First book in a series & pay-off?

I want some fresh opinions. I never had this issue before even though I planned some other series.

So. The issue. There is a big secret that gives one of the main ongoing problems of the story a second (or third XD) layer/twist. For example (I don't want to spoil mine so it's made up):
- kids disappear
- MC's sister disappears
- MC starts digging
- MC discovers kids are getting kidnapped by fairies
- and those kids themselves are changelings
- it seems like fairies want their blood children back
- but the truth is that they sacrifice them to their hive queen, which they keep in secret, as well as the fact that they have one big hive mind

The last point would be the twist-secret. I feel like revealing it in book one will sort of undermine the intrigue for the other two books (it's a trilogy). At the same time, if I don't reveal it, won't it make the book seem unfinished and unable to stand on its own, even though the local plot arc is completed? I think I'd frown at something like this when in a reader's position, but I'm pretty demanding about tying up loose ends, so I'd like to know what other people think.

missesdash said:

Just to clarify, what's the local plot arc in the scenario above? I might misunderstand, but if the primary conflict is resolved, the readers obviously don't know or expect a twist, so they'd see it as finished, right?

Click to expand...

But if it's obvious that the ending is not set in stone, that the story goes on in a bigger sense? Like in Divergent... don't want to spoil it, but it's like the conflict the first book was built around is solved, yet it's just the first step, MC and her people have just entered a global (bigger) conflict. Okay, we've opened the code lock on room one, but there is another door in there. Like this.

So for this example, it would be like this: the sister is returned but MC and others declare they're off to see the wizard, that is, to get all other kids back. And we get a hint that MC is a changeling herself even though she wasn't kidnapped.

Katrinioni said:

And then the last two. This way the first book could end on a cliffhanger where her sister has suddenly disappeared.
If you don't like that idea though, then I also think that you should end the first book with the discovery that the children are being kidnapped by fairies. Good luck

Click to expand...

Thanks. Though this way I might end up with a five book series.

lvae said:

Lastly, have a little faith in yourself. Even if you use this idea in your first book, you're going to come up with more better ideas later, for the sequel.

Click to expand...

Yes, I thought of that too (packing it with good stuff). But in this case, the problem with the twist is that it's world-building. That is, I can't top it, I might find a better idea but not a bigger threat--and the plot of the next books is connected to the first one. The story will truly end only in book three.

Becca C. said:

A big twist that changes the way the reader understands the rest of the book seems like an interesting cliff hanger to leave off on. That's what a lot of YA books attempt, so it could work. IMO, of course, plus I haven't read your novel, lol.

Click to expand...

Most YA books I'm thinking about actually have cliffhanger endings which kind of surprises me because most of them are also debut books and we are told to avoid that.

alicereckless said:

If you spend the majority of the first book building up to the twist that the kids have been kidnapped by fairies, I'd say the second. If the fairy twist ends up at the least half way through the novel, I'd say in the first.

Click to expand...

The first twist is hinted at early but isn't revealed until about 75%, I think. I can't say it comes as an amazing surprise but it sure raises the question of "why would they do that?" That is, the question only the final twist answers for real. But also the final twist will get a true conclusion only in book three.

missesdash said:

Have you though about putting the twist in an epilogue? I did that with my novel. So it's "complete" in a sense. But the epilogue introduces a new conflict. Felt less gimmicky that way because I really do sant to offer the reader a 100% complete story.

Click to expand...

Kind of like those horror movies where it's over, everything's fine... and then a zombie crawls out of the fresh grave?

thebloodfiend said:

I don't like being expected to buy another book after I finish the first in order to get a complete story. If it's part of a series, fine. But I don't want a huge, in the middle of a battle, cliffhanger. It's like ending The Matrix as soon as Neo and Trinity break into the skyscraper to save Morpheus. Lame.

You can write a trilogy while still giving your reader a whole story. I'll begrudgingly admit that Stephenie Meyer is capable of that.

As for not including the twist in the first volume? There's no guarantee that you'll get picked up for a multi-book deal. If the twist is important to the first book, put it in. You want to focus on selling the first book. After that, you can discuss a series with your agent/editor. But speculating on a second book when the first isn't done won't do you any good.

Leave potential for a series if it's that important, but tie up loose ends.

Click to expand...

And what if Matrix ended once they saved him... but discovered the truth about the Matrix? Leaving you to wonder how they'll deal with it.

As for the twist, it's not that it's unimportant. But it would work better if it were revealed later, closer to the big ending of the series. It would make a bigger impression that way.

I've just finished another YA book (first in a trilogy) where the world-changing twist was half-revealed about 7/10 in and left unresolved (we know there is a twist, we know things aren't what they seem, but we don't get a complete explanation of why and how). I think the ending of that one can be best described as a pause to catch some rest before a new fight. Hmm.

Rhoda Nightingale said:

Will it? If so, there's your answer. Intrigue and plot twists aside, "unable to stand on its own" is definitely not something you want for your first book.

Click to expand...

Yes, this is true, but I'm not sure just how correct my definition of "able to stand on its own" is. Or rather, how it correlates with what publishers have in mind. Just for example, I'd be hard pressed to name a single YA debut novel of the recent years (that I've read) that in my mind can stand on its own. They all look like the first book in a series to me.

Cyia said:

"Stand on it's own" means is the main conflict, central to the single book, resolved by that book's end? Even if the arcing conflict isn't.

My go-to on this is Harry Potter because it's the easiest.

Book 1 - immediate plot: save the Philosopher's Stone - accomplished
arcing plot - Voldemort - addressed and progressed

Book 2 - immediate plot: save Ginny, Hermione, etc. - accomplished
arcing plot - Voldemort - addressed and progressed.

Those are stand alone books.

Click to expand...

Aha. So "Voldemort is arrested, killed, reformed or dealt with in some other seemingly final way by the end of the first book" isn't always a requirement for it to stand alone? That's exactly why books with this kind of structure don't seem like they stand on its own, well, to me. Because an important issue was set up beside the immediate conflict--but I-reader haven't received any real closure, only a promise to solve it later.

There is also a popular kind of plot structure in which MC gets hooked by a certain secret and solves it by the end--but the answer only reveals a bigger conspiracy at work. That can be considered a stand alone, too, right? I mean the current definition in the pub world.

I see. I was right about my own private definition being stricter--any kind of obvious arcing conflict seemed to keep the book from standing on its own. Now, if MC thought the antagonist was dead & problem solved, but in book two we found out MC was wrong--now that seemed like a stand alone book one, because it could exist forever without the sequel.

Thanks for clearing it up. I might be having a smaller problem with my own novels than I thought.