Hyowha

Every story use the transformational arc. It's not a manual trying to impose a method, it's a manual analyzing the way humankind always built its stories. How many words you'll write or how many instalments depends on you: the Author.

Just think of every shonen anime, light novel or webnovel: after defeating an enemy, a more dangerous enemy will approach, and on and on and on. But every "arc" is transformation. Think of Dragon Ball here as an example.

Then, if a story drag itself too much is because of the author trying to capitalize on it.

      ValentinaKhan
      Good point, but I agree with what Hyowha said, this is not really a guide to write web novels in a broad sense. It's more suitable for a single mini-arc, usually one with a definite antagonist/obstacle.

      Web novels often string together many of these mini-arcs. Some have antagonists, some don't (i.e. fillers, breathers, slice-of-life stuff)

      In each of these arcs, the MC would fight, get discouraged, get defeated, get back up, fight and win or get defeated and spared (again).

      The inciting incident might be contained in this arc, or exist in a previous arc (an old nemesis, old friend, etc)

      The hero might not transform at all. It might take several (dozen) arcs for him to figure out his weakness then fix it. Or the author will have to reveal new weakness so he has room for improvement. The transformation is not as cut-and-dry as in normal novels or movies.

      Each arc (in good novels) might scatter hints toward a larger antagonist behind the scene (build up for a major arc). Then the protagonist confronts this antagonist, defeats/befriends them. Then a new major arc begins.

      In fact, I would recommend web novel writers to research how TV series plots are developed, as these have much more in common with web novels than normal novels or movies.

            ValentinaKhan No, not every arc uses the transformation that you mentioned, unless you want to write a story which just rehashes itself over an over. Of which dragon ball is a great example btw.

            An arc can abruptly end in a climax, it can’t also start not with an exposition but with a climax.
            If you want to, you could have no climax at all.

            It works, because an arc does not need to be a complete story.
            The method you have listed is a way to maximize the emotional potential of a complete story, which an arc ismaili not supposed to be. Or well, not always.

                Hyowha ImBloo

                I repeat. Every story follows the Transformational Arc. If it doesn't it's not a story, but a teenager's wet dream.

                The problem arises when you need to increase your words count for publishing purposes. (An average novel has around 80.000 words, by the way. 100.000 if fantasy.)

                So, how to elongate your narrative?

                You can do like Martin: writing a story with many POV, almost every POV a transformational arc itself.

                You can do like Tolkien: writing the backstory of every damned tree branch. But you risk to kill your readers by the sheer amount of infodump.

                You can do like in the Hunger Games series: writing multiple arcs but every one of them self concluding (Escaping the games, overthrowing the government, etc).

                Or you can use some cheap tricks like in most asian narrative: Fan service, fillers, slice of life and so on.
                In Boku No Hero Academia, as an example, the first season is a decent Transformational Arc. The second season is pure fan service for the first half and they shift the focus on Todoroki because Midoriya is an almost transformed character by now.

                I cited four examples, they are all Transformational Arcs. They can be good developed or not, but they are.

                It's really difficult to find a story which doesn't follow the rules.
                (If it doesn't it's not a story, but a teenager's wet dream.)

                Then of course parts of the arc can be modified. In a action packed story the Grace period is often omitted.

                      I've wasted a lot of time searching around for how-to's when it comes to writing fiction. It is an obvious response when someone wants to do something in the information age they're clueless or not good at. What do we do when we don't know something(how to write? How to tell a story?)? We google it, look up information, ask other people.

                      I myself have dedicated a good deal of time going through content after content of such topics and I've read most chinese web novels for male with at least a few hundred chapters translated listed on novelupdate in hope of learning how to write from them to no avail. Reading doesn't help with coming up with a story or gives you the skill to write.

                      Only through writing itself can one learn to write/tell stories.

                      Reading or any other form of media can give inspiration and stuff, but the core writing/storytelling capability of a person, that writing muscle, it only gets built up by actually writing. No amount of anything else can be a substitute.

                      I wish someone told me that when I wanted to write a long time ago. Would've saved a lot of time.

                        ValentinaKhan Alright, I wasnt planning on arguing, but since you seem adamant about your opinions, let me say mine.

                        Not. Every. Story. Follows. The. Transformation. Curve.

                        As I have stated the transformation curve is a very classical approach, which is why you will find them in many books. Most of them follow one adventure though.
                        The books you cited are the examples which prove my conjecture, as I stated a that it is used in many stories, most which are worth following. But the are stand-alone books, or simply sequels.

                        Your statement that any story that does not follow the the transformation curve is a teenagers wet dream, is a rather childish one, and an almost offensive view on the many different books. It is a complicated matter, summarized and oversimplified into a skewed narrative, which in itself is false to begin with.

                        One piece for example, doesn’t follow a transformation curve. Many arcs in One piece end in a climax, or have no end.
                        The marine ford arc ends on a climax, or the water seven arc, which is sorely an expositional arc towards Enels lobby. You will also find that the story use multiple climax and arcs whose climax would only be found in another arc.

                        Nanatsu no Taizai, is a bother example, in which you follow the Main Characters through only part of their adventure, which began a long time ago. It does not divide itself into arcs, even less does it use transformation arcs.

                        Boku No Academia is also a great example. As you said before, the later half uses does not use a transformation arc, but is still essential to the plot. Would they have gone with another transformation arc, the story would have turned predictive.

                        Clannad and other Slice of life do no follow the arc.

                        To shift away from anime’s, many detective stories and thrillers do not use the curve that you mentioned. More often than not, you find their climax at the end of the book, in which wither the culprits is revealed, or maybe even not.

                        A comedy, such a story the office, or friends does not follow the steps you mentioned.

                        Many fables such Odyssey and the tale of Gilgamesh do not follow the steps you mentioned.

                        Does that make these stories any lessons worth than they are?

                        The point which we are currently arguing is a point which has been talked about since ancient times. Gerhart Hauptmann, a representative for naturalism (the era which believed life should be represented in a natural way, instead of forcing a linear outline such a story the transformation curve) mentioned in his drama “Die Ratten”, the importance of moving a plot point beyond a climax and how the old approach has turned stale. The book went on to become a classic.

                        I’m not saying that a transformation arc is bad, but that it is not a necessity. In an online novel, which thrives from having many chapters, the curve is not advisable as it turns your story predicatble and repetitive a problem many novels her have btw, due to using the arc (find villain, get stronger beat villain. Repeat with different names)

                        EDIT: I’m sorry if I may have come of as rude, your statement about “teenagers wet dream” had made me a bit mad.

                            Hyowha To shift away from anime’s, many detective stories and thrillers do not use the curve that you mentioned. More often than not, you find their climax at the end of the book, in which wither the culprits is revealed, or maybe even not.

                            I'd like to pinpoint many parts of your post but let's start with this, because I'm not sure what we are talking about anymore.

                            "you find their climax at the end of the book"

                            Have I ever said something different than the climax is supposed to be at the end of the story?

                                BravelyNovice

                                You don't learn how to write by writing. In the same way you don't learn how to build a house by putting a brick on another brick.

                                You need to learn the trade by others first and then you need to do a lot of exercise.
                                For writing: you read the manuals and only then you start writing.

                                    ValentinaKhan
                                    Was the curve you are referring to is the classic way to write a playscript, known as a 5-way act triangle, in which the climax is in the middle?

                                    https://www.google.com/search?q=play+5+acts&client=ms-android-samsung&source=android-browser&prmd=ivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiW8cfpo9nfAhURfnAKHSilASQQ_AUoAXoECA0QAQ

                                    EDIT: Hey I saw my mistake, the whole time I thought you were talking about something else.
                                    But hey, this also shows that there are different ways of structuring a story, not just using the transofrmatoon arc. So my point still stands

                                        ValentinaKhan I repeat. Every story follows the Transformational Arc. If it doesn't it's not a story, but a teenager's wet dream.

                                        Really? Wow! Who said that? Must be a powerful Sith, I'll bet!

                                        So, how to elongate your narrative?
                                        You can do like Martin: writing a story with many POV, almost every POV a transformational arc itself.
                                        You can do like Tolkien: writing the backstory of every damned tree branch. But you risk to kill your readers by the sheer amount of infodump.
                                        You can do like in the Hunger Games series: writing multiple arcs but every one of them self concluding (Escaping the games, overthrowing the government, etc).

                                        #1 Lol, were you too lazy to google the name of the Hunger Games author?
                                        #2 See what the problem is with your examples? None of them are web novels. See, with a title called "how to write a webnovel..." I expect you to stick to that format when citing examples.

                                        Or you can use some cheap tricks like in most asian narrative: Fan service, fillers, slice of life and so on.

                                        It's really difficult to find a story which doesn't follow the rules.
                                        (If it doesn't it's not a story, but a teenager's wet dream.)

                                        Again with the generalization. And you're either not looking hard enough, or not looking in the right places.
                                        #1. Movies are stories, too, right? I can point you to a bunch of war movies that have no transforming protagonists. They don't change, they just survive. They are spared a horrible death not by overcoming character flaws or whatever, but sometimes by sheer dumb luck or outside intervention.

                                        Or, certain movies just depict a snapshot of someone's life, i.e. over the course of a few days. Example: Inside Lleywin Davis. The protagonist doesn't transform. He just... exists. There's not inciting incident, we just see his struggles, and at the end, nothing is resolved. His life continues.

                                        Or, the Dollars Trilogy by Sergio Leone. You can argue that The Man with No Name doesn't transform at all throughout the trilogy.

                                        I can go on and on, but you get the point.

                                        #2. Look at The King's Avatar, the #4 (Edit, #5 now :() on Translated story ranking and tell me: How did the protagonist transform?
                                        Most people would scratch their head at that question. Sure he has flaws (1 or 2), but it doesn't affect the plot in any way. He has the same personality in nearly 2000 chapters. The thing that does the most transforming is his umbrella.

                                        And I dare you to say that novel is a teenager's wet dream. If you do, then (1) I applaud your ballsiness and (2) Congratulations, you just alienated the very community you set out to "educate."

                                        What you've outlined in your "guide" is not a webnovel. It's just a story cut down to bite-sized chunks. I'm not dissing your guide. I'm just saying: it doesn't fit a web novel.

                                        I suggest changing the title to "One approach to writing fictions." It's more reasonable and open to discussion. Assuming that's what you're trying to be.

                                        When I saw the thread, I thought it was an invitation to a discussion. However, it looks like you're just here to dispense wisdom and expect to be responded with praises and thanks. If that's the case, I'm gonna peace out and go back to verbalizing my teenage wet dream.

                                            Folks:

                                            Character-driven stories

                                            Plot-driven stories

                                            I don't think there's only those two types, really, and a story can of course be both at the same time.

                                              i legit thought webnovel doesn't have plots and have just a basic knowledge about what should happen then think of what could happen then just add it then if you paused on doing this part just bring it up again and stuff 😂😂

                                                ImBloo

                                                I sense you don't have the tools to sustain this conversation, so I'm going to simply point out what you got wrong in any example you made.

                                                You can look up for the definition I'll put in italic with Google, I don't have time to waste teaching angry kids the abc of storytelling.
                                                (If any other apart from this crybaby want to know, I'll gladly explain.)

                                                Inside Llewyn Davis is a Transformational Arc, but our Llewyn is a Tragic Hero.

                                                The Dollars Trilogy aren't stories, they are situations

                                                The King's Avatar is a comeback sport story, like Rocky and Any Given Sunday.

                                                I add:
                                                Of course the The King's Avatar is not a teenager's wet dream. A teenager's wet dream is when your character has everything and nothing happen. Something along the lines of "I'm the coolest kid in school, girls want me and boys want to be like me. Forever and ever. No ifs, buts, or ands."

                                                Then, is TKA a good story? Objectively not.
                                                But, but...it has a Transformational Arc? Yes, but it's poorly developed.

                                                Don't get me wrong. I like the story, but if popular=objectively good, then we should gather every Sunday in a dedicated building to read a page from 50 Shades or Twilight.

                                                    ValentinaKhan

                                                    Yes, Popular = Good
                                                    What other method, is valid if not Popular = good.

                                                    Sounds like your disconnected, from the world.
                                                    While every novel is not meant for everyone, I can say 50 shades of gray is one of the best novels of our time.
                                                    And I 100% hate that fact, but it has a movie and is a best seller...
                                                    Calling it 'Trash,' because you do not like the topic, is just not being objective.

                                                    Also calling I'm Bloo a crybaby... You sound like a little girl who got slapped by daddy.


                                                        ValentinaKhan You seem to have lost touch with reality, as you perpetuate your opinions as facts.
                                                        When you reach a point where you believe that popular =/= good, you have automatically distanced yourself from an objective viewpoint, and instead are spouting nonsense about what YOU define is good or bad, based on YOUR standards, not much unlike the internet warriors, or the old men telling tales on their armchair, who know nothing but feel the need to undermine those around them.

                                                        There are many resources which define whether a transformation arc i should needed or not, but that there is even a debate to begin with means that a transformation arc is not the ultimate gospel.
                                                        You speak as if it is the law, such as how gravity bind us to the earth, but you fail to see that it is not the case.

                                                        If you look again at your past arguments you may realize that you have interwoven yourself into a tale of bullshit. And I don’t really understand where you find your audacity to judge upon other stories with such a self righteous disposition.

                                                        There have been many examples given as to why your theory is untrue, so I won’t repeat myself.
                                                        But just for good measure I will send you a link, https://www.scriptmag.com/features/craft-case-character-arcs

                                                        Get off your fucking high horse, can’t you see no one agrees with your statement?

                                                            Hyowha Coincidentally, I've just been reading about narcissists who have no capacity to understand they could be wrong (read on, please, I don't mean you). It's sad in theory, but if you're in any kind of relationship with them, it's anything but; it can be downright scary. Something about the OP's insistence on his/her POV rang alarm bells, but maybe I'm just being jumpy. P.S. They don't like being called out or shown up. P.P.S. They like feeding off the negative reactions of others (it's best that we leave them alone). We should all be informed of these kind of stuff so we could keep ourselves protected -- just my two cents :)

                                                            P.P.P.S. Might be advisable to lock this thread soon.

                                                                Acutelittletrap Just to play devil's advocate, but many "classics" were unpopular at their time of publication. A couple examples are "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley and "Moby-Dick" by Herman Melville. Of course there are the few that made it to the banned book list like "To Kill a Mocking Bird" and "The Grapes of Wrath" that are considered classics today as well. If you claim these are not good, well, there are certainly enough people who would disagree. I'm sure if we give "Twilight" and "50 Shades [...]" another decade or two, they will be long forgotten by all but our generation. I'm also certain that the classics of our time will be some obscure books read by few. Additionally, I highly doubt any of the webnovels we see today will become classics either despite my enjoyment of them today.

                                                                Random plug: My hope is that R. Lee Smith can get some recognition, but with the triggering nature of her works, it'll never happen.

                                                                    Web Novel Novel Ask