How Many Books to a Series? What is your thought?

[[deleted user]]

I would think 5 - 8,the longest series I remember reading was 10.

[Benji]

I personally get depressed when I read a stand alone story, or finish a series. I love the anticipation of the next book. Maybe It's just the addict in me.

Steven Eriksons' Malazan book of the Fallen series kept me captivated after a whopping 10 000 plus pages. Constantly introducing new characters, new cultures, his world expands with each book. More is revealed throughout as well. Having actions, or occurances, explaining themselves several books later.

As far as I understand there are 2 trilogies yet to come and I'm on board for all of them.

[Cori]

If you count Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar books as a series, I always look forward to more. I have read every one and loved every one. I also look forward to more in Brian Lumley's Necroscope series, L. E. Modesitt's Recluce series, and R. A. Salvatore's Drizzt books. Maybe most of these can be considered stand-alone, I am not sure.

[Brenda]

I began reading the Harry Dresden series, but they seem very similar and finally I fell off the sled at book 4.

[Cor Markhart]

Ah.. that is when the series starts to get really good.

Dresden Files is one of the examples that show how such long series can work. It has an overarching plot that spans the whole ~23 planned books and yet none of the books is boring to read or feels stretched. You also have great character and world development.

I like long series because I feel that those give the author the possibility to create really fascinating worlds and characters and give them room to grow. I also love series that play in the same world but have different characters because this adds a scope of storytelling impossible to accomplish in a single book or even a trilogy.

[Brenda]

Everybody kept on telling me that. The series starts getting good at 4, at 6, at 10. At some point I realized it was never going to start getting good for me.

[carol. , Senor Crabbypants]

Brenda wrote: "Everybody kept on telling me that. The series starts getting good at 4, at 6, at 10. At some point I realized it was never going to start getting good for me."

Ha! I found there were books I liked a great deal better than others, but i don't know that I'd claim the whole series has been "consistently better" than books one to three.

[Greg]

I enjoy reading lots of books with characters I like, or a world I like. The Recluce series is one, and I'm always interested in a new Salvatore book.

Still, the trilogy is the way to go. Even if you want to write 10 or more books with the same characters or setting, I think it's better for the reader to break them down into 3-book blocks. It gives readers a good starting point, and easily-foreseeable ending point.

I like the idea of Sanderson's 10-book series, I just don't like the idea of having an ending point that could be a decade away or more.

by L.E. Modesitt Jr.

by R.A. Salvatore

by Brandon Sanderson

[[deleted user]]

Greg wrote: "I enjoy reading lots of books with characters I like, or a world I like. The Recluce series is one, and I'm always interested in a new Salvatore book.

Still, the trilogy is the way to go. Even i..."

I agree with you about the trilogy packs or even four-packs.It gives the reader a,shall we say resting point.

[Greg]

Charlton wrote: "Greg wrote: "I enjoy reading lots of books with characters I like, or a world I like. The Recluce series is one, and I'm always interested in a new Salvatore book.

Still, the trilogy is the way t..."

I agree. I don't mind super long series per se, especially if some of the books wrap up nicely.

When I was rereading the WoT series this year I'd usually stop after 3 books and read something different, then pick it up again.

[Brenda]

Clearly there is an interest in series. Publishers would not publish them, if there wasn't gold in them thar hills. However, from the author point of view, the work is as long as the work needs to be. (Once someone asked Abraham Lincoln, a famously tall man, how long a man's legs should be. His reply was that they should be long enough to reach the ground.)
You do not want us padding out a singleton book to be three, or five, or eleven volumes. Be sure and demand value for your money.

[James]

As a writer, one of the things that turned me to self-publishing is the publishing corporations insisting that genre books must be a series. I had editors openly tell me that unless you have three books, and the books must be at least 80K words, we don't want to hear from you. It frustrated me to the point where I didn't want to write. When I finally realized I could tell them to screw off, I wrote the rules of Write Club:

The first rule of Write Club is – You will write every day.

The second rule of Write Club is – You will write EVERY day.

Third rule is – Someone must edit your work, and you will listen to them.

Fourth rule – You will finish what you start.

Fifth rule – You will write one story at a time.

Sixth rule – No passive, no weak verbs.

Seventh rule – Stories will go on as long as they have to.

And the eighth rule of the self-publisher’s Write Club – You will publish what you write.

It set me free and my productivity and creativity increased in magnitudes. Now, if only readers can be convinced that they don't need to read in the measurements that the publishing industry has dictated.

[Brenda]

Clearly readers can vote with their dollars. For years publishers believed that YA works could not be very long. It took J.K. Rowling to prove them wrong.

[Cor Markhart]

Lol... There existed many (long) YA series before HP became famous, I spent most of my childhood reading them.

And self-published works have currently a huge quality problem... Maybe one in ten is worth reading.

[Angela]

Ala wrote: "47 books. Tops."

lol

[Angela]

Jan wrote: "How many books do you think an author can write in a series before it starts to fade or go downhill? In my thoughts after the third or fourth book the series starts to loose it's zing (for lack of ..."

I think there's something about the number three that's just right. I can think of only two series that held me past three books--well three, counting George R. R. Martin, but I can't bring myself to read any more after the Dance with Dragons book.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, *good karma*]

S.M. wrote: "I think there's something about the number three that's just right. I can think of only two series that held me past three books--well three, counting George R. R. Martin, but I can't bring myself to read any more after the Dance with Dragons book.

Totally agree with the trilogy thing. That's my preference, too. I've done well with Kate Daniels but I think of those kind of books differently.

[Angela]

Kate Daniels was planned as a series, so hers works. I also love the John Williams Gotrek and Felix books (from Warhammer tabletop game) as well. They're no-think books that you'll enjoy if you want to enjoy a small cast of characters running around killing monsters.

[Reuben]

While Dresden Files works for his length, Butcher definitely reuses a couple of Dresden's cracks in later books. Wish I could think of an example. Seems like a sign of something...

[Lauren]

I'd usually say that 4 books MAX are ideal to complete a series BUT some books do well continuing on as they do because they stick to the overall story line. So many books loose their storyline by trying to drag it out (House of Night/Morganville Vamps/Stephanie Plum)
Still some series (J.D. Robb) do okay with their series because there is no bigger picture.
Then there are series like Kresley Cole's Immortals After Dark where each book leads a little closer to something bigger (but there are so many characters who each have their own book) that it takes FOREVER to finally get to the big BOOM at the end.
I guess to sum it up: 4 books would be perfect, fee authors can get away with the Never Ending Series & some series are just written to be ongoing