamer

mauidreamer 🚫

@palamedes

Author Kris Me gives a suggested reading order for most of the Keltria universe stories which is neither publishing nor chronological order ...

Reply to topic

Forum: Author Hangout

Prequesls and Series Numbering

WARNING! ADULT CONTENT...