Establishing Stakes

AshleyEpidemic · Jan 30, 2013

So I did a bit of searching and I found some good bits about stakes, but not with the question that came to mind.

As an estimate, by when should the stakes be clear to the reader? I was recently reading an article that said by page 50 the stakes should be clear. While I read another article that said the stakes needed to be established by 1/4 into the book. And yet another said by page 75.

I am getting the feeling that it is slightly subjective. But what indicators let you know when it is time to reveal stakes or when they come too late?

A S Abrams · Jan 30, 2013

I always thought it was when the character has to make a decision about whether or not to pursue the story goal. At this point the character can't go back to life as it was and has to make tough choices. I would think that this is the time to show what the character stands to lose or risks.

Going by page numbers doesn't help because every story is a different length. Some authors place the inciting incident, the event that propels the character into the main story, at the 1/4 mark. This is usually the point of no return and where that big decision is made so, yes, the stakes are sometimes established there.

The stakes also build throughout the story so that what the character thought was important to them changes and different risks are assessed.

Dreity · Jan 30, 2013

Depending on the genre, page 50-100 has so far served as a decent arbitrary standard for me. I never really thought of it in terms of establishing stakes (although it does make sense), but generally speaking if the characters aren't knee deep in the main plot by that point then it's moving too slowly for me.

Jamesaritchie · Jan 30, 2013

"Stakes" doesn't really mean much to me, but I try very hard to establish the story, the main character, and whatever problem it is he's facing in first chapter, and in the first couple of pages, whenever possible.

"Stakes" can continue to get more and more serious, but as a reader, I want the story to start on page one, the problem clear and present, and I want the stakes establish right away, or what's the point of reading further? If I have to wait for the story to start, wait too long to see what's at stake, I'm going to look for another novel.

BethS · Jan 30, 2013

AshleyEpidemic said:
So I did a bit of searching and I found some good bits about stakes, but not with the question that came to mind.

As an estimate, by when should the stakes be clear to the reader? I was recently reading an article that said by page 50 the stakes should be clear. While I read another article that said the stakes needed to be established by 1/4 into the book. And yet another said by page 75.

I am getting the feeling that it is slightly subjective. But what indicators let you know when it is time to reveal stakes or when they come too late?

There is no magic page number.

However, what's at stake should be apparent very soon, within the first chapter. The stakes can escalate as the story goes on. The character doesn't have to know everything that's at stake right away. But if the character wants something, and there's no price to be paid either for gaining it or losing it, then why should the reader care? The sooner the price of failure is made apparent, the better. And the higher the stakes, the more compelling the story will be.

quicklime · Jan 30, 2013

AshleyEpidemic said:
So I did a bit of searching and I found some good bits about stakes, but not with the question that came to mind.

As an estimate, by when should the stakes be clear to the reader? I was recently reading an article that said by page 50 the stakes should be clear. While I read another article that said the stakes needed to be established by 1/4 into the book. And yet another said by page 75.

I am getting the feeling that it is slightly subjective. But what indicators let you know when it is time to reveal stakes or when they come too late?

tell the damn story :tongue

stakes should be clear as soon as is reasonable. On the other hand, I really doubt there is an arbitrary line or formula for this. Agyar is one of my favorite books, and we know the stakes (Agyar has to find a way to un-bind himself from his mistress and maker, kellek, before she frames him for a murder, and he's falling in love) about halfway through....but before that, we read anyway, because he still has an interesting tale to tell.

phantasy · Jan 30, 2013

BethS said:
However, what's at stakes should be apparent very soon, within the first chapter. The stakes can escalate as the story goes on.

I have to disagree with this idea that the stakes should be apparent in the first chapter. First 50 pages, fine. I keep seeing this in recent books and WIPs. If I don't care about the character or the world, I'll never care about the the stakes. Other novels don't do it as much and most are better and more memorable.

It's like books start out...OMG THIS HORRIBLE THING IS/WAS HAPPENING!

And I'm like...so? I don't care yet. Something is happening in every book...that's why its written. To me, this tactic is as bad as advertising. It's like telling me you have a Sale and I don't know what it is you're selling yet. Establish the characters and setting...even if its a small conflict at the start and then keep going.

I might change my mind about this someday but for now I'm not convinced. Write well and write good characters. Get me interested with your style.

AshleyEpidemic · Jan 31, 2013

quicklime said:
tell the damn story

stakes should be clear as soon as is reasonable. On the other hand, I really doubt there is an arbitrary line or formula for this. Agyar is one of my favorite books, and we know the stakes (Agyar has to find a way to un-bind himself from his mistress and maker, kellek, before she frames him for a murder, and he's falling in love) about halfway through....but before that, we read anyway, because he still has an interesting tale to tell.

This what I am considering as I am revising. When I look at the page number, the moment the stakes are clear comes a good chunk into the novel, over 1/4, but under 1/3. And definitely over the 50 page mark. But there are plenty of events and issues that contribute to the stakes from page one.

Dreity said:
Depending on the genre, page 50-100 has so far served as a decent arbitrary standard for me. I never really thought of it in terms of establishing stakes (although it does make sense), but generally speaking if the characters aren't knee deep in the main plot by that point then it's moving too slowly for me.

I might take this idea.

phantasy said:
I have to disagree with this idea that the stakes should be apparent in the first chapter. First 50 pages, fine. I keep seeing this in recent books and WIPs. If I don't care about the character or the world, I'll never care about the the stakes. Other novels don't do it as much and most are better and more memorable.

It's like books start out...OMG THIS HORRIBLE THING IS/WAS HAPPENING!

And I'm like...so? I don't care yet. Something is happening in every book...that's why its written. To me, this tactic is as bad as advertising. It's like telling me you have a Sale and I don't know what it is you're selling yet. Establish the characters and setting...even if its a small conflict at the start and then keep going.

I might change my mind about this someday but for now I'm not convinced. Write well and write good characters. Get me interested with your style.

This is the major thing I struggle with. I tend to not like books that throw me right into the catalyst.

stray · Jan 31, 2013

Person. Place. Problem.

The protagonist starts his journey in a normal place. He has a problem. Something is at stake. The problem marries another problem and gives birth to a dilemma. The dilemma hangs out in the bad part of town out with a strange predicament and they cook up a crisis.

They have to overcome the crisis using the lessons learned overcoming the earlier problems.

The stakes and the obsticles should become more complicated and more important as the story unfolds.

cbenoi1 · Jan 31, 2013

> But what indicators let you know when it is time to reveal stakes
> or when they come too late?

Wouldn't that be at the Inciting Incident?

-cb

stray · Jan 31, 2013

Stakes can be illustrated before the inciting incident.

Without the stakes the inciting incident has not teeth.

e.g - The private detective is reluctant to take a case before he realizes a love interest or family member is somehow involved in the case. The bond between him and the family member or love interest is illustrated early in the book.

He has no choice.

He takes the case and enters 'the point of no return.'

The stakes grow as the plot unfolds.

ap123 · Jan 31, 2013

I think the stakes are/should be revealed as the story unfolds. There has to be something to make the MC and story interesting from the beginning (hook), and then as you progress, the reader should be getting to know the character better, in and of itself raising the stakes, and the conflicts should deepen, become more involved. Otherwise it's a very short story. Stakes are conflict, conflict is story.

AshleyEpidemic · Jan 31, 2013

My issue isn't the actual stakes. They grow, become more complex and are very clear, once they are revealed. My issue is that the stakes, which are hinted at from the beginning, are not fully revealed for a while. The beginning establishes smaller issues that contribute to the main conflict.

stray · Jan 31, 2013

AshleyEpidemic,
Sounds like you have answered your own question, are on the right path....Keep doing what you're doing.

Kerosene · Jan 31, 2013

AshleyEpidemic said:
My issue isn't the actual stakes. They grow, become more complex and are very clear, once they are revealed. My issue is that the stakes, which are hinted at from the beginning, are not fully revealed for a while. The beginning establishes smaller issues that contribute to the main conflict.

I have to agree with the others on bringing up the conflict, thus what can be lost, thus the stakes, early on.

In the first 500words, I want to see conflict and know where the story might be heading. That should give me the stakes.

The stakes can evolve. Like a detective who doesn't have enough money to keep the lights on, then he gets a case. Later, he forgets about the electricity bill for the little girl he needs to find before she's killed.

My story has the "underlying" stakes appeal, but after numerous rewrites, the stakes have come out stronger.

But to me, it sounds like you just need to keep up conflict to carry the reader into the main story.

BethS · Jan 31, 2013

phantasy said:
It's like books start out...OMG THIS HORRIBLE THING IS/WAS HAPPENING!

And I'm like...so? I don't care yet. Something is happening in every book...that's why its written. To me, this tactic is as bad as advertising. It's like telling me you have a Sale and I don't know what it is you're selling yet. Establish the characters and setting...even if its a small conflict at the start and then keep going.

I don't think I made myself clear.

Generally (ideally), a character starts out wanting something, or trying to avoid something. There should be consequences for failure, and the reader needs to be aware of those consequences in order to care whether the character succeeds or fails.

The character's goal in the first chapter need not be his overarching goal; that can develop over time. Neither do the early consequences need to be dire, earth-shattering, or life-and-death. But they do need to matter.

BethS · Jan 31, 2013

stray said:
Person. Place. Problem.

The protagonist starts his journey in a normal place. He has a problem. Something is at stake. The problem marries another problem and gives birth to a dilemma. The dilemma hangs out in the bad part of town out with a strange predicament and they cook up a crisis.

They have to overcome the crisis using the lessons learned overcoming the earlier problems.

The stakes and the obsticles should become more complicated and more important as the story unfolds.

Beautifully expressed.

BethS · Jan 31, 2013

AshleyEpidemic said:
My issue isn't the actual stakes. They grow, become more complex and are very clear, once they are revealed. My issue is that the stakes, which are hinted at from the beginning, are not fully revealed for a while. The beginning establishes smaller issues that contribute to the main conflict.

That's perfectly fine.

In Courtney Schaffer's The Whitefire Crossing, you think you know the stakes within the first chapter or so.

You don't.

By the middle of the book, you're sure you understand them, and they're way worse than you imagined at the beginning.

But you still don't know everything that's at stake. There's more yet to be discovered. And more. The truth is gradually revealed like someone peeling away the layers of an onion. It's masterfully done.

All that's required is that you have something at stake at the beginning.

brianjanuary · Jan 31, 2013

The stakes should be at least hinted at by the Inciting Incident (10% into the story) and firmly established at Plot Point One (20-25% in), which is the event that launches the real story. Then at the Midpoint (halfway in), the stakes are increased (reversals occur, a ticking clock can be introduced, the opposition starts hitting back harder, the hero has more and more to lose) and continue to increase until Plot Point Two, which launches Act Three, when the hero has figured out what he/she has to do to defeat the opposition and goes about it. However, in Act Three, you should continue to up the stakes until the final confrontation.

ElaineA · Jan 31, 2013

stray said:
The protagonist starts his journey in a normal place. He has a problem. Something is at stake. The problem marries another problem and gives birth to a dilemma. The dilemma hangs out in the bad part of town out with a strange predicament and they cook up a crisis.

I am printing this and taping it to the wall in front of my writing desk (hope you don't mind!) as a reminder of the distilled "essence of fiction" and that bold, succinctly written imagery is a prized workhorse.

Jamesaritchie · Jan 31, 2013

phantasy said:
I have to disagree with this idea that the stakes should be apparent in the first chapter. First 50 pages, fine. I keep seeing this in recent books and WIPs. If I don't care about the character or the world, I'll never care about the the stakes. Other novels don't do it as much and most are better and more memorable.

It's like books start out...OMG THIS HORRIBLE THING IS/WAS HAPPENING!

And I'm like...so? I don't care yet. Something is happening in every book...that's why its written. To me, this tactic is as bad as advertising. It's like telling me you have a Sale and I don't know what it is you're selling yet. Establish the characters and setting...even if its a small conflict at the start and then keep going.

I might change my mind about this someday but for now I'm not convinced. Write well and write good characters. Get me interested with your style.

There's no reason at all not to have story, character, and stakes all at once. We do need to care about the character, but damned if I want to read fifty pages abut a character who isn't yet facing a deadly serious problem. Write well, write good characters, yes, but either those characters have a serious problem, or we're just watching grass grow.

MsPuck · Jan 31, 2013

Before the reader loses interest. Some readers have shorter attention spans than others.

Sonsofthepharaohs · Jan 31, 2013

brianjanuary said:
The stakes should be at least hinted at by the Inciting Incident (10% into the story) and firmly established at Plot Point One (20-25% in), which is the event that launches the real story. Then at the Midpoint (halfway in), the stakes are increased (reversals occur, a ticking clock can be introduced, the opposition starts hitting back harder, the hero has more and more to lose) and continue to increase until Plot Point Two, which launches Act Three, when the hero has figured out what he/she has to do to defeat the opposition and goes about it. However, in Act Three, you should continue to up the stakes until the final confrontation.

That all sounds very analytical and stuctured, like something you'd find in a 'how to write a novel' book, but I've never found it a very useful exercise trying to divide my book into plot points or acts.

I think escalating stakes is a much better way to measure story progression - start out with something small, and keep on piling up the stakes, which naturally means an increase in conflict and tension.

You don't need to show us the view from the top of the hill when we're just starting out at the bottom, but you do need to give us an idea what it is, to assure us that it's worth the climb to see it for ourselves.

quicklime · Jan 31, 2013

brianjanuary said:
The stakes should be at least hinted at by the Inciting Incident (10% into the story) and firmly established at Plot Point One (20-25% in), which is the event that launches the real story. Then at the Midpoint (halfway in), the stakes are increased (reversals occur, a ticking clock can be introduced, the opposition starts hitting back harder, the hero has more and more to lose) and continue to increase until Plot Point Two, which launches Act Three, when the hero has figured out what he/she has to do to defeat the opposition and goes about it. However, in Act Three, you should continue to up the stakes until the final confrontation.

that's a lovely formula, except I don't think you can write well by formula.

and I suspect a great many books deviate from this, either bringing stakes and plot points in too soon or too late, so they can tell the story well instead.

srgalactica · Jan 31, 2013

quicklime said:
that's a lovely formula, except I don't think you can write well by formula.

and I suspect a great many books deviate from this, either bringing stakes and plot points in too soon or too late, so they can tell the story well instead.

When I first started out writing, I started out doing it by formula. It didn't work. It stifled the writing. Write the story. Keep the readers interested. Screw with your characters lives. If you introduce the conflict too late in the story you can always change it later. Nothing is written in stone...unless, of course, it is *literally* written in stone.

Establishing Stakes

AshleyEpidemic

Did you see my bag?

A S Abrams

Bananas are my favorite animal

Dreity

Jamesaritchie

BethS

quicklime

all out of fucks to give

phantasy

I write weird stories.

AshleyEpidemic

Did you see my bag?

stray

cbenoi1

stray

ap123

Twitching

AshleyEpidemic

Did you see my bag?

stray

Kerosene

Your Pixie Queen

BethS

BethS

BethS

brianjanuary

ElaineA

All about that action, boss.

Jamesaritchie

MsPuck

...But you can call me Kristen.

Sonsofthepharaohs

Still writing the ancient Egyptian tetralogy

quicklime

all out of fucks to give

srgalactica