Simplicity or complexity

[TitaniumTi]

I'm planning a pivotal scene in my WIP, a sci-fi suspense novel. This scene provides the protagonists (and the reader) with key information about the nature and the severity of the threats they face.

In brief, a group of protagonists meet an antagonist, who kills a protagonist. The other protagonists flee in different directions. The POV protagonist learns things about the threat through various near-misses he experiences during his flight and by witnessing another protagonist's misadventure.

So, I need three protagonists in the scene: the POV protagonist, the protagonist who dies and the protagonist who experiences the misadventure. Do I add complexity to the scene by including a fourth protagonist?

The pros of a fourth protagonist include more opportunities for dialogue in an action-heavy scene and another voice, with different experiences, contributing to later discussions of the threat.

The pros of limiting the scene to the three essential protagonists include greater simplicity and an opportunity to slightly pare down a long scene.

What do you advise?

 

[tinkerdan]

I would say: what it takes is what it takes.

That means that the POV character is going to see these others and add his own experiences so it doesn't matter how many others there are.

What does matter is that what happens moves the plot forward so everything and every one should have some purpose to moving it forward so it if can be done in three it is done in three if it needs one more person then add them and if it needs two more add them.

Always remember though to try to figure out first if this can all be done from one character the POV or if it needs two then from there; can I do it all from two if not then move to three. So in the most simplistic sense what you can do with the fewest players can work out better than trying to spread your writing too thin throughout a cast of thousands.

 

[Brian G Turner]

The pros of a fourth protagonist include more opportunities for dialogue in an action-heavy scene and another voice, with different experiences, contributing to later discussions of the threat.

The pros of limiting the scene to the three essential protagonists include greater simplicity and an opportunity to slightly pare down a long scene.

A scene where you need lots of characters to explain lots of things is a potential flag, IMO.

When it comes to editing, I suspect you'll need to pare down this scene no matter how you write it. However, editing out a character will probably be harder that to edit in a character.

Likely, you don't need to dump as much information in this scene as you expect - you can sprinkle some of it into other scenes, or explain some points better elsewhere.

 

[TitaniumTi]

Thank you Brian and Tinkerdan. Your comments have helped me think through the issues, and I have decided that I need the fourth protagonist, primarily for dialogue but also to ease through a drop in the tension at the end of some chase-and-flight action.

 

[MatterSack]

Include the fourth character. Have the exposition you mentioned be as diagetic as possible (eg, spoken dialogue between them).

With two protagonists analysing their situation together, you'll also be able to introduce interpersonal conflict.

 

[BelgarionOz]

I would say write it with the forth protagonist and see what happens. If it works great, if not then you can always rewrite it. But you might lean some things about the scene along the way that you can include if/when you rewrite it.

 

[TitaniumTi]

Thanks, MSack and BOz. I'll include the fourth character, and see what happens.

 

[barrett1987]

Only you know bro What your gut tells you is usually right, even if it makes life harder Good luck man! and post some on the crit boards when your rdy! im intrigued!