Thread: How many is to many?

Alright, so I'm working on a new project and after plotting it all out, I've realized that there's a slew of characters that are centrical to the plot of the story/series. There's somewhere around... 17 characters that are main characters, not including side characters, or room for expanding on those particular characters who annoy the crap out of you, until finally you have to write them into your story.

17 characters, is that to many?

How many is to many?

~Rodney

I think I recall Stephen King's The Stand having over sixty characters. Most of Tom Clancy's novels have at least twenty characters who play a pertinent role in the story, and about another twenty who have relevance in a small way. So, no, I don't think seventeen is overly high. It can get confusing, though, which is why you shouldn't have characters with similar sounding names, because the reader can confuse two characters quite easily. Give some nicknames - makes them easier to remember. I think you'll be fine with seventeen.

There's really no hard, fast rule that says X number of characters is just one too many (or X number of chapters or pages or POVs or random trombone playing bunnies). Just tell the story and don't worry about "normal" this or "too many" that. You'll be fine.

I have almost a hundred characters in my story and only about twenty of them are actually important, so I don't think any amount is too many.

Let me ask you this: if somebody says that's too many characters, are you going to get rid of some of them?

If you have an idea and story that can support the characters, and it's written so the reader can keep it straight, you can have as many as you want. You just have to have the chops to pull it off. There are no rules.

Originally Posted by kidstaple

How many is to many?~Rodney

As others have said, there’s no rule. But I think a large cast of characters is more common (even expected) in certain genre. For instance, I would expect a large population in a high concept thriller that deals with global consequences as opposed to a New England cozy murder mystery. But I’m sure there are exceptions to both those examples. You should populate your story with as many people as you feel are necessary to tell the tale. For even though there is no rule on the number of characters in a book, there is a cardinal rule that we should all live by: Don’t ever confuse the reader.

One additional point. Always ask yourself, whose story is it? No matter how many characters you have, the reader should always know the answer. Good luck.

For even though there is no rule on the number of characters in a book, there is a cardinal rule that we should all live by: Don’t ever confuse the reader.

Ha. There are great writers who SPECIALIZE in confusing the reader.

Don’t ever confuse the reader.

One additional point. Always ask yourself, whose story is it? No matter how many characters you have, the reader should always know the answer. Good luck.

I read your advice, and my first impression is, yeah, that makes sense. But then you say, "Don't ever" and "should always."

These things aren't gospel. I'm not saying you have to qualify everything, but saying "often" or "here's how I see it" would give you more credibility -- in my opinion.

It's not just you. I think a lot of these pronouncements about what makes good writing are no more than things that should be considered.

the reader should always know the answer.

NO future in the lucrative mystery market.

Originally Posted by lin

Ha. There are great writers who SPECIALIZE in confusing the reader.

The idea is that the reader should only be confused when you want him to be, not because you didn't write it right.

Think that goes with out saying. Although SO MUCH writing advice tend to go WAY to far towards the idea that the reader is a moron who can't be trusted for a minute without having his hand held and captions provided.

But why should that be popped out on this discussion, or the idea of "having the chops to pull it off"? Are these things that become more intensely important or difficult with many characters than with few?

No.

And that's really what the thread is about... the idea that are optimum or maximum numbers of characters.

But why should that be popped out on this discussion, or the idea of "having the chops to pull it off"?

I know, it's a huge stretch to think it just might be more difficult to manage a 50 characters than 5. However, I'll defer to your great wisdom.

Well, for me at least, a huge amount of main characters turns me off. Generally it's more trouble than its worth to actually remember a ton of characters and you're more likely to not flesh out your characters enough. This however, is my opinion. I personally like a smaller group of main characters, but you should do what your story demands.

I am writing a novel with over sixty rather important characters, but I am deciding to mix the roles of some together and focus on the two main characters. Why? Because my theme and motivation changed. It completely depends on your motive. If you want to have so many characters that the readers cannot connect fully with one, then go ahead and do it. But then again, the 17 characters you have will definitely have 17 layers of importance, and it's important when writing to keep those layers very clear to yourself, if not to your readers.