I've started on the final book of my trilogy, but I'm having doubts. The first two were structured to follow a single MC across a grand journey. This third one is split evenly between two MC's, only one of whom is on a journey. The other is both an antagonizing force and the only window into the motivations of the villain. My concern is that this is too much of a deviation from what readers would expect after the first two books. My question is: does anyone think that this much change could be harmful due to expectations being subverted too strongly? Thanks in advance.
My experience as a reader is I will tolerate a lot as long as the writing is good and the story is interesting. I may be annoyed briefly when reading the second character for the first time. Hey, where is MC1? I liked that guy. This MC2 jackoff better get off my lawn! But if it is well written and interesting I will quickly settle back down and enjoy the story. So, don't sweat it. Tell your story and tell it well. - MC
Cormac McCarthy's Borders Trilogy did the same thing. All the Pretty Horses followed John Grady Cole, The Crossing followed Billy Something, and Cities on the Plain had the two of them together. Books 1 and 2 were completely unrelated, though, setting and theme aside. Nothing connects them except the two characters coming together in Book 3. ETA: Patham... Billy Partham, I think. Didn't even have to google!
I'll be honest and say probably yes, for me it would be. If I've enjoyed the two previous books and look forward to more of the same, I'd be disappointed. To ameliorate you could make it obvious in the blurb that the third book will be a bit different than the first two, but some readers will probably get caught cold nevertheless. Maybe you can end the second book with an outlook and a hint that things will be different going forward? Foreshadowing, focusing on the antagonistic next POV at the very end of the book should hopefully make the transition more smooth. Best of luck.
Thank you three for your feedback. Since two of you say that as long as it's compelling, it's fine, I'm going to press on with my current story/structure. However, I agree with LifeLine that I should do something to ameliorate this a tad. I can't foreshadow this split in the second book for a few reasons, but I can shift the balance of the storylines a bit in the new one. Going through the outline again, there is room to extend the journey by at least one chapter, thought two might be a stretch. I feel that such an extension, even if minor, helps preserve the feel of the other books a bit better. Unfortunately, it still won't be until the book is ~halfway done that the journey will start, but I can't see a way around that. If exploration with a purpose is close enough to a journey with a destination, though, then I don't think that will be too much of a problem.