Sequels

[Colleen Thomas]

I have a hankering to revisit some characters from an earlier work. I intend to concentrate on the lives of ancillary characters from the first work and not so much the main characters.

Anyone have an opinion on whether i should make this a part two or just another story without reference to the earlier work?

 

[CrimsonMaiden]

I'd say if it's not following the same storyline as the first, then make it a completely new story. However, I'd put a little snippet at the beginning telling it's an offset of another story. It could give the older story some new life.

 

[Guest]

 

[carsonshepherd]

Definitely agree with the Crimson one. Great idea Colleen.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I'd say if it's not following the same storyline as the first, then make it a completely new story. However, I'd put a little snippet at the beginning telling it's an offset of another story. It could give the older story some new life.

It's going to be an offshoot of Riding for the Brand. When I wrote that one I introduced a couple of characters who I feel like would be fun to write. I think it will probably work best as a stand alone. I might introduce sharacters in it conciously that could deman their own story. Kind of a running chain story thing. Not sure.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Definitely agree with the Crimson one. Great idea Colleen.

I've tried it both ways, making part 2 and a new story with the same characters. This one is kinda different because it's the ancillary characters from one who will be the main characters from the next. At least that's the plan

 

[matriarch]

I've tried it both ways, ............. with the same characters. .....................

'Hijack'

 

[oggbashan]

Confusion by numbers

Colly,

If you had less than ten stories posted I don't think it would matter whether you made any reference in the new story to the old because readers could find the earlier story very easily.

With your number of posted stories I think you should make a point of stating at the start or end of the story that the characters had an earlier existence.

I don't think it is necessary to make it Ch.02 or even to make the link obvious in the sub-title. What you are writing is not really a sequel but the previously minor characters' story. It should be capable of standing alone.

Og

 

[Belegon]

I am starting to use Crim's method...

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: Confusion by numbers

Colly,

If you had less than ten stories posted I don't think it would matter whether you made any reference in the new story to the old because readers could find the earlier story very easily.

With your number of posted stories I think you should make a point of stating at the start or end of the story that the characters had an earlier existence.

I don't think it is necessary to make it Ch.02 or even to make the link obvious in the sub-title. What you are writing is not really a sequel but the previously minor characters' story. It should be capable of standing alone.

Og

thanks Oggs

I forget sometimes I have a lot of stories out there.

 

[impressive]

Agree with Crim (and that AV drives me wild!) -- in fact, that's what I just did with the "Topping Love" story you just read. The author's note simply says: "The characters of x, y, and z were first introducted in my story entitled ...."

Can't wait to read it, Colly!

 

[matriarch]

Agree with Crim (and that AV drives me wild!) -- in fact, that's what I just did with the "Topping Love" story you just read. The author's note simply says: "The characters of x, y, and z were first introducted in my story entitled ...."

Can't wait to read it, Colly!

Ermmmmmmm....*looking at my watch*......what you doing still here???

 

[impressive]

Ermmmmmmm....*looking at my watch*......what you doing still here???

I'm not "here." I'm "there." Just checked in to hotel. Have about 2 hours to kill now before dinner/supper.

 

[wishfulthinking]

Hmmm...I had been thinking about the same thing, but haven't really decided. I am currently leaning towards doing something like:

Captured: X and Y's story

[can't actually remember their names right now ]

Rather than put it as a new chapter, and keep it linked to the previous story.

 

[ABSTRUSE]

I agree with Crimson also.........now get crackin!!

 

[Global Carol]

First, this neophyte is quite humbled by your prolific output. Second, I tend to agree with the tenor of the feedback here in this thread.

That said, my two cents: Reference the previous story if those characters were well enough developed to merit it. If there was enough information about the characters when they appeared earlier to make you want to write more about them, there’s a good probability that people will want to read more about them too.

From the stories I’ve read, you flesh out your characters with enough detail and backstory that many feel like “living, breathing, human beings.”

Perhaps a reference in the title or a subtitle would provide readers with a helpful link. Or, even consider using the (Hollywood-derived) word “prequel” or something along that line in the title.

 

[Sabledrake]

My "Closer than Cousins" story is a spinoff from my "Neglected Son" story, so I just put a brief word of explanation in for readers interested in finding out more of the sordid backstory of these characters

Mentioning that reading the first is not required to understand the second is usually a good idea. Readers hate homework

Sabledrake

 

[dr_mabeuse]

You'll get a lot less reads if you have "Part 2" in the title.

---dr.M.

 

[minsue]

It's going to be an offshoot of Riding for the Brand. When I wrote that one I introduced a couple of characters who I feel like would be fun to write. I think it will probably work best as a stand alone. I might introduce sharacters in it conciously that could deman their own story. Kind of a running chain story thing. Not sure.

*jumping up and down clapping in girlish glee*


(Just so you know, that's not something I do often )

 

[Evil Alpaca]

It's going to be an offshoot of Riding for the Brand. When I wrote that one I introduced a couple of characters who I feel like would be fun to write. I think it will probably work best as a stand alone. I might introduce sharacters in it conciously that could deman their own story. Kind of a running chain story thing. Not sure.

Yay! I loved that story!

I would definitely leave off the part 2. I've actually done that once already now, writing an extension of a certain set of characters' world that isn't a direct continuation of the previous story-line, and I liked it pretty well.

 

[oggbashan]

You'll get a lot less reads if you have "Part 2" in the title.

---dr.M.

And even fewer if it says "Ch.12" and there are three Lit pages.

Og

 

[wishfulthinking]

Ogg does have a point about ch.12 having less reads!

But I've found Part 2 or Ch.2 doesn't seem to affect my reads at all. I think a lot of people when they see ch.2 and like it, they then read the first chapter as well.

 

[Quiet_Cool]

If the story doesn't directly connect or off-shoot from the original, meaning if reading the first one isn't a necessary part of understanding the second, I'd say forget the part 2 deal, just like everyone says. Honestly, I might not even reference the original, depending on how careful you word the introduction mentioning that. Some people will begin reading the intro and think it might be necessary, then "BACK" out of the story before even finishing it.

I'm most likely going to write that off-shoot of "After the Party: Dana" soon, but it'll be so far off-shot that I doubt I'll mention it in an introduction either. Makes an interesting thought though, how people react to seeing the mention of a previous story, even if it isn't a pre-quel, at the beginning of a new one.

Let us know which you choose and how things work out, if you don't mind.

Q_C