Mc deaths

[Roseuwuowo]

Hihihi i just wanted to ask.

If i killed off an mc and then straight up ended the novel abd start another one explaining their death but didnt revive them, how would you feel? Im sorta hesitant to do that. Its kind of necessary.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Do you kill the MC and start a new novel?

Or do you kill the MC to start a new novel?

It depends on that. In the former case, I would accept it. In the latter, I would feel bullshitted by the author if you understand what I mean.

 

[Amarathia]

Like the above says, depends how and why the first MC dies.
In other stories authors kill of the MC but keep on going with the same novel, just have a new MC. I know that if I went through a story where I liked the MC, then they died, I might be aggravated enough that I won't read that next novel (unless story was already tagged as tragedy and it was clearly leading up to the MC's death). Because at that point, readers went through ENTIRE first novel to only find that they were just reading an elaborate set up for the second novel.
I might not continue because I am uncertain if I will like the next MC as much as the first.
Especially if the first MC seemed to be killed off arbitrarily, I wouldn't continue.
So...it certainly can and has been done, but I say it has to be handled well. Their death should probably be explained in the same novel, and it should be for a plausible reason. Moreover, what's surrounding their death has to be interesting enough to make a reader want to continue with the story and see things through

 

[Roseuwuowo]

Do you kill the MC and start a new novel?

Or do you kill the MC to start a new novel?

It depends on that. In the former case, I would accept it. In the latter, I would feel bullshitted by the author if you understand what I mean.

The former, because simply killing off the mc would be illogical, i wouldnt do that just to start a new novel. It would be in the same world as the original one. The new novel would probably be quite short, because i cant just revive the mc and carry on with the story. Basically, im starting the new novel to explain the death of the mc.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

The former, because simply killing off the mc would be illogical, i wouldnt do that just to start a new novel. It would be in the same world as the original one. The new novel would probably be quite short, because i cant just revive the mc and carry on with the story. Basically, im starting the new novel to explain the death of the mc.

Then it should work perfectly fine. I see no problem with that unless the death is completely random. Good luck then!

 

[CupcakeNinja]

Hihihi i just wanted to ask.

If i killed off an mc and then straight up ended the novel abd start another one explaining their death but didnt revive them, how would you feel? Im sorta hesitant to do that. Its kind of necessary.

Go ahead and do it. But to avoid backlash i would call that work a prequel to the true main story.

 

[Roseuwuowo]

Go ahead and do it. But to avoid backlash i would call that work a prequel to the true main story.

Ok i'll do that

 

[Sabruness]

Like the above says, depends how and why the first MC dies.
In other stories authors kill of the MC but keep on going with the same novel, just have a new MC. I know that if I went through a story where I liked the MC, then they died, I might be aggravated enough that I won't read that next novel (unless story was already tagged as tragedy and it was clearly leading up to the MC's death). Because at that point, readers went through ENTIRE first novel to only find that they were just reading an elaborate set up for the second novel.
I might not continue because I am uncertain if I will like the next MC as much as the first.
Especially if the first MC seemed to be killed off arbitrarily, I wouldn't continue.
So...it certainly can and has been done, but I say it has to be handled well. Their death should probably be explained in the same novel, and it should be for a plausible reason. Moreover, what's surrounding their death has to be interesting enough to make a reader want to continue with the story and see things through

^this.

Also, be super clear that it will end with death and tag it with tragedy.

 

[ludagad]

It's a big no-no for me to have the MC die at the end. I avoid tragedies like the plague. But that's just me.

 

[AliceShiki]

Well, unless you end the story, I don't think you should start a new novel... Like... Can't you just finish "Arc 1" with MC's death, and then start "Arc 2" with the new MC?

If it's still the same story and stuff, might as well keep it under the same name as well.

 

[Kldran]

Personally, I'd advise making the new novel into a very long epilogue, instead of a short new story. Make it part of the story in which the MC dies, and it becomes a continuation of sorts, just a continuation that's now missing the main character, and provides some closure on the consequences of their death.

 

[Deleted member 22388]

Straight-up killing the mc
Leaving the readers puzzled
Yea I like that idea
In fact I already have in hand but its a different situation

 

[Vaerama]

I know that if I went through a story where I liked the MC, then they died, I might be aggravated enough that I won't read that next novel (unless story was already tagged as tragedy and it was clearly leading up to the MC's death). Because at that point, readers went through ENTIRE first novel to only find that they were just reading an elaborate set up for the second novel.

Would it be alright if I already killed them once? ?

I do so love to hate tragedy.

 

[AliceShiki]

Would it be alright if I already killed them once? ?

I so love to hate tragedy.

The more the merrier! XD

 

[D4isuke]

More pointless character deaths = turn-off series (unless it's horror with gore elements)
More meaningful or reasonable character deaths = okay
More satisfying character deaths (it's like killing zombies for a chance to survive) = okay, now this is definitely hardcore.