In my story, I am wanting the first forty pages to follow the 'mock' main character, and then I'm killing them off which sets up for the real story where I follow another group of main the characters, all of whom are affected by the main character who is killed in the forty pages. I this too risky? If so, is that a good thing? Will it anger the reader? *SPOILERS* If you have ever seen the movie The Place Beyond The Pines, it is like that, where what seems to be the main character for the first hour or so of the movie then dies mid-way through and afterward, it follows another character, then after that, it follows a third. But I mainly want to focus on the transition from the first main character to second, and if that is what I should be doing and how to approach it.
I don't think it is too risky. There are books out there that do this sort of thing. Will it anger some readers? Yes. Nothing wrong with that.
I'm personally not a fan of this type of thing. I want to settle in and relate to the MC as soon as possible because he's my vehicle in an unfamiliar world. If my vehicle gets into a car crash and explodes, I'm going to be awfully hesitant to get into a new car... That said, it's only a personal gripe and I'm sure it's been done successfully before!
Hello, friend. Well, I will say its more or less risky. While there's nothing wrong of killing your characters, however, if you like your MC too soon how readers are supposed to relate to him/her? You have to give the reader enough information about the character before you are thinking of killing your MC. If you still feel the need to kill him/her soon, explain why. I hope this helps. Keep on good work.
I think it depends on just how much influence these mock MC's have on the real MC. If its very little, then I'd be pissed to have read forty pages when the story could have started later instead and simply flashed back or filled in the backstory later. Done well it can work, but is it risky? I think so.
You have to ask yourself why we are in this character's POV if they die so early. What does it accomplish? Would you be better off being in your 2nd MCs POV qnd witnessing the death happen, then experiencing that transition of needing to fill their shoes? Something like this could allow your first MC so be more enigmatic, and make them seem more invincible than they are, thus causing their death to be more traumatic. Viewing someone from an outside perspective allows you to create a sense of mysticisms around them that can't be accomplished with the POV of your first MC. So with that being said, what is the objective of your POV shift? How does it relate to the concepts and themes of the story? In what way does this POV shift benefit and hurt the story? Weighing these values pro/con style will help you get to the root of your issue.
Do we need to know the first MC's story in order to understand and fully appreciate the second half when the second MC comes in? Is there a very important reason why you simply cannot start the story with your second MC from p.1? (eg. the story then just wouldn't work) If your answers to those questions are absolutely a resounding YES, then go for it. But if you're doing it because it seems like a cool idea or you think it's clever, then don't. It would become an annoying gimmick. I think it all depends on why you're doing it. Does it really add to the story or are you just wanting the fun and thrill of misleading the reader and feeling very clever? Another thing to consider: is this a practice, experimental piece or a piece you hope to publish? (not to say experimental pieces can't turn out to be so good you decide to publish it) But what's the intention? Because if you just wanna practice your skills and try to pull off something difficult, then go for it.
Some characters can be lopped off with no detrimental effect. Lopping off others might decrease reader interest.
