Currently doubting the ending of my first ever completed manuscript (my current novel-in-progress) At the moment, I've ended it in the same way that I had planned for it since the moment I created the plot in my mind but now I am wondering if I should end it in a different way as an alternative version has been poking at my mind for the last couple of days! My current ending feels a little safe as an option (not for the characters so to speak as they are in some danger at the end but regarding to the narrative itself instead) since the majority of the plot is about the two characters finding safety and finding their families (who they are separated from since before the beginning of the book) and, in this ending, they are reunited with their families but their place of refuge has been destroyed leaving them, and many others, without shelter during the first night of snow during a medieval winter (which was a dangerous thing back then) and the sequel would follow on from there ... however, my alternative ending would mean that the characters are not reunited with their families at all and that only one character (as the other had to stay behind in their place of refuge) would be without shelter during the first night of snow instead of a whole towns worth of people. The journey to find their families would then be continued into the sequel. I'm just not sure which would be better ... I could write both endings and see which one my draft readers prefer but I was just curious as to what anyone else thought about this conundrum. Any suggestions are welcome! (I'll attach a poll if that would be easier but it would perhaps help me more to hear your reasoning for your decision as well if you wouldn't mind putting one in the comments, thanks!)
Writing both and seeing which your readers like better is probably your best bet, since it's so hard to make a judgment from a description in a forum post. That said, I like the sound of your first ending better. Safety can come in a lot of different forms, but your family is your family, so in terms of the goals of "find safety" and "find family," the stakes feel higher for the second one. Therefore, the book would be unsatisfying to me if they didn't find their families. I'd feel like it was a gimmick to make me read the sequel. Versus if you resolve that most pressing part of the plot, but give them a new problem to deal with (place of refuge destroyed), it feels like more of an organic "now I want to see how they handle this in the next book" kind of ending. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a safe ending, narratively speaking, especially when it's your first book and you're learning a lot.
Thank you for your comments! I agree with your statements ... its why I wanted some second opinions on the matter
You should be thinking about what will satisfy and not annoy your readers. If they know this will be a series, you can leave things on a cliffhanger-y edge, if you want. If your readers assume this is a stand-alone novel, however, don't leave them sputtering 'but...but ...but what about those other people ...what about the reunion we were led to expect?' Make sure you tie up all the loose ends they were expecting to be resolved within your first book. You can certainly leave them with the idea that more will happen to your characters later on, and that you are working on a sequel, but if you just cut the story off, they will not be pleased. You will have broken their trust. So ...if you're NOT planning to end with 'To Be Continued' then make sure all the important things get wrapped up. However, if you DO make the series status very clear (by ending with 'To Be Continued', for example, or calling it Book One in the Surprise Surprise Series) then you can leave a lot still unresolved. Your readers will expect this, and will not be annoyed.
If the goal of your story is to find the characters' families, and you end the book without them being reunited with their families, then pray tell, what was the point of your book? So a reader can watch them meander and never achieve their goal, and you're betting on them wanting to read a whole new book just to see them reunited with their families, when you didn't deliver this promise after the first book? Your alternate ending will surely piss off all your readers. Sorry if I sound really irritable. I'm exhausted after a whole day with my toddler... Stick with your first ending - the original one makes sense. You've left a little loose end for a sequel but your characters' main goal has been completed, making it a complete story. There's nothing "safe" about it - it makes sense and is how a story should be told. Do not go for random endings for the sake of so-called originality and end up pissing off your readership. Another thing to consider - traditional publishing does not like cliff hangers from novice writers. Your chances of being traditionally published is significantly slashed if you end on a cliff-hanger with your very first book. Something to consider if you want this book to be published.
I agree that if you have hopes of being traditionally published, ending with a cliffhanger is not a good idea—the novel needs to have a satisfying ending. Both endings seem to have too much cliffhanger, though the second one is much more problematic than the first.
I agree. I wonder if the first ending could be improved by sprinkling some hope. A family reunited and facing a hopeless winter vs. A family reunited, competently ready for the hard work of surviving winter.
