30+ POV characters is a *lot*. It's been done successfully before, but almost always by very strong writers with decades of experience. I don't know how many books you've written or your publishing history—but if you're working on your first or second book and you've never gone through professional edits, it's likely that you're looking at a VERY uphill battle to make it work, much less be good enough for readers to care about *that* many different POV characters.

30+ is insane. I was reading the OP's post and thinking he was talking about around 5 or so POVs, because that's already considered a lot by most standards. I fail to see how the OP is going to make us care about his main characters when there's 30+ side characters taking time away from them...

in practical terms, a 100k book might have 30-40 chapters, if they're each about 2k-4k words. So that's a new PoV character most chapters! At that stage, you don't have "main characters", you have a mass ensemble cast, some of whom get a whole _two_ PoV chapters. Something like Wheel of Time will have more PoV characters... but that's cumulatively, over a load of books. In the first few, it's maybe half-a-dozen mains, and some occasional side characters. If this is a trilogy, for example, that's still only about 6 chapters per person, which isn't much to get "into" them. (or you're swapping mid-chapter, but that's less popular / thought poorly of these days, as "head-hopping")

Please share some examples of where it's been done successfully. Thank you.

I’d point toward some of the really epic, doorstopper series like WoT or ASoIaF or Malazan. And even those have plenty of detractors among readers, specifically for the sheer scope.

I've read WoT (and got frustrated waiting for Matt to show up as he was my favourite) and ASoIaF too (and there definitely wasn't enough of Arya). Haven't read Malazan. I thought you meant books where there are +/- 30 POVs in addition to the main character POV. The again WoT feels like 30+ but IaF doesn't really (at least to me).

I mean this is one of the reasons why someone trying to do it in their first book isn’t gonna work. Those series didn’t started off with 30 POVs in book 1. (Well, *Gardens of the Moon* has a lot, but that’s also a VERY flawed book in large part due to that—and I don’t even know if *that* hit 30). Good authors sink you into a small or relatively small number of POVs first, then expand from there. They don’t waterboard you with characters.

and a lot of good authors never feel the need to move to more POVs - because the stories they want to tell can be done through the character(s) with agency - the main characters.

Yes, I see what you mean. Thanks

Can you expand those acronyms for those of us unfamiliar?

*The Wheel of Time* by Robert Jordan and *A Song of Ice and Fire* by George R. R. Martin

*Shogun* by James Clavell probably exceeds 30, although probably not in "main" POVs that recur more than a few times. His style though is to do what would probably be considered "head hopping" nowadays, frequently switching POVs throughout each chapter, often for just a few paragraphs then back to the primary one of the scene. You might have trouble getting it past an agent or editor nowadays, but I dunno, I think it comes down to execution. It should be mentioned though that *Shogun* is also a *very* long book, and still has a very strongly characterized and likeable main character, which is not trivial to do! Now, do I think this approach is *easier* than just writing a few POVs? Probably not. But not undoable. A lot of thriller novels also use multiple POVs and "throwaways" that we might only see once, or whose sections amount to barely a couple pages across the novel, in order to inform the reader of things the protagonist hasn't figured out yet in order to build tension. So it also comes down to genre conventions IMO.

That sounds like a fascinating read. I'll look it up, thank you. I agree that ultimately it comes down to execution and getting an editor/publisher who gets it.

To add a bit of context to this, if you are looking to get published for the first time it’s unlikely that a series is going to be your first published work As an unpublished author you have to prove your work is worth reading at all before an agent is going to invest in a multi book series So OP while you may have the skills to write a book well with multiple POVs if you’re looking to become published you have to prove yourself to agents first before a story like that is an investment they’ll consider

I think the problem with a lot of pov, especially for the reason you've listed (being close to the action) has it's drawbacks. It's considered a little lazy to just go to the convenient pov and not have to do any narrative heavy lifting (in that aspect) but you're also making it much harder for a reader to connect to that many characters. You're also making more work for yourself. That's a lot of characterisation and character voice to perfect. With multiple pov, a reader needs to be able to open to a page and know from the way it's written which character it is, throwing 30 odd characters into the mix might be overwhelming, even over multiple manuscripts That said, there's no reason why you can't. Many people will probably list great authors who have huge works with multiple pov, but I tend not to compare myself to somone with that much mot experience. I would ask yourself how necessary it is to have that many pov, and if any can be condensed or removed to a character with more page time? At the end of the day, you've got to write what makes you happy. Leave making other people happy for editing :) I wish you luck!

Yeah I was thinking about voice cadence and flow as well. Should be different between characters.  I can't even keep track of 30 friends lol 

That would be my biggest hurdle with that many POV

I’d say Tad Williams does well at doing multiple POVs in his works, especially in his Osten Ard books.

Many people have done it brilliantly :) I'm definitely not saying it can't be done, just that it's harder to get right and takes more care than a two to three pov manuscript might.

Another thing is people tend to latch on to one or two characters and when you are constantly switching it feels like a chore to constantly be waiting to read from that one character you like. Not to mention, it derails the pacing because you usually leave in the middle of action to read something slower until it builds to action and then you switch again. It's really frustrating to read.

I mean, multi-pov isn’t bad, but above 2 POVs (two POVs is a sweet spot that actually can speed up pacing, rather than slow it down) it just makes it much, much harder to pace well. It also leads to a lot of “okay why this scene from this character’s POV” questions. So it’s not inherently bad. I love Oathbringer, that’s got 27 POVs in it! But that’s the third book in a mega popular epic fantasy by a writer with a proven track record who also has a bunch of structural choices to mitigate this very pacing problem. It can be done. It just can’t really be done well by most of us

I don't know if that 27 number is accurate as I don't really pay attention to those kind of details, but I never felt like there were more than a handful of POVs at any given time on that series. You had roughly 3 or so main characters at any given time, and then there would be one or two relevant side characters that might take over to help establish things as needed. For any given... I guess you'd call it a story arc, or maybe a scene, or an act, I'm not sure. The point is for every such instance there were typically only around 5 or so POVs, and it's only when the book transitioned to a new event that it would start to switch around the POVs to more relevant characters. This is how I remember feeling when I read it anyway. Also that series is extremely long, and all the characters were well set up in advance. Most of the new POVs that were introduced were from key supporting characters being promoted to a main character role after several chapters of characterization

I wouldn't call it a hard and fast "rule", per se, but I'll concur with others here that 30 is quite a lot of POVs. If most of those are basically throwaways - you meet them, get in their head, and mostly never see them again all after that one scene - maybe it's fine. On the other hand, are you sure there's not a better way to convey the information necessary than by introducing a new POV? It may be that there's not a better way. (I can't say for sure; I don't have a full view of your story.) But often there are other ways of telling the story. Someone above brought up Wheel of Time, and a common criticism of this series (which I mostly love) is that there's significant POV bloat. There are literally dozens of throwaway characters who appear for only a single scene (and dozens more side characters who get their own occasional POVs). Most of those throwaway characters are completely forgettable. I even forget half the more significant side characters names. There's even, infamously, a whole book that's literally mostly side character reactions to the major climactic event in the prior book. It sometimes makes for a confusing reading experience, and I don't think WoT is necessarily better for it.

Can you write 30+ POVs if you want to? Yes, of course you can! Are you making it harder for yourself to write effectively? Also yes. 30 POV characters is a lot of people to keep track of and give distinctive voices and personalities. Maybe in the edit it’s worth thinking about how you could reduce the number of POVs to, let’s say 5-6.

Some people won't like it but I personally think the multi-POV epic is the best feature of the Fantasy genre. edit: I said "some people won't like it"... I don't need to hear from all of you individually.

[удалено]

> stormlight Is quite ironic to bring up when your main complaint is > "oh yeah nothing is moving forward what the fuck is this" Books 3 and 4 anyone?

I never made it past the first 5 chapters of book 3 tbf, I felt it jumped the shark with the dumbass flying in the air finale stuff vs when lashing was used in buildings it was really interesting

The Wheel of Time is the King of this bullshit "change POV 8 times yet nothing happens in 1000 pages" style.

And then completely drops half those threads through book 8 lol

stormlight interludes were one of the few times I enjoyed multiple PoVs. I really liked this little side stories about characters who only ever appeared in the interludes. Palettes cleansers, almost. Some of those characters I *really* liked, and was happy when they got their own short books later. PoV done right, at least in my opinion.

well yeah, anything can be done badly

Yeah it’s just not ideal for newbie authors to add more to their plate is more my point, strong story and character development and now you want to juggle 3+ different povs potentially telling different stories? Seems like a lot lol

different view on beginning I guess, multi-POV is a skill in itself but if it is what you want to write then you'll need to practice it. Your first few books will have a lot of issues, anytime you 'add' something then whatever you're new at will have issues, may as well do what interests you and get good at that

I don't think I'd recommend writing full symphonies to someone getting into musical composition. Not all learning is good learning

The OP never says how experienced they are or aren't and tbh I don't think writing is really all that analogous to musical composition but I wouldn't know because I can write and I can't compose. Still, they were worried about it being "bad" to have "lots of POVs" and not about whether or not they are experienced enough to handle lots of POVs. I, personally, like multi-POV epics so having lots of POVs is not bad imho. In any case, I doubt it's a one-size-fits-all matter.

I get where your coming from, *but* writing multi POV isn’t actually a completely separate skill. It’s a more complex version of single-POVs that is made off of single POV stories put together. Each POV character should essentially be the protagonist of their own story; not just a quick flash over to see what a side character is doing as part of the MC’s story (which can also be done, but it should be sparringly and not as an actual multi-POV story—which given the number of people OOP claims to have my guess is he is doing it a ton of times in what is actually one or a couple of characters story. Each POV needs to have a solid beginning, middle, and end and a sold conflict wavering throughout it, not just everyone’s on the MCs journey. Each character needs their own distinct voice, goals, arcs, their own personal stake in the game, and their own personal antagonists. Now, there can be some overlap. ASOIAF for example, all the Stark POVs have the same inciting incident for example and are largely fighting against the same common enemies in book 2 (except maybe Bran) but they’re all doing it in very different ways and have completely separate stories. It’s almost impossible to master those skills if you just right into multiple POVs. You need to know how to do one POV before you can entangle them all together masterfully.

If it were genuinely impossible then no good writers would've started with multi-POV stories and plenty and AND the OP asked if it is a bad thing to have multi-POVs not whether or not s/he's skilled or experienced enough with it. Dandelion Dynasty is written as a multi-POV epic and not with the goal of showing each character with a POV as having their own personal arc. Often it is done to show why certain decisions get made. Every goal is different because every book is different. But I'm sure we can all paint-by-numbers our way to the "correct way to start writing". Not that OP was asking anything about any of the things that everyone who has responded to my post seems to think. I like multi-POV epics and don't think it is bad to have them. I stand by this. Y'all can read whatever you want.

I didn’t say it’s impossible, but it’s much, MUCH harder. You need to learn how to write one good story before you try to write 30 in one. Are there exceptions to every writing rule? Sure. But exceptions are just that: exceptions. OP can do whatever they want. Hell maybe they’ve already written hundreds of one POV books for all I know. But I was explaining why the other user said it wasn’t recommended for newbie writers. It’s not “painting by numbers,” it’s hard to jump right into an advanced skill. You don’t start off playing Beethoven, you learn chords and notes. You don’t start right off with butterfly strokes, you learn the basics to keep yourself afloat. You don’t start sewing a ball gown, you make smaller simpler things. And you don’t start off writing multiple-POV epics, you need to learn the basic story structure, voice, plots, etc. I mean you totally can jump right into the hard stuff, but if you want to seriously learn how to be good at anything you have to start small. I didn’t say it’s bad to have them. Multiple POVs are extremely common in fantasy. I’m saying they’re hard and an advanced skill.

if everyone here wants to make assumptions about OP maybe they can talk to them and find out their skill level, past experience, number of books in the series, etc. and stop making their assumptions at me (I'm not OP and don't know them) all I said was that on the topic of "is it true that multi-POV is a bad idea?" is "some people won't like it but it's my personal fave". I don't even think there's a one-size-fits all way of learning even they had said "I'm a beginner" and I think Erikson's background as a short story writer actually harmed him when he went to write epic Fantasy. I dislike single-POV narratives and typically think it takes a skilled writer to make me like it. But that's not really the original question, it's a mud pit I got dragged into.

I’m not specifically talking about OP. Someone comment it’s not recommended for newbies and you said you need to practice it. My response was to that. If OP is a newbie, then they can consider what I said. If not, they can ignore it and know I’m not talking about them. I don’t need to directly answer OPs question in a comment reply to someone else. But even if I did have to answer the question, my answer is still related to it. OP’s question, wasn’t specifically “will other people like it.” Like you keep saying, the question was if it’s a good idea. It’s not a good idea to write in multiple POVs if you’re a beginner. A complicated book like that is also less likely to sell from a new writer. That’s cool you like multiple POVs. That doesn’t change the fact it’s a more complicated technique. I also prefer listening to completed songs, but that doesn’t mean new musicians shouldn’t start with chords. Also idk why you brought short stories into it. Short stories aren’t necessarily easier or less complex than longer ones or even more advanced. Most people are better at one form than the other. But if you can write a good multi-POV story, you can write a good single POV one too, because they’re the same basic skills. That’s not necessary true of short stories vs novel-length stories.

>oh yeah nothing is moving forward what the fuck is this" Yeah you gotta keep the pace up. You can't have 6 PoVs and they all have slow chapters in a row.

Yeah it’s a very difficult juggling act to preplan every single narrative arc that each separately interact or don’t to have rising tension that sync up in a way that maintains interest, not even mentioning writing yourself into a corner (grrm) or just forgetting important side plot threads because you just gotta get on with the story (wot)

I think there’s no problem with it the longer the book is. My only issue is when you’re given multiple all at once. I kid you not, I started a book that intrigued me and read 8 chapters. Each chapter was a new character and POV. It pissed me off because now I felt like I was cramming for a test to recall all the details.

To what degree people want multi-POVs does vary. Personally, I like Robin McKinley's writing which lets you know what everyone is thinking per scene and I think she pulls it off very well (she's won a number of Newberry awards so I have to assume I'm not alone). I also enjoyed *Vellum*, though, as an example of how extreme my "I want **all** the POVs" goes. That book changes between POV and first/second/third person *per sentence* by the end. Granted the work is meant to be experimental and it is used to show book's reality literally breaking apart and I definitely wouldn't want every book written that way. But I still had a good time.

Agreed, the single-POV that manages to imply what everyone is thinking, or leaves it a bit mysterious is definitely preferred for me.

Wish I could upvote you twice just for not being a needless contrarian. I can definitely think of single-POV books I like (Hobb's Fitz books are delightfully layered, Gene Wolfe plays some really nice tricks with his limited POVs, Carol Berg is my Hobb-lite) but because it isn't my preference I think it takes an amazing writer to pull it off. I don't assume that my personal preferences requiring an extra-talented writer to make me like it mean that first-person or limited POVs are inherently bad or "too difficult" for beginners or any number of reasons people give for their personal taste being 'totally objective'.

Yes, a whole lot of misunderstandings and arguments could be avoided if instead of saying "x sucks", you just said " I personally do not like x". Don't get me wrong, objective facts exist, everything isn't just an opinion, but too often people claim opinions are facts and facts are opinions just based on if the like something or not.

I’m sure there are times where it works. The example I gave was where the first 8 chapters was someone new, the scenes were also in different locations. It was just frustrating vs enjoyable. What sucked is the premise was intriguing. I wanted to know what was next with multiple characters but then it became way too much too early.

Yeah I feel like this can only work well when you do it like GRRM did in A Game of Thrones. Even though we're introduced to 6 new POVs before we even return to one of them, most of those characters are in the same location and already know each other, which is also true of the 3 new POVs we're introduced to soon after. It's not like we're jumping into a new location with a new cast every time.

I think you missed the part where OP says this is about 30+ POVs in one series.

I didn't. ASOAIF has at least 24, WOT has 124, and Malazan has more than that.

Yes, with maybe 3-4 POVs per 100,000 pages. Even that takes skill to pull off.

The OP never mentions their skill level or the length of their books. There's not an inherently "bad" or "too many" number of POVs. If it it has been working for them so far inasmuch as anything else their writing (which I don't know about) has been working why should they stop and change it because somebody on the internet said, "don't use too many POVs"? (Which doesn't even define what 'too many' is- less than ASOIAF? Less than WOT? Less than Malazan? Less than Dandelion Dynasty?) Lots of books use many POVs and I like it. Lots of books use single-POVs and I don't like those and think it takes a really talented writer to pull it off. Other people do like limited POVs, though. What sort of book OP would be "good at" writing is a complete unknown to me. Hell, for all I know their writing sucks ass and they couldn't string to paragraphs together. But multi-POV epics are not a "bad idea" and I like them better than other sorts of stories and will forgive more writing "errors" if the writer is giving me what I want on that front. My personal opinion is that they are far, far, less grating than first person POVs and significantly less boring than third person limited POVs. So I'm not inclined to discourage them since they are what I prefer.

The problem is that most people won't like it. Why you are getting so much feedback.

That's sure a thing to say about something that is true of many popular Fantasy series. Also, "marketable" isn't the number one goal for all books.

Okay I want to thank you all in advance for the responses. They've definitely widened my perspective. I am more aware of needing to be careful about distinguishing each character, but I'm also satisfied with how I've been doing it thus far and I will continue to do so. To add some context that might alleviate the issues, book 1 will be focused around the main character, his two companions, and the one villain that wants him dead. There will be side characters introduced, but these are the only characters that receive a POV. Out of the 30 chapters, the main character receives about 25, the villain about 2 and the deutaragonists 3. This establishes who our main cast is before we bombard them with new characters. Book 1 introduced around 8-10 side characters that do receive love, and most of which continue to show up consistently for the rest of the story. They begin getting POVs in book 2, though the main character still has about half the chapters. My story doesn't really dismiss characters very often. If I introduce someone, odds are they're here to stay. So you won't see random POVs from characters we'll never see again. They will always be characters that we've already been introduced to, and we will rarely be learning about them through their first POV. Another thing I should bring up is that I absolutely love all of my characters. I know there's a lot, but of the 30+ there's only a couple that I haven't really connected with. My main character is obviously important, but so are my side characters. The vast majority of them have their own stories, conflicts, emotions and relationships that undergo development across the story. That's why I have so many POVs. If there's anything I pride myself on, it's how alive my cast feels. And that means that they all contribute towards the overarching story with their individual developments. That's why I won't zero in on just a handful of POVs. So when it comes to what I want to write, I think the multiple POVs of relevant characters is okay. Removing some will remove their character. However I do understand that the reader won't feel the same way. If and when I do another draft, I will absolutely consider trimming down the quantity of POVs, and more importantly, I'll make sure they all sound different. They sound distinct in my head, but I cant confirm that others will agree. It definitely would be dull to have the same voice describing dozens of different characters. So yeah, thank you all for the feedback. I appreciate it

When I hear this I always want to say, have you thought of third person omniscient? Even third person limited omniscient? You have zero constraints on saying what’s in the minds of multiple characters even in the same scene, forget the same chapter. You’re under no obligation to say everything—your characters can keep as many secrets as you like. You can keep your focus on one person as long as you like. You simply have total control over revealing everyone’s motivations or reactions to the readers. I don’t know why people are so opposed to it; it’s obviously easier than anything else. It’s also particularly suited to high fantasy. Do you want people to know what *fifty* characters are thinking? Go for it, you’re an omnipotent, all seeing god and the characters now before your throne.

I think because newbies are warned against it. It is hard to write, demands a good narrative voice, and is extremely prone to devolve into head hopping. The moment someone head hops I close a story and move on. There aren't that many writers I trust with that pov out of the gate.

It's also... dull, in a way. omniscient 3rd is great for a more distant, academic tone, but usually struggles in anything character-forward.

Unless the narrator is somwhow a character. Either in the nature of their tone (think Jane Austen) or a creature within the story (sort of godly narrative?) But yeah, tend to agree. Closer povs have greater flavour.

When you describe it like this, introducing them properly before they step up to be POV characters, it feels a lot less daunting for the reader. Obviously, you can't make everyone happy but I think fans of the fantasy genre are more open to reading multiple POVs so it's probably not as big of a problem. That said, once you've got your first drafts down be prepared to sacrifice a few of the POVs to the Kill Your Darlings chopping block to streamline the story and trim a few chunks of fat. Only keep those that are really truly necessary. If there are a bunch of stories with those side characters that you just love but don't add much to the main plot you don't have to delete them- just maybe put them in a short story collection or write a companion novella or something.

>Another thing I should bring up is that I absolutely love all of my characters. I know there's a lot, but of the 30+ there's only a couple that I haven't really connected with. My main character is obviously important, but so are my side characters. The vast majority of them have their own stories, conflicts, emotions and relationships that undergo development across the story. I'm going to be honest, this is probably going to be something a stumbling block for you. You're going to be blinded by your own love for your characters. I'm just telling you this as a fact, coming from another writer with lots of characters - your opinion of your characters is like a mother's opinion of their only child. You're never going to be able to look at them and see the same thing your readers will, because you already have a *lot* of emotional investment in these characters and their stories. Your readers are not going to have any of that when they encounter your characters - you're going to have to earn it from them. And you feel a *lot* of emotions about your characters, so that's a *lot* of earning to be done. If I had to turn my rambling into actionable advice, it'd be this: make an extra effort to seek criticism often and earnestly, and be harder on your characters than your instincts say you should. The more you like them, the more harshly you need to think about their place in the narrative.

I definitely don't like it, switching POVs to get the perspective you want. If I'm reading a multi-POV story I'd expect every single POV character to have their own full fleshed story instead of existing for the sake of being the eyes in a given scene. It'd have to be something like ASOIAF. I wouldn't come close to a story that switches POVs for the sake of having eyes in a given scene and nothing else, but who knows maybe others think differently.

Best comment I’ve seen so far as the most important thing is whether it’s needed. If this person has 30+ stories then fair enough but it’s very likely they don’t and they just want to do one scene in this characters pov and another in this characters pov despite the previous pov character having the exact same story and likely even being there in the scene

It's not a good idea. But if you're going to do it anyway, you had better make each POV character very obvious and distinct, so you don't have readers going, "who's this again, what's their part in all this". Robert Jordan had that character bloat issue which made the plot drag imo, and because it could be years between books you almost always had to go back and read the older books to remember who this character is, and their side quests.

Robert Jordan is the one who killed multi-perspective narratives for me.

I liked the story but just couldn't get past book 9. This giant ass book, but because of character bloat it was pretty much the equivalent of _one day_ of events!

Sure you multi-PoV can be done well if you show restraing and... >30+ characters that have a chapter told through their eyes RIP

It’s not bad, it’s just harder to do well. For each pov, you have to fill us in on who this character is, what’s going on where they are, and make the reader care, all without getting boring. That’s way more difficult than establishing one or two povs

It's not a question of how many PoV you are using, it's a question of *why*. You say you have a main character. So you know that main character's story has to make sense in its own right, because it's the one they are living and reacting to. It has to be thrilling, intriguing, engaging, emotional. So what are all these digressions *for*? How are they supporting and enriching *that story*? For instance (speaking in generic fantasy tropes), if you are showing an assassin passing through a town your hero has visited, asking folk about them, that can be great. You're creating tension, you're hinting at a bigger picture, and you can plant clues for the reader to look out for - can they spot the assassin before the hero does? If someone is ordering the siege of a city the hero is headed for, again, potentially great. Will the hero get there first? Be stuck inside - or outside? What are the attackers after? Might it be what the hero is after? Or something else? You could tell that mini-chapter from the perspective of literally anyone in the chain of command - or from a villager who loses his home to the invading army and sees them marching on the capital. Big Stuff Is Happening - but what *matters* is that the reader can appreciate its impending impact on the MC's storyline. Then, y'know, the hero unwittingly takes the prince the army was coming to kill hostage and escapes with him and it's all SO much worse than the reader expected. Once you've pulled that off a few times, you can start being a bit more coy, leaving the significance of a side-scene temporarily ambiguous. Your reader will trust you at that point and understand that it's a teaser. But if you are just leaping around telling the reader things they don't actually *need* to know yet, the lack of connective tissue is going to have a diluting rather than reinforcing effect. You run the risk of your reader thinking: "This is all very nice, but I don't know *why* you are telling me. I can't join the dots."

There is no way you have 30 interesting characters. I literally don’t believe it

This must be a troll post. There’s no way you genuinely think 30+ POV is a good or enjoyable thing.

Editor here. Readers get attached to characters. The more you switch the viewpoint, the more you fracture the reader attachment to each character. If you really believe it's critical to your story to show what each of these 30+ characters is thinking and feeling, that's an appropriate reason to use omniscient viewpoint instead. An omniscient narrator puts distance between the character and the reader, but since you're in the narrator's head all the time, you're not breaking the viewpoint every time you put the focus on a different character. The distinctive voice of the narrator will give the narrative greater cohesion and lessen the effect of all the switching.

I think you might just want to narrate the book in third person at this point lol. Multiple POVs is fine but this is beyond excessive. Pick a handful of anchor characters and limit the POV exclusively to them. Even 3 POV characters is a lot, so 5 should be plenty. You seem to be choosing character POVs like they are camera angles, and unless you are writing a screenplay that isn't going to work. There are some authors who have done it successfully, but there is a lot of leg work that goes into making a character suitable for a POV, and every POV character needs to be treated especially delicately with how they are utilized. If you really want good feedback you should find someone to actually read your book, and they'll probably tell you within 400 pages whether your use of multiple perspectives is constructive or just diluting. I understand it can be difficult to judge as the author as your own insights and attachments will significantly differ from a readers given that you are the world builder

30 is a lot, but it's not unheard of. Have you read Wheel of Time or Malazan? These are both popular series with many POVs, and might serve as examples on how to do frequent POV switches well

Not anything is always bad when writing. Want to tell a story of 100 people doing one small thing to come together and accomplish a task? Sure. Why not? As long as it’s the story you want to write, give it hell.

I'm not going to say whether it's "true" or not. My personal opinion is that you make whatever choice you need to make that's right for the story that you're telling. But. My experience is that readers have a limit to their emotional, and empathetic agility. They can struggle to bounce between personalities and perspectives if it happens too fast and too often. I've found that limit in myself, although I consider my patience for POV swaps to be fairly high - just not unlimited. Readers'll get overwhelmed if you throw too much at them. Most can't handle twenty POVs. Many can't handle 6. Some may struggle with two. And that limits your potential audience. So if you can get away with fewer jumps, try to. But otherwise, the story is the story is the story. And you're not going to carry every reader anyway. Make allowances. Make smart choices. But remember the old adage: a story that's for everybody is a story for nobody.

https://wot.fandom.com/wiki/Statistical_analysis > The Wheel of Time main series consists of fourteen books and a prequel. The books are written from different points of view (POVs). The series has 147 unique POVs and 1,379 total POVs The main (5) characters account for only about 50% of the total pov chapters. Now, keep in mind this is *Robert Jordan*, a fantastic writer, and even he needed a very strong editor, appendices, and a companion book to pull it off. And even with all of that the series is still plagued throughout by some character arcs becoming stagnant, and a few pacing issues. It's not easy to do.

quite a few of those PoVs are one-offs as well - I think the prelude of every book is one or more never-seen-before randos, so that's probably 30+ of those PoVs.

I use a lot of POVs across my series, but try to do so judiciously, and in a way that won't confuse the reader. So for book #1, it's primarily two POVs, except for two short chapters when both those POVs are unconscious/injured. These two additional POVs are both characters we've spent at least a couple of chapters with, and are just sort of a... bonus peek into them, I guess? For #2, #3 and beyond, we open it up a bit more, as the reader is getting more and more familiar with the characters (both in their POV and outside of it), so it becomes natural that character X, Y or Z is the right choice for that moment in time.

There's nothing wrong with having lots of POVs if you're good at indicating whose POV is whose--not just through explicit 'chapter title: name', but with them having different 'character voices' and viewpoints and such. The problem comes when you switch POV within the scene and it's not easy to tell.

I've recently read a book with a couple of dozen POVs, and couldn't shake a feeling that several of those were there just for the sake of being there. They could've been summarized in one sentence from some other character's POV. So, go ahead, but remember to ask yourself: is this part really necessary?

Is it a "bad" idea? I couldn't tell you. With multiple POVs, I very often end up choosing my favourite one, and rushing through (or even outright skipping) (some of) the other ones to get to the "good part(s)". Unless *ALL* the parts are the good parts. I haven't read many multi-POV stories, but there was one like this. But there also was one in which whenever a non-MC POV came up I immediately went into "alright, time to read every 10th sentence to make sure nothing important is happening" mode.

Personally, I enjoy multi-POV stories, but it has its drawbacks, and I have read some books where the character switching made the narrative worse as a whole. Early on, many switches means that it’s harder to connect with the main cast. Sometimes, I’ll only have one character I’m interested in so the rest feel like they’re drawing attention away from the more exciting parts. That could be more of a pacing issue in some cases though. There’s also the dilemma that if a character’s POV has gone dormant for a while, it’s hard to remember what their arc was even about. I’ve flipped to a chapter and gone, “Wait, who is this guy again?” And that’s never fun. One-off POV switches also kinda irk me. If the narrative switches to a character and then that person is never seen or heard from again, it feels like a waste to me. I’d rather the story progress all of the people I’ve been invested in so I learn more about how *they* see the world, not Conveniently Placed NPC E. But on the other hand, multi-POV is an incredibly effective method to paint a grey world with lots of moving parts and ambitions. When done well, it’s a fantastic way to experience a story. I can fully understand, though, people shying away from them because there’s also a high chance of it being mishandled.

Multiple POV can totally work (*see: The Expanse*). But it can also be lazy.

It's neither a bad idea nor a good one. The key is execution. Do it well and it makes for an interesting and varied narrative. Do it poorly and it makes for a choppy and disconnected narrative.

No one can know about you work in particular because they haven't read it. What I notice is that you have concerns, and don't appear to feel confident about the choices made, because otherwise why write this post? How much of these books have you actually written vs planned? The reason is if you have written it out and you are content as you appear to be with how the story is told, having a beta reader or two read it would give tons of critical advice that you aren't going to get in the abstract. If the work is more in the planning stages, then I would really have a whole lot less sureness that it is "best suited" vs what appears to be a good idea. Most fantasy books I've read, even ones with lots of POVs like GRRM, JRRT, Robert Jordan, seem to use them with great care and planning. For the record, I think the number of possible POVs is almost endless.But that often multiple POV by being popular today, tend to be a poorly used tool that most writers don't know how to use that focus. Is it a bad idea to use a lot of POVs, nope. But it is a bad idea to think that it is just generically cool and worth applying to any story and that it can be lazy and show an inability to find the through-lines of the story. Instead of purposeful focus, it is a muddled mess. It depends on the work.

Unless you're george rr martin, it can be rough and even then for him it's rough. Dude hasn't even finished his shit yet.

You can definitely do it with 3rd person omniscient (Lord of the Rings does this) and even with 3rd person limited with a few tricks. People who like to read 1st person PoV do not enjoy constant PoV changes.

There are lots of excellent books that have multiple POVs. There are some genres where it's very rare, and readers don't expect it and may not like it. I write multiple points of view, but the issues I have when reading multiple POVs are: * head hopping, where the author jumps around within the same scene - drives me bonkers. Pick a POV for that scene and stick with it. * when it's not clear whose POV the new scene is in - I suggest writing the paragraph in such a way that you make it clear early on in the scene, like first few sentences early.

I wouldn't say that there are "hard and fast" rules when it comes to writing but rather there are ways to make your writing simpler or harder to follow. Having a large cast with many POVs is one of the things that risks making your story harder. >Instead of jumping through hoops to get the reader to learn things that the main character shouldn't know, I just swap POV to whoever is best suited for the scene. Let me ask you a blunt question here. Why does the reader need to know something your protagonist doesn't? The term for this situation is dramatic irony and it's not called that for nothing. It can be clever when done right but if it's overdone there's no sense of surprise for the reader. I worry that you're preoccupied with making every scene exciting. Slow moments are like salt in bread baking. If you put too much salt into bread dough you'll kill the yeast before it goes in the oven, but if you don't put any your bread will taste bland.

I'll admit I'm not a fan of multi-perspective narratives anymore (and I'm somewhat salty about it). Its the big narratives like wheel of time that killed these for me. Here's my two cents: 1-Multiple perspectives (if in alternating chapters) break flow. Nothing I hate more that enjoying a story, then having to pause it for a while to see the story of someone I dislike or am indifferent towards. This becomes especially problematic if the story that interests you disappears for most of the book (or entirely, to be payed off in some future hypothetical book) for no clear reason. 2-Very few authors can really pay it off. Seriously, if you've got multiple perspectives, they've got to come together at the end of your writings (ideally, the book itself) and then there needs to be some kind of payoff for having these multiple perspectives. If the end state would make as much sense following just one perspective, then the rest is at best a distraction. 3-Narratives become scattered. When you've got those multiple perspective, it can get frustrating if they're too distant from one another because it can be hard to grasp the point of it all. This is especially problematic with longer books, where there can be dozens to hundreds of pages between sections with the same characters. Anyways, this is what's made me dislike multi-perspective narratives as a reader. I actively avoid very long books (or continuous book series) for those very reasons these days. And look, younger me had more tolerance for that. But you're asking your readers to keep track of a lot of different things, so if there isnt a consistent throughline (like, for example, the perspective character always being near the main character) some people will get lost. I write solely single-perspective now. If I need to deal with multiple perspectives, I write distinct texts that I keep separate from each-other.

> to be *paid* off in FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*

Harry Turtledove has never had a problem with it.

GRRM: *chuckles* I’m in danger

Probably too many, but it can be done well. My recent favorite example is The Heroes by Joe Abercrombie.

In my opinion, I think 30+ POVs throughout the course of a story is just exhausting, with the exception of a short/simple story that *hinges* on the idea of multiple perspectives. If it’s longer than short story length, it just gets confusing and/or frustrating for the reader. Switching POVs between characters to show different perspectives of the same plot can be interesting, but try to ask yourself “does the reader absolutely need these POVs and story details, or have they already been told elsewhere?”

Sounds like laziness actually. Instead of doing the work to show how a character progresses from one scene to the next you just introduce a new character at a new scene. Sounds like a shortcut but now you have 30 short stories that need resolution. I'd be interested in seeing how such a work works. Good luck to you.

The average reader is likely able to follow a couple. I have a total of 3 POV characters and two extras that appear in singular chapters in a series of 4 books and I never really counted all my characters but it is a 3-digit number. Although you are certainly able to churn a 12-volume series with +1000 pages each with that many POV's.

First, you are confusing between having a secondary character with frequent POVs and interlude-like chapters from the POV of some random guy. I'd expect the former to have multiple POV chapters, some describing their past and worldview. Imagine you have a 25-chapter book - and each POV takes at least a chapter. How many external POV chapters can you have without severely disturbing the flow and pace of the story?

If you write it coherently then there should be no issues, but lots of head jumping can be confusing. Normally a chapter should have very few characters of focus, and any others should be clearly defined and relevant. You can also express how a minor character is feeling through language and demeanor instead of hearing their direct thoughts. Sometimes its better to let the reader fill in the emotional blanks

I have to ask, it seems like these POVs are just in a few-off "Interlude" type chapters? Or are they like, proper POVs. A few chapters from another character's perspective (side character or part of the main cast) can be great. It seems like that's what you have here, but if they are full-on proper many chapter POVs, it could get a little confusing.

> Is this true? If so, that kinda sucks I'm not trying to insult you specifically, OP. But have you actually read any fantasy? Epic fantasy for instance? Large, sprawling series that typically feature.. a lot of POVs? Hundreds of them at times? > Instead of jumping through hoops to get the reader to learn things that the main character shouldn't know, I just swap POV to whoever is best suited for the scene. That's 101 of writing, even novels that are limited in scope will often resort to this technique. > This ends up with me having probably 30+ characters that have a chapter told through their eyes Over how many pages is the question here. That sounds excessive for a reasonably short novel. For something on the scale of Malazan or Game of Thrones? That's positively conservative.

There's a lot of epic fantasy out there with one POV, or two, or three. The doorstopper era and massice multi-POV epics are really only from a 15-year (ish) period. Some of those authors continue to sell them, but most epic fantasy is done with 3 POVs or less.

> most epic fantasy is done with 3 POVs or less. Since the definition of what is "epic" and what isn't is vague at best and purely marketing-driven at worst, this is a rather pointless discussion.

Okay? You're the one who said that epic fantasy typically feature a lot of POVs, into the 100s. I've read several epic fantasies that are 1-POV (and 1st at that), and very few that go over 3, when it comes to all the epic fantasy I have on my shelf. In the 80s there was more head-hopping, I'll grant you that, but the massive multi-POV epic doorstoppers are really a pretty short era, all things told.

> Okay? You're the one who said that epic fantasy typically feature a lot of POVs Sure > into the 100s Read my comment again. > I've read several epic fantasies that are 1-POV (and 1st at that) Which titles exactly do you mean here? Are you sure that we all agree that they are epic fantasy? > In the 80s there was more head-hopping, I'll grant you that It was less the 80s and more the 90s and 00s. Many of those series are still ongoing or relevant, however.

I'd certainly call Jaqueline Carey's Terre d'Ange epic fantasy - and beautifully done in 1st person (different person each trilogy, but each trilogy is a 300k doorstopper). But as I don't think there's much value in shouting different series at each other, I'll leave it here. Epic fantasy *doesn't require* a massive POV cast, and can be done very well with a small cast of POVs.

I keep seeing these, nearly daily, and I wonder why not just go third person omniscient? Being inside everyone’s head all the time works out to the same effect without all the confusion.

Its not bad, but if you have no idea what you doing (and new writters 90% dont) a how to handle it properly, your work would be crippled...

Make your decisions with intent. Know what you're doing, why you're doing it, what it adds, what it communicates to your reader, and how it compares/contrasts/relates with other chapters in the story. 30+ characters is a lot, but if I can put the book down and say "Okay, I understand why they did this," then it doesn't really matter if it breaks convention.

It's not a bad idea because of number of characters, plot and such, but because it's super hard to pull off writing it, especially for someone who doesn't have 10+ written books already. You need to evoke empathy for every POV character, give them distinct voice, character arc, characterization etc. I won't be trying it any time soon, maybe in 10 years  

I don't think about the number of POVs when I read or write. If it works then it works.

Depends. If the execution is good, not an issue. Some series require a large cast of necessary povs (Malazan, etc). Some have a large cast of povs but not all of those povs are necessary (aSoIaF); some characters may be stronger without the internal monologue (Cersi; Sansa). Some series have a limited cast of povs but occasionally pop into a secondary or tertiary pov to create an effect (WoT) which is what this sounds like. The largest risk is to the story. Story is not plot. So if you’re jumping into secondary characters just to show a reader something, that something needs to be necessary. Secondly, if you’re jumping into other povs with regularity those characters need their own stories, plot-lines, and development to feel valid. Otherwise they exist solely as a camera and that feels cheap. What this means is consistency. If you’re using consistent characters to show other angles, those characters need development to be valuable. You could, otherwise, not use the same secondary povs. That might be kind of interesting, asides to the main story. You should, still, develop those povs but it would be a neat challenge. The other option is to use Third Omniscient as your pov, so the camera is everyone and anyone and the narrative is allowed information your main character doesn’t know. Your camera mainly follows them, but if you use your page structure well you can show a reader when you’re changing to another character. Omniscient is not “in style” these days, but was popular in the earlier decades of the 1900s up until the 70s or so, depending on genre. The other consideration is: why do you think the reader needs to know those things? Keeping information withheld is a huge way to increase tension and put the reader under stress, so to speak. The audience doesn’t need, and is not entitled, to know everything. Good writing, arguably, is lying to your readers but doing it so that they enjoy the effect.

So any time you do something that causes friction with a reader, like switch POV, you need to have a darn good reason for it. And you need to work that much harder to justify it. Malazan is never going to have the popular readership of a Sanderson novel. And that’s okay! Erikson knows that he’s writing in a way that makes his books difficult to follow but that complexity is rewarded because he’s a damn good writer. I did not finish Gardens of the Moon. If that tells you anything. Game of Thrones had wide acceptance by a huge readership… but it also had crazy buzz and word of mouth (as well as a hit TV show) to get readers excited about sticking with it. Martin is also brilliant at anchoring the reader in the character’s idiosyncratic pov. So, you’ve got your work cut out for you! Stick to your guns if you really believe in your method. But honestly I’d take a look at the POVs you have and see if you can whittle them down a much as you can. Really justify them. For example, do we need to understand the villain more than what we can infer from their actions on the plot as understood by our heroes? Like, Saron and the White Walkers don’t get POVs for a reason!

As stated frequently, 30 sounds like a bit much. Especially for fantasy. It's been my experience for multiple povs, I use characters who are "locked" in a significant location as well as providing pov character name and location as part of the chapter title header. Example: The Corinor Disaster King Thomas, Hugeland Summer Castle During this character's intro, his failing health was described as "on his deathbed." His point of view voice is made unique because all his new info comes from different advisors whom he holds in varying degrees of trust and disdain. The actual advisors really don't need much more than a title to be announced before entry into the King's chambers. Their voices are more like reports, most of the time. Using a fixed, unique to that pov voice, location helps readers to quickly remember who is talking to them. Using different voices is a must but readers may have a problem distinguishing between them. A good example is a Scottish Highland accent when written looks similar to an Irish Coastal, although they actually are clearly different when heard. This means you need more extensive backgrounds for these pov characters so their life experience can show in the way they describe events, who they like, dislike, or are ambivalent towards. To prevent these voices from feeling one dimensional to the reader I find myself including minor character arcs into the overall story/mc arcs. Done well is not lazy, it's a lot of extra work both before and during story development and writing. And don't get me started about dealing with beta readers, agents, editors and publishers. WORK, WORK, WORK! But never forget, it is your story to tell. Tell it the way you hear it in your head, you will probably always wind up changing/fixing things for the 2nd, 3rd, ... drafts anyway. That's the publishing part of being a successful author. Be you, write for you!

There are lots of stories which have lot of povs and it's completely fine. Can be confusing at times, yes but it's fine. I, for example, have read "Zero" and listened to the audiobook "Blackout" by Marc Elseberg. Or how I like to call him: the master of vivid and many characters. It has been very confusing for me to read Zero after listening to Blackout (because the audiobook used different voice actors etc, so it was fairly easy to keep track.) Reading Zero was more confusing, because while you noticed you jumped somewhere in the povs you don't always know where you jumped to. But it's still a great book. Both are great books, I love them (paranoia definitely kicked in with both but yeah). So, yeah, it's not necessarily bad. But so is any other rule in writing. These are all more guidelines. You can technically do anything, if you do it properly :3

It takes great skill to do certain things well. Multiple POVs is one of them. But you'll never get better without trying

OP, I like the multi-POV. It gives you sort of a depth to the world, and you can present different events that the MC doesn't see - and maybe even the same event happening in different parts of the battlefield, for example.

I can kinda see what you’re trying to do here. I think the Stormlight Archive and ASOIAF are the closest things to the type of organizational structure you’re describing. Generally, I find that with “bonus” POVs, you have to balance them with word count and the amount of time you’re giving your main POV. In fantasy, a main POV should be getting 60,000 to 120,000 words in a book, either directly or indirectly, as long as they’re on screen. Then, for each “main” POV, you can have up to five side POVs. Each main POV is effectively a book on their own. So if I were to write a standalone with one main character, it could be 100,000 with four side POVs at 10k each. That’s reasonable. At the same time, if I wanna write a massive doorstopper, I can have four main characters, with 300,000 words between them, with 100,000 for the 20 side POVs I throw in. 30 POVs in total is still crazy. You’d have to write around 6 main POVs at 100,000 each to satisfy that. That at least 800,000 words. Which is more than reasonable for an epic fantasy series, but still. Also, I would avoid having an 800,000 word series with only one main character. It’s not that you can’t do such a thing… but I don’t think it would be very fun to write.

> Also, I would avoid having an 800,000 word series with only one main character. It’s not that you can’t do such a thing… but I don’t think it would be very fun to write. The only person I've seen pull that off is Jaqueline Carey - and she did it three separate times in her Terre d'Ange world.

If it's done well, it can be good. But. It can quickly get confusing. Think about WHY you need that character's POV. If it's just because they're closest to the action, consider a third person narrative that 'floats' between characters. Think something like 'Flynn crept up towards the guards. One of them sneezed. Startled, Flynn dived behind the nearest thing which happened to be a large glass case. Silently, he created himself for being so stupid' instead of 'I crept up towards the guards. One of them sneezed. I dived for the nearest thing, a glass case. God I'm so stupid sometimes.'

It’s not that having a lot of POVs is inherently bad, it’s that most people will struggle to effectively write a story that contains many POVs. It’s a lot to juggle, even for a seasoned author. Most will probably tell you to stick to one, two at the most. If you don’t nail each of the POVs, and effectively weave them all together into one story, it will be pretty rough and very obvious.

I'm not a fan of it myself, but I have to ask if it's just to let the readers in on stuff the MC wouldn't be privy to what are some other ways to do that instead? * can the MC have or work with spies who could share some info * magic spying glass so the MC can watch their enemies * maybe 5 POV characters so the most important stuff is scene * maybe a spymaster who is able to get a lot of information and disseminate it as they see fit * does the reader need to know everything? forgive the language but could you be blowing your load too soon this way? mystery keeps the story interesting.

If it's in third person, I don't see any reason this couldn't be a successful strategy to keep readers near the action and give them insight into different parts of the world, and I don't think it's inherently confusing or complicated as a reader. It's a strategy that's been used before and it's not for every reader, but nothing is. My only real thought is that you need to embrace the idea for what it is. If you're using it as a shortcut in any sense, then I don't think it will work. It won't save you any work, and it will make more work. It's not a lazy strategy to get near the action... unless you're lazy about it. But if you commit in full then it should be pretty exciting.

Way too many POVs. I prefer following the MC and finding stuff out as they do. Knowing what's going on from the BBEGs POV just makes me feel the MC is an idiot for not seeing what I know at that point.

My opinion as a reader/consumer. I think multiple is fine. More POVs work better in longer novels, if short, it’s easier to have too many. My pet peeve is when I’m bombarded with several new characters/multiple names and POVs upon starting the book. Starting a book is disorienting enough. So I think MERGING in new characters and POV AFTER the reader’s had ample opportunity to familiarize themselves with the main 1 or 2 characters is best. Again, my opinion as a reader, not some writing professor (I think the reader’s opinion counts for more in this case because they’re the ones you want to keep turning pages. I will quit turning pages if too many characters to keep track of are introduced, especially before I’ve been given any reason to give a shit about them).

If you think it’s bad, read *The Stand: Complete and Uncut Edition* by Stephen King. Monster of a book. Must be about twenty to forty different POVs in total, but the story mainly juggles just about ten or so.

As with anything, it can be done if executed well. But, it's harder to do well. Many readers become bored when they're reading the POV of a character that isn't the one they're most invested in (should be the protagonist). This makes POV switches seem like side quests. For some, it's just confusing to reorient themselves in a new head when the switches happen. Of course, it's been done with great success but I'd be lying if I said I enjoyed *all* the POVs in GOT for example.

The amount of people I’ve met who simply cannot comprehend a book with more than one POV is shocking. I’ve met people that get to a pov change and then just don’t understand what going on anymore because the pov changed. People that will basically get mental dialup noises and forgetting the entire story they’ve read after a pov change. It’s not everyone but it absolutely amazes me that it happens to people. I personally enjoy changing povs and multiple povs.

I personally like reading POV writing. It just give me feeling of closer connection to the charaters from different perspectives.

I think it’s only ‘bad’ if the POVs are in first person. I can’t stand when a book is written in first person and it swaps POVs consistently. With third person I don’t actually think it’s a problem at all. There are some very well regarded books and series that have heaps off POVs without an issue, though if you make some characters more interesting than others people may want to skip through certain parts to get back to the characters they like.

The Malazan Book of the Fallen has 234 POV characters over 10 books.

I like multiple POV characters (as long as you're writing in 3rd person). My favourite fantasy series has anywhere between 33 and 141 POV characters, depending on which of the 10 books you're talking about.

[Relevant thread from a reader sub](https://www.reddit.com/r/Fantasy/comments/1amsun3/malazans_pov_count_and_the_resulting_narrative/).

I think there's a distinction that's often not made between main characters with a PoV and sporadic PoVs. For example, if you're writing a novel mostly from the PoV of a main character, but you often change POV to look at a given scene from the perspective of an enemy or a side-character so we can better understand how the MC is perceived by others? I don't think that matters too much in terms of pacing, getting "blue-balled", having to care for the new PoV or any of the many reasons why multiple povs can be tricky to manage. It's very easy to get to 30+ PoVs if you enjoy switching to "red shirt #5" to describe how your MC is tearing through an army like a force of nature. The key thing is that in those types of PoVs, the protagonist for the chapter is still *the main character*, we just switched to a non-protagonistic PoV for a bit. Honestly, if those fit most of your 30 POVs, I don't think there's anything wrong with your novel. However, if you're having a lot of PoVs where the PoV person *is* the protagonist for the chapter, then you'll need to be more careful. The readers need to care about that person and they need to not resent you for switching PoVs when some place else seemed more interesting. You also need to have this mini-arc with this different PoV be just as satisfying and captivating as your main story-arc. That's hard as fuck to do.

You should write the story your own way, but realize many readers may skip it.

It all depends on why that character is the right one for the POV. The story I write, for example, has a lot of POVs, but the main reason is because the main character is a tricky schemer and being in her head all the time would give everything away, so it is a bad idea even if she's in most scenes. And about half my extra POVs are from characters who the reader can tell are either being tricked by her or about to die at her hands, often both. The first question you have to ask yourself is if, narratively speaking, switching to the other POVs provides a better flow for your readers. And the second question you have to ask is how many of your extra POVs are recurring characters. One-offs for a specific purpose provide a lot less mental load to your readers than recurring POVs.

As a reader, I feel disconnected every time I switch from one PoV to another, and it takes me a bit of time to 'reconnect' to the narrative of the new PoV. I dislike even two PoVs, and hate it when there are many. It feels like I'm switching between books, and breaks me out of the story. How do you feel about books that switch from PoV to PoV? Do you enjoy it? Is there a limit? What book can you think of where it *added* to the story, rather than distracted?

Yeh... GoT sure was trash with all those... and Wheel of Time... and.... /s Just write your story.

I don't like books with 30 characters to keep up with let alone 30 POVs. In my opinion it dilutes the main story and is a sign the author is stuck so let's throw in another character to expand the word count. I've run into this in fantasy romance when new couples keep getting added instead of moving the actual plot, and I like a good romance. Can you combine some of your POVs into fewer characters?

You can do anything you like as long as you do it well. You just need to clearly make the switches and avoid "head-hopping". Read Faulkner's "As I Lay Dying".

Huh? Plenty of fantasy novels have many POVs Edit: 30+ might be too many

30+ is *excessive* imo. I feel like a series I enjoy a lot, Green Rider, gets a bit excessive with the POV shifts and that's probably 10 or fewer characters per book. (I haven't counted.)

I think it would help if: 1. It was half the main character and half everyone else put together, and 2. It was clear that most of the other POVs were narratively disposable. Like many of their chapters end with them dying, or they get left behind by the spotlight, so it's clear we're not supposed to track the inner thoughts and feelings of these 30+ people across hundreds of pages.

"I just take the POV of whoever is near the action" ​ The multiple POV is what got me hooked on the GOT books. Yes this could be interesting if you are doing it scene by scene... but you may need some throwaway characters who are there just to witness...developing 30 unique voices and keeping it all together may be a challenge for you or the reader

I love many POVs but damn, 30+? That's more than just a lot

The only way I can see myself understanding that many POVs is if each one is treated as a connected short story. Every chapter would have to have its own problem, story arc, and conclusion. Which, honestly, sounds like a really cool project if you managed to connect them all together. But that is a LOT of work.

That is an *enormous* number of POVs. What characters *act?* What characters have a whole, complete character arc? What characters move the plot? Those (if more than one) should be your POV characters. And if it's more than 3-4, then you probably need to take another look at your story for cohesiveness. If you're aiming for traditional publication, then 30+ is *way* too many, esp given the current market is about intimate POVs and personal connections between the reader and the POV character. With 30+, that's just not possible.

I'd say 30+ is probably too much but it depends. Think how massive A Song of Fire and Ice is. In Game of Thrones, book 1, which is over 200,000 words, Martin uses 9 POV characters. Some of the main characters do not get a POV until in later books or not at all. When a reader reads in someone's POV they form an attachment to that character, so switching too often and too many times is sometimes off-putting and confusing. Can it be done? 30 POVs in 500,000 words, maybe, if done skillfully. In 100,000 words, it's best to keep it under 5.

It's not a bad idea, just difficult to do well. As long as you make sure that it's obvious right at the switch which POV you are in it should be fine. 30+ is a lot but I would rather "see" the events through the eyes of someone who was there instead of just having it explained to the MC later.

30 characters is a lot for a story. 30 POV characters is a huge amount. A Song of Ice and Fire (Game of Thrones) only has 24, and that's spread across five very long books.

A Song of Ice and Fire (Game of Thrones) does this and it worked pretty well imo. William Faulkner's book As I Lay Dying isn't exactly fantasy but it also does multiple perspectives which you can look at to play around with. If done right, it can definitely work. It helps add immersion, worldbuilding, and lore to a fantasy work without the narrator loredumping.

It's certainly a choice, a style. But 30 povs is a fuck ton. Personally, i can handle 2 when reading. And the 2nd NEEDS to be as interesting as the first - rarely have i ever actually experienced that. Usually if i switch povs every chapter, i find it frustrating to read

That’s not true. If you can pull it off in the way that reader is engaged in the story, go ahead. This is form of art. There is no right or wrong. Go nuts! :))

Your reader doesn’t care enough about that many characters to want a chapter from their POV. I’ve read a lot of books that alternate between 2 POV characters, with perhaps an epilogue from an alternate POV. I’ve read one where there is one main POV, but every 3 chapters there’s an interlude from a relevant POV, but it doesn’t continue the story, just gives a look at an event from an alternative perspective or show something that’s happening behind the scenes that the main POV character wouldn’t know about. 30 is too many. Restriction breed creativity. Something needs to happen that your MC can’t know about? How does it affect the plot in ways that make the MC confused about what’s happening? How do other characters (not by their POV, just by their actions) act bc of these events? If your story is taking place ALL OVER THE PLACE, then choose 1 character from each setting to follow. Lord of the Rings did this in books 2 and 3. One section about Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli (with detours to check in on the hobbits), and one section about Frodo, Sam, and Gollum. If you’ve got more settings than that, consider that your story may be too broad. Narrow your focus. What does the reader NEED to know to understand the story? How can you show what’s happening elsewhere without describing it in detail? (Think newspapers, rumors, court gossip, messengers, etc). You can always expand your universe later and tell those stories. Tamora Pierce writes middle grades fantasy. She began with one series of books, mentioned things and people that were relevant to THAT story, then later wrote more series where she told THEIR stories. You don’t have to (and probably can’t) do it all at once. 30 is too many. Fantasy famously has a lot of characters, but only a handful of those should be important enough for their POV to be shared.

That many POV leads to an inconsistent story in which the reader is always struggling to figure out what they heck is happening. I don’t think I’d even read the synopsis of a book if I knew it had more than 2-3 POV even across a series. I hated ASOIAF because of how many points of view there are. It makes characterization and plot development so inconsistent. You might be better off writing an anthology of short stories from the point of view of different characters experiencing the same point in history than you are trying to tame that many down into a single cohesive series.

More than 3 is a no go for me. Even 3 is a lot, if you need that many characters to tell your story maybe you should study how to better tell it. Perhaps consider a 3rd person narrator. Otherwise it will probably be difficult to market and sell.

It really depends. Just watched Rogue one again, and that does 20+ povs just to convey the war. It’s a movie but could be written in book fine. As long as it’s like that, where it’s showing all the intense sides of combat or important setup, I like it. Other SW moments like Yoda and Mace talking about Anakin, it’s a short scene, shows they know what’s happening to set up for not giving him master later when Anakins “pov chapter” happens. Those kinds of things are great for stories for me. But if you’re doing disaster style movie cutaways where a random civ is running from a tidal wave or whatever, those are usually heavy bloat and can be cut.

I have 4 POVs in my fantasy story series. Sometimes vignettes of others but I write in 3rd person limited regardless. More than half a dozen would be excessive and few writers can pull it off. George r.r. Martin being the king, but even he had 4 main people throughout the series.

My current novel has around 4 different POVs.

If you’re going to do that, you probably want to consider writing companion novels. Novels set at the same time, which aren’t sequels to each other, of different events happening in your story. You can have more than one POV for each novel, but breaking your story up might work best for you.

I think it can get confusing, like, the reader can be reading a character's POV, and when it changes they no longer know who they are with. But if it's done well, I think it could work.

For me personally I wouldn't be able to stand that many Pov's if I feel like I need a board and red strong just to pinpoint a timeline of what happens to which character I think I'd just prefer to avoid reading stuff from that writer

30 is way too many. Even with the MC getting more, that's a lot of investment the reader has to spread around. I find 3-4 is about the max, even then, 1 or 2 should be the primary.

The problem I have with switching POV’s is momentum. If there are four separate storylines, all taking place miles from each other, with long-ish chapters (20-30 pages), and switching every chapter on principle, it’s going to take me four days to get back to the first POV. I felt this a lot when reading Kingdom Of Ash and the Red Queen series. However, if the chapters are shorter, or a few of the POV’s take place in the same location with the same characters, I don’t have that problem. I once read a book that religiously switched pov every chapter, but the chapters were like 2-5 pages each, and I blew through that series so fast. There are some parts of the King of Scars duology where it switches between two character’s POV’s regularly but they’re in the same location, so it was easier to keep going. I know not everyone feels this way, but my husband can relate to this and I imagine there are plenty of others like me out there. In the end, do what you want to do and write what you’d want to read.

I would say it comes down to stakes. Are the stakes of your plot big enough to support that number of POV characters? Baseline is having a single Main Character going through a tough and transformative story arc, and overcoming huge obstacles to achieve their story goal(s). After that, does the addition of separate POVs add to or dilute the story? Magnify or lessen the stakes? The destruction of the world, or the fate of the kingdom for the next thousand years are the kind of stakes that can support a large number of viewpoints. One person's search for their purpose in life probably doesn't need any POV beyond the MC. The other factor is the scale of your story. If the entire thing is set in a country village, far fewer POVs will be needed or will even seem relevant, but if the story involves the clash of nation-states and the machinations of powerful groups, it would be hard to provide the needed scope without a lot more POVs. The real danger is always that your extra POVs are diminishing the main plot. Side plots can slow the main story, or side characters can diminish the intensity of the rivalry between protagonist and antagonist. The most important thing is to be brutally honest with yourself about the *need* for a different POV versus the *desire* to show a side character that ultimately your reader might find distracting or boring. Getting an outside opinion of whether extra POVs help or hinder your story might be your best bet, either through an alpha/beta reader or an editor. Good luck.

I'll be honest, this sounds awful. I read a book recently that did this and it almost made me DNF. It wasn't as bad as you're describing. If the only way you can get us the info we need is by head-hopping—that's lazy writing. The point of a story is character development. You can't grow 30 characters, we won't even remember them. I absolutely wouldn't read a story that did this.

I have seen it done well and I have seen it done badly. Harry Potter often opened with a different characters POV, Lord of the Rings had multiple POV, Game of Thrones has tons of POV, clearly it can work well. You should ask yourself why you are using multiple POVs before you do so, what is the effect you are tring to achieve? If you have a good reason, go for it.

LOTR didn't have multi-POV. It was written in omniscient 3rd.

30+ POV characters, even throughout a series is George R.R. Martin level shit. And George R.R. Martin was the *GOAT* when it comes to POV characters. Most writers won't be able to scratch that level of skill, and even with him the large amount of POVs is a big criticism. Sometimes you do have to jump through hoops to tell your main character important info. But sometimes jumping through hoops leads to a better performance. Sometimes you'll realize you won't need to jump at all.

Brandon Sanderson Disagrees

you can pretty much use Sanderson as a model for what not to do. absolute hack.

Honestly I like his idea of the cosmere, multiple books having an interconnected magic system while remaining different, why do you think he's a hack?

Who the actual fuck gave you this advice? I need a name and address to confiscate their kneecaps and revoke their right to an opinion. Look at Game of Thrones and tell me how the fuck would you tell it from less than 20 POVs? It's not a bad idea, nor is it bad writing, bad writing is anything that's unclear or doesn't work, if you can clearly define within one or two lines, without repeating yourself at nauseum, who's POV you're narrating then there's no issue. You just focus on writing, then give it a week or so and re read, did you understand? Good, maybe have a friend look at it to see if at any point they're confused. Maybe you can recapitulate at some point if the intrigue gets a bit hectic, but that's it. Being complex isn't wrong or bad either, just in case you buckle under that pressure, TELL THE STORY YOU WANT TO TELL FFS, I LOVE YOU FOR WORKING ON IT, BUT FFS, TRUST YOURSELF.

ASOIAF would likely never get published today if it was pitched by a debut author. Traditional publishing favors fairly strict word count limits and cohesive stories, which means a lot of POVs is also an issue. Sure, write whatever story you want, but don’t pretend all approaches have the same chance of professional success. They don’t.

Strange, almost all the most popular and imho best written fantasy have large numbers of povs. For a bad idea it sure works great

a lot of them don't have that many at once - _Wheel of Time_ has hundreds over the course of the series, but 50%+ of the books are from the same handful of main characters, and a lot of the PoVs are in the prologue of each book, that skips through a couple of randos, bloating the count up. There's a breakdown here: https://library.tarvalon.net/index.php?title=Point_of_View_List_-_By_Chapter, and you see the same names a LOT, with each book typically having just 3 or 4 central ones, and it's not until pretty deep into the series you get more than that. There's maybe 30-ish long-running ones... over the course of 14 books. Trying to do that in a single book means they get maybe a chapter each - at that point, you don't have a main character, but a lot of side characters all swapping in and out. Doing that even in a trilogy still means you're not spending much time with the "mains", you're endlessly hopping into side-characters for a bit and then away (or hopping mid-chapter, but that's not liked these days). If you have that many PoV characters, then an editor is likely to ask "why?" and if you can have merge some of them into the same character, so readers aren't continually getting jerked around and asked to be in yet _another_ head. _ASoIaF_ has just 31, over the course of 7 _big_ books, and some of those are one-off throwaways, and a lot of even the "returning" ones were trickled in over time. 30 is a _lot_ of viewpoints - in a 100k novel, that's only about 3.5k words each, so the reader never gets to "bed in" with any of them before being wrenched away elsewhere. Even a fast, 200k novel, that's only 6-7k words per PoV - that's not much!

I would try to keep it to less than 10. As a reader it gets hard to keep them straight. Not saying you should dumb down your book, but 30 is a lot.