The "I'm writing a book" thread

[Pepsi Ranger]

I posted an article and video about the writing workflow this morning. In short, it discusses ways to integrate more than one software type into your writing and revising regimen to keep both the engines hot and the story organized.

In the video, I cover using Snowflake Pro (software dedicated to using the Snowflake Method) and Plottr (software used for defining scene structure and attributes for character and place) for planning the story, Microsoft Word for writing the scenes, and Scrivener for perfecting the narrative arc.

As a bonus, I also talk about Campfire Pro and Campaign Cartographer 3+ for advanced world-building.

If you have the time, and if you're wrestling with that crazy book idea, check out the video. It's about 37 minutes to watch, but it covers a lot of ground.

Note: The YouTube video has links to every program mentioned in its page description (except Microsoft Word, because if you don't already have it, then you're probably happy with whatever substitute you're using). The article does, too.

[yt]g7AJNhR28pk[/yt]

[Gizmog]

There's a lot of fantastic information in this thread, more than I will ever be able to make use of. I'm curious about more of a beginner's issue, and I hope this isn't the wrong thread for it. What's the obsession with word count? Is there some magical golden spike that appears at 50,000 words and binds the whole work together?

They just really wanted the second book (for a small fee). Anyway, they made Writer Beware's list a few months later, and I haven't heard from them since (though the woman who called me, under one name, called me again a few months later, with a different name and for a new company). Just hang up if they call. And, no, I don't know how they got my house phone number.

That is *horrifying*.

[Bob the Hamster]

I know word count is a much better measure of the length of a work than either page count or chapter count, since those can be of varying sizes.

It's the easiest way to measure how much you are writing in a given period of time.

[Gizmog]

Ahhh, that makes sense. I have a terrible time deciding where to put Chapter Breaks. For a long time, I thought it was like a sentence, where you have a complete thought, but then I realized there's a lot of books where the Chapter break is a cliffhanger and a cliffhanger surely isn't a complete thought. Fortunately I've never had to divide a work into pages, a perk of the digital era.

[Pepsi Ranger]

Word count is also tied into genre requirements. Here's a good article that breaks down the expected word count range by genre.

There's usually room to bend the rules on word count, especially if you already have a strong following or if you're writing the fourth or higher book in a series (which is why Harry Potter keeps swelling in size the higher up the anthology you go). But typically, beginners should try to keep to the appropriate ranges to maximize their readers' trust (like the first three Harry Potters do).

Word count is also important for e-book readers, since that provides a more accurate estimate of how long it will take them to finish the book. It also helps them judge how "valuable" they may perceive the book. Value comes more into play when you start pricing your books, but until you throw a price tag on it, the word count isn't that important to buyers (but it may still be important to readers who want to escape for more than an hour).

But you should also ignore your word count until you're finished with the first draft. The last thing you want to do is rush through or leave out important information because you're about to miss a checkpoint (a temptation when also factoring in story structure), so as a rule of thumb, just write the first draft and decide on the appropriate length in the editing stage.

I once got to talk to the author of the MEG series, and he told me that he never looks at his word count. He's got a following (and a bad Jason Statham movie under his belt), so as important as it is, it isn't really that important, especially if you already have a strong readership, so just keep that much in mind.

That is *horrifying*.

Indeed. But at least they haven't come to my front door. Yet.

There's a lot of fantastic information in this thread, more than I will ever be able to make use of. I'm curious about more of a beginner's issue, and I hope this isn't the wrong thread for it.

As a beginner, you really only need to remember three key components:

1. Learn and practice story structure (inciting incident, rising complications, opposing forces, climax, resolution, etc.).

2a. Write only the scenes you need to tell the story.
2b. Keep those scenes interesting and exciting.
2c. Make sure each scene is a result of the momentum from the previous scene, not "random thing happens next."
2d. Remember that scene = action, sequel = reaction, and both are needed to maintain balanced pacing.
2e. Each scene and character action should respect the rules of your world- and character-building.

3. Don't wait for the muse. Treat writing as a discipline that you show up for and do, even when the muse is out to lunch. Make yourself a schedule if needed.

Okay, that should be enough to get you going.

[ArtimusBena]

Some stuff I wrote a couple years ago. A prologue and first chapter. Written a bit artfully, paced like reading a myth.

Daedalus, the builder of the famous Labyrinth, has the conceit to think himself a demigod, and wages war upon Heaven as revenge for his prayers going unanswered.

https://www.inkitt.com/stories/fantasy/ ... chapters/1

https://www.inkitt.com/stories/fantasy/ ... chapters/2

[Nathan Karr]

Aine and Tendo of No Eat were originally going to be a fantasy novel; Aine as the main character, Tendo as her love interest, and two more party members (a warrior named Todd who speaks mostly in puns and remains eerily silent at other times while wearing a mask he never removes in anyone's presence and a wizard named Odang with a terminal inability to feel any sort of pleasure; his brain simply never produces feel-good chemicals other than maybe adrenaline, but he's dedicated his life willingly to doing good things even without any positive feedback). I wrote a few drafts of the first few chapters, started plotting out the broad strokes of the worldbuilding, and drawing up reference sheets and concept art.

I uploaded various bits of concept art, my own fursona shifted from a pink fox to a pink tanuki during the design period that lead to Tendo (Tendo and Ronintendo were technically supposed to be two completely different characters despite similar appearance and inconsistent nomenclature), art started leading to silly comics set in their world, which spawned a meme and then a videogame adaptation that technically takes place about a decade after the novel would have.

I think dialog and prose writing are still my main strengths, but if I were to start writing a novel again it wouldn't be quite so outlandish on the surface (it'd star either completely animal-shaped talking animals with no outlandish coloration or human-looking standard fantasy archetypes like an elf and a dwarf and whatnot)...lull people in with a sense of familiarity and gradually tune up the weirdness as chapters progressed.

I think one of my weak points is that once I've got two characters talking to each other, I have a hard time trimming down their dialog or having them do anything other than carry on in conversation and emote. If I've got three or more characters, I start finding juggling them a little difficult. I might fare better with an adventuring duo who are foils rather than filling out a trio or a traditional four or six man adventure team.

I probably won't return to attempts to write something big and epic though, more likely small standalone short stories. Do many variations of similar themes, possibly in a shared world (if the fantasy world has over nine thousand adventurers roaming about, why would I only focus on the four most aggressively stereotypical?)

[Strela_999]

Glad I'm not the only one writing - or at least, trying to write - a book about the universe in which my game's set. But I guess it's logical when you've created a world for your story; you really get invested in it, think about it and about the cool stuff that happens there, and want to read about it, to watch about it, to play it... and since it doesn't exist, you have to do all of that yourself

Still, do you guys have that issue in which you're always coming back to what you've written to redo it all over again, erasing all of your progress? That's what happens to me: I'll spend a couple weeks, if not months, writing and writing because I feel inspired, and then, after some time on holiday, or being enthusiastic about something else (or, in a less glamorous way, doing something like writing about the evolution of the market for this Munich real estate ), I come back to what I've written, don't like it anymore, and rewrite it all over again...

[Pepsi Ranger]

Still, do you guys have that issue in which you're always coming back to what you've written to redo it all over again, erasing all of your progress? That's what happens to me: I'll spend a couple weeks, if not months, writing and writing because I feel inspired, and then, after some time on holiday, or being enthusiastic about something else (or, in a less glamorous way, doing something like writing about the evolution of the market for this Munich real estate ), I come back to what I've written, don't like it anymore, and rewrite it all over again...

What you're describing is quite normal, to a point. It's part of the "pantser's" method of writing, where you sit down, write whatever you think should happen next, and cross your fingers that it's leading to something important, while not knowing if it is actually taking you anywhere. Yet, you keep digging in, believing that every scene is getting you closer to the end, stopping and going back only when you realize that you're going nowhere or in circles.

Stephen King is the master of this type of writing, but it's not easy, and it's rare that you'll get to the end without drastically rethinking your premise and wishing you'd start from some other part of the story. As far as I know, Lee Child is the only one who can sit down, start writing, never look back, and still end up with something amazing and unforgettable (he's the author of the Jack Reacher series, if you don't know who I'm talking about). Most authors can't do that. Most authors have to go back and reevaluate their choices.

Pantsers can typically get to the end unscathed, as long as they know what the ending should be (which I believe is how Stephen King manages to do this successfully, even though it takes him a few hundred thousand words to do it). The writers who have to start over are the ones who don't typically know what their hero or villain's goal is. Any story that begins without a goal (or want) for the protagonist or antagonist is doomed to stall before it's finished. If your story has no goal, then you're going to have trouble finishing it.

"Plotters," aka the people who plan their novels out before writing a word, don't run into this problem as often in the actual writing, but they do run into it during the outlining stage. One of the reasons why they outline is so they can avoid discovering their faults 50,000 words into the manuscript. However, if they don't know their characters' goals, then they'll stall halfway through the outlining stage.

For me, I'll sometimes run into the problem where I'll plot something out, then discover in the writing that it was a bad plan. It usually takes something unnatural to expose the flaw in the plan (as in something against the character's personality, for example). It's one of the reasons I prefer to just write and see where it goes. At least that way I can stay truer to the character. But I've implemented bad plans through that method, as well. My Powerstick Man adaptation is insanely long. INSANELY long. As of now, it's a series of nearly a million words. I have to rewrite it. A series of a million words. Rewritten. Yeah....

All because my hero's goal takes too long to achieve, and because it's taken me quite a while to figure out what his goal actually is (he's a reluctant hero, and reluctant heroes typically want to be left alone, which kinda sucks for anyone who needs him to act).

But it doesn't have to be this way. Sometimes rewriting a book or series is just a matter of moving things around, which is what I have to do in my particular case. Doing so may also require adding new scenes and deleting others. The only time I have to rewrite from scratch is when I'm "remaking" it, which is what I'll do when I'm updating a short story into a novel, or when the premise is so bad that there's nothing I can do to save it without rethinking the premise (usually because I don't know what the heroes or villains want, or why they want it). Most of the time, I'll have a weak premise that just needs tweaking. In those cases, I'll go back and outline what I already have and examine it from a bird's eye view. That's what I'm currently doing with The Computer Nerd.

Regarding the loss of interest in a book idea, that's often a sign that the idea isn't fleshed out well enough. My favorite author, Max Barry, once wrote an article about this very problem. He says that if he's not having fun writing the scene, then the reader won't have fun reading the scene. I think that's true of my own work. If I'm struggling with a scene, I may want to rethink how the scene works or decide if I even need it. This is probably a symptom of writing the lowest hanging fruit. For example, if the villain has captured your hero, where is the hero? Is he on a table in some mysterious room, secured by a rope with a loosened knot and no one around to watch him? Or is he hanging upside from a palm tree on some tropical island where everyone is a brainwashed tourist who thinks he's part of the attraction, who would rather take a picture of him than try to get him down? Sometimes fixing a loss of interest is just acknowledging the low-hanging fruit and putting it on a higher branch.

Anyway, I could go on, but you get the point. A strong premise won't leave you alone, and you'll probably lose sleep if you don't write it down in full right away or as soon as possible. If your premise doesn't cause you to lose sleep, then it probably needs an adjustment. I can't imagine Michael Crichton coming up with the premise "theme park with real-life dinosaurs turns on its guests" and thinking, "Eh, I'll get to that later." In that situation, you'll suffer the bad scenes to get to the good ending because you can always go back and fix those bad scenes. If you find that you're just rewriting scenes from scratch, well then that's normal and part of the revision process, and you're just acknowledging that it can and should be better than it is. Just about every scene of every work will have that to deal with in its first draft. Totally normal and expected.

[kylekrack]

Still, do you guys have that issue in which you're always coming back to what you've written to redo it all over again, erasing all of your progress? That's what happens to me: I'll spend a couple weeks, if not months, writing and writing because I feel inspired, and then, after some time on holiday, or being enthusiastic about something else (or, in a less glamorous way, doing something like writing about the evolution of the market for this Munich real estate ), I come back to what I've written, don't like it anymore, and rewrite it all over again...

I experience this pretty much every time I return to writing something, but that's because I've never actually finished a long piece of writing (I think the longest thing I've finished was a one-act play). So, I'm not a writer.

However! I wanted to respond because this resonates a lot, not just with writing. It seems like taking a hiatus on something creative then returning leaves the artist prone to fatigue. For me, I often experience this with code. After I've been separated from a piece of code for long enough, it feels so daunting to get back into that headspace, I'd rather just start fresh. I make music and experience the same thing there.

I'm kind of thinking out loud at this point, but I think there are a few concrete reasons for feeling disconnected from an old project:

• 1. You've forgotten how it works. For writing, maybe you've forgotten the small details of the story, and have to reread everything to remember exactly what's going on. In code, I literally forget how certain functions work (and of course I never comment thoroughly enough).
  2. You've grown since you last worked on it. Maybe you've become a better writer (or a better person, even!), and your old writing doesn't feel representative of your current skill. Going through and editing it feels like more work than starting over.
  3. You don't feel the vibe anymore. This one's more obvious and less concrete, but whatever inspired the original project is gone. This probably means that the idea/concept isn't strong enough. Really good ideas will have more than raw inspiration motivating you to finish them.

Maybe Pepsi Ranger is right, and plotting is a reliable cure to the above problems. Even beyond writing, outlining your project thoroughly enough will at least fix problem #1. Just noticed Pepsi even said something similar about loss of interest in the idea: "that's often a sign that the idea isn't fleshed out well enough." And the rest of that argument I think goes beyond writing. I have fun play-testing and making Katja's Abyss, for instance, and I feel like that's a good sign the player will enjoy playing too. On the flip side, when something is really frustrating to work with, it ends up being a sign that I should change it, because the players will be frustrated by it too.

My question is, how much outlining is sufficient to keep a project on track? You've sort of answered that by placing a lot of importance on character motivation. Is that the biggest piece of the puzzle? If I can figure out my main characters' goals & what the ending will be, is that the best I can do to prevent creating a bad plan? I don't expect answers to these questions, necessarily, they're mostly rhetorical. I'm gonna ruminate on this.

[Nathan Karr]

3. You don't feel the vibe anymore. This one's more obvious and less concrete, but whatever inspired the original project is gone. This probably means that the idea/concept isn't strong enough. Really good ideas will have more than raw inspiration motivating you to finish them.

This is what happened to me with Maces Wild: I had a few specific things I wanted to do (time travel, a game set in near-past instead of distant-past technologically, make a bunch of 80s and 90s pop culture references, make a game that reverses my usual slow, cautious, defense-heavy personal RPG playstyle by giving heroes and enemies alike high Speed and strong offenses but fairly weak defenses, [s]rip off[/s] flatter Surlaw's Village People RPG through imitation, make a hero who uses ice/water as his main attack element because I normally went with fire/electricity/plant power) and a specific mindset (a combination of self-loathing, self-pity, and disgust with myself over certain interests I have and the types of people I tended to associate with online; Ken's personality was supposed to be a girl-crazed horndog but I lacked the confidence to go all out with portraying him as such). Accomplished all my design goals in the 15 minute demo with 5-15 minutes of optional exploration and thought I'd have it in me to extend the game with roughly 15-30 more minutes of storyline and a few hours of optional exploration and boss fights but I really didn't.

My core personality isn't any different, but I no longer have the same self-loathing I did eleven years ago, and were I to set out to make a satire of the furry culture now it'd be a lot more scathingly explicit. I've dug deeper, found more horrifying horrors, found that being nice to people doesn't get them to hate me any less, and eventually started finding genuine confidence buried within myself; the old meekness I used to exude was a facade I put up, partly consciously but mostly unconsciously, in the hopes that it'd make me liked and tolerated more.

I couldn't make a game like Nintendo Quest again either, because most of the things I was satirizing in the OHR community at the time have changed since then anyway. I've matured a little since I started that, the community as a whole has matured even more (and my game design sensibilities are also a lot better so I'd definitely make something more fun).

As far as writing style, I'm definitely a pantser. All my best writing was quickly churned out stuff made with a brief flash of inspiration and a lot of hard work concentrated into a short time window, usually with very little more than a spell check. I've never once had success with trying to write an outline and flesh it out later, and most of my main characters desire little in life beyond the freedom to explore the world or a vaguely defined desire to fight the good fight against the forces of evil.

I never plan out different "wants" and "needs" and whatnot for characters, and probably the only times my writing has fulfilled the expectations of good writing practices in general is on accident (such as Ken and TOBMAC having a character dynamic in Maces Wild; my expectation was that TOBMAC's gameplay functions being little more than having very high HP and physical defense but being very difficult to heal would leave players frustrated with him, his personality or lack there of also somewhat frustrating the players, and Ken's snapping at the robot and finding him annoying would be just another thing people would like about Ken; having back and forth to this, TOBMAC being likeable and having a personality at all, were what we'd call a happy accident).

I write anything else (games, stories, YouTube comments) roughly the way I write a forum post: I gather my thoughts as I type them and occasionally change the wording of a sentence or break a paragraph up into smaller pieces after the fact; downplaying my tendency for hyperbole so that people are less likely to latch onto something I was saying for effect and going "Well that's not technically true 100% of the time" while ignoring the substance of what I said is the main piece of internal tone-policing I undergo, and the second is to not use my natural vocabulary to its fullest extent at all times as being overly verbose can leave many readers befuddled and vexed.

[Pepsi Ranger]

On the flip side, when something is really frustrating to work with, it ends up being a sign that I should change it, because the players will be frustrated by it too.

I think this is an important consideration in any design choice (whether in writing, game design, music, painting, etc.). While weaving a complicated element into your work is technically impressive, it's only as good as the end user's response to it. To keep it relevant to the topic, the more complicated your story, the harder it'll be for you to write it and your reader to read it. This is why they say the most successful concepts are the ones you can reiterate in a single sentence. Example: "Bad guy will do horrible thing to victim if hero doesn't do this to stop him." Or: "Paleontologist must verify the safety of a park full of living dinosaurs before it opens to the public." Start adding too many details to the core premise and things can go belly-up pretty quickly.

My question is, how much outlining is sufficient to keep a project on track? You've sort of answered that by placing a lot of importance on character motivation. Is that the biggest piece of the puzzle? If I can figure out my main characters' goals & what the ending will be, is that the best I can do to prevent creating a bad plan? I don't expect answers to these questions, necessarily, they're mostly rhetorical. I'm gonna ruminate on this.

It's a good question and one I'll answer anyway.

I think character motivation is the soul of the story, but not what makes it interesting or attractive at the start. Again, going with Jurassic Park, no one really cares that much about Alan Grant's motivation at the beginning since it's one of curiosity (much like the audience's motivation). Curiosity is enough to get us to the table, but probably not enough to keep us there, especially after we see that first brontosaurus eating grass in that huge field. "Yay, dinosaurs! Um...okay, so now what?" It's not until his motivation becomes that of survival and keeping the kids safe that we really begin to care and that the story takes on its heartbeat. What gets us to the table is "Ooh, dinosaurs go on a rampage at a theme park! I wonder what happens next!" What keeps us there is the suspense of wondering if he'll succeed (because we want him to).

Regarding the outline, the amount you do (whether in your head or on paper) depends on what's needed to get the story into existence and on-point. The number one commandment of storytelling is to keep it interesting. Outlines can't really achieve that. Only fleshed-out scenes can do that. The outline's job is to make sure you don't send your characters out on a pointless tangent. It's there to make sure you respect story structure and keep your scenes relevant to the treatment of your premise.

I wrote my first edition of The Computer Nerd without an outline. The only things I had going into it were a prompt that I'd gotten out of an older edition of Stephen King's On Writing, a 6000-word short story I wrote in response to that prompt, and a question: "What happens next?" The answer to the question was a three-act novel that did the job but could've used some genre-pepper to make it stronger. Because I'm going back to add in the obligatory scenes and conventions I've missed for its genre, I'm now creating the outline to see it from a bigger picture and to make sure I don't mess something up when I integrate the new scenes. But I didn't start with one. I'd written 80,000 words and the ending before even considering writing an outline for it. I still managed to get some impactful scenes out of the pantsing session that made me want to keep going.

So, basically it's all organic, even at the outline level. Planning is important, as is character motivation, but keeping the story interesting and exciting is the most important thing. I mean, something had to make 50 Shades of Gray a phenomenon. Sure wasn't the writing quality or the characterization or the plotting. It was likely the premise and the emotional response readers had to it that caused readers to flock to it. Same could be said of its predecessor, Twilight. In both cases, the author finished writing it. In the case of 50 Shades, the author wrote the whole thing on her phone. Why would anyone write an entire novel on her phone? Perhaps the emotional connection reached the writer, too. I know I'm most engaged with my writing when I can't wait to see how the scene plays out. I experienced that when I wrote the Coastal Run Cave sequence in the Powerstick Man novelization (in Superheroes Anonymous). That sequence spanned three chapters and almost 12,000 words, and I wrote it all in a single sitting. When I read it today, I'm still captivated by it.

I think character motivation is important and what allows us to empathize with the situation enough to want to see it through. Outlining just helps us keep the actions and reactions believable while still moving toward the ending.

Oh, and I often have to remind myself of this, but you should really be thinking of your story like you would a videogame with boss battles. Each level gets a little tougher with a slightly stronger boss fight. The conflicts our protagonists deal with should be going through something similar. "Oh, you want that job, Simon? Okay, but first you got to pass the interview, and the interviewer wants to hire his girlfriend. Oh, so you've proved that you're more qualified and less subject to nepotism than his girlfriend? Okay, well now you get to work in the mail room and serve everyone coffee, because did you really think we would put you in charge of the ad department? We don't care about your stupid degree or your experience. Oh, you've found a bug in the mailing system? Okay, that might get you a small promotion to custodial services, but now you've got to deal with Jack, and Jack don't like anyone who thinks he's too good for cleaning out toilets!" And so on. Eventually your hero will get his dream job and discover that life was simpler when he was working in the mail room. But he's got to endure the gauntlet first before he can figure that out.

[BennyJackdaw]

Word count is also tied into genre requirements. Here's a good article that breaks down the expected word count range by genre.

There's usually room to bend the rules on word count, especially if you already have a strong following or if you're writing the fourth or higher book in a series (which is why Harry Potter keeps swelling in size the higher up the anthology you go). But typically, beginners should try to keep to the appropriate ranges to maximize their readers' trust (like the first three Harry Potters do).

Word count is also important for e-book readers, since that provides a more accurate estimate of how long it will take them to finish the book. It also helps them judge how "valuable" they may perceive the book. Value comes more into play when you start pricing your books, but until you throw a price tag on it, the word count isn't that important to buyers (but it may still be important to readers who want to escape for more than an hour).

But you should also ignore your word count until you're finished with the first draft. The last thing you want to do is rush through or leave out important information because you're about to miss a checkpoint (a temptation when also factoring in story structure), so as a rule of thumb, just write the first draft and decide on the appropriate length in the editing stage.

I once got to talk to the author of the MEG series, and he told me that he never looks at his word count. He's got a following (and a bad Jason Statham movie under his belt), so as important as it is, it isn't really that important, especially if you already have a strong readership, so just keep that much in mind.

That is *horrifying*.

Indeed. But at least they haven't come to my front door. Yet.

There's a lot of fantastic information in this thread, more than I will ever be able to make use of. I'm curious about more of a beginner's issue, and I hope this isn't the wrong thread for it.

As a beginner, you really only need to remember three key components:

1. Learn and practice story structure (inciting incident, rising complications, opposing forces, climax, resolution, etc.).

2a. Write only the scenes you need to tell the story.
2b. Keep those scenes interesting and exciting.
2c. Make sure each scene is a result of the momentum from the previous scene, not "random thing happens next."
2d. Remember that scene = action, sequel = reaction, and both are needed to maintain balanced pacing.
2e. Each scene and character action should respect the rules of your world- and character-building.

3. Don't wait for the muse. Treat writing as a discipline that you show up for and do, even when the muse is out to lunch. Make yourself a schedule if needed.

Okay, that should be enough to get you going.

To be honest, it's kind of info makes me a little nervous about the story I wrote. I have been looking for beta readers, and I have found a few, but no one who can stick with story, and your advice makes me wonder if I have a lot of filler in my book. I used a standard word pad, and I don't know if there is a word count feature on it, so I haven't checked how long my story is. There is also a lot of chapters that I created mostly to show how strong the cast of characters are. I wish I had someone who could stick with the story and tell me what I could trim down.

[Bob the Hamster]

You could copy-paste the whole thing into LibreOffice or a Google Doc. That would be a quick way to check the word count, and you can still keep working in wordpad if you prefer.

What is your story about? Who is the main character, and what are they like?

[Pepsi Ranger]

To be honest, it's kind of info makes me a little nervous about the story I wrote. I have been looking for beta readers, and I have found a few, but no one who can stick with story, and your advice makes me wonder if I have a lot of filler in my book. I used a standard word pad, and I don't know if there is a word count feature on it, so I haven't checked how long my story is. There is also a lot of chapters that I created mostly to show how strong the cast of characters are. I wish I had someone who could stick with the story and tell me what I could trim down.

Is the story finished?

Your first draft is neither expected to be perfect, nor is it supposed to be. I wouldn't worry about the filler until you have a finished story. By that point, you should know your premise, theme, conflict, and resolution, and then you can evaluate your scenes for relevance. But if you've finished the story and your readers haven't, then consider how exciting (and conflict-driven) your scenes are, how relevant they are to the main story (nobody wants to follow a bunch of characters--they want to follow a single protagonist but will tolerate others if they have to, assuming those others are important to the story), and whether the story belongs to the main character.

The fact that you write scenes to show how strong the cast is also makes me wonder if you're adding more than you need. Your cast supports the main character (i.e. how a posse supports the lead gunfighter in a western), or the cast collectively enforces the theme (i.e all five members of The Breakfast Club enforce the theme of "parents living vicariously through their children, to the child's detriment" even though John Bender (Judd Nelson) is the principle character that affects the most change on the group). But the entire cast shouldn't get equal screen time if they're not equal partners in achieving the plot goal. The reader only wants what moves the story forward. Even epics like The Lord of the Rings and Game of Thrones put this to practice in spite of their large casts.

Think of it like this:

(Note: Because every story instructor and his mother uses Star Wars: A New Hope as an example of the Hero's Journey, I'm going to do the same.)

Luke Skywalker's destiny is to become a Jedi. Everything that happens in the movie brings him closer to understanding the Force, understanding Darth Vader (and understanding how to defeat him), and understanding his journey into using the Force. Although we can't get into his Yoda as Mentor stuff until the second movie (there are still time restrictions at play), we still have Obi-Wan Kenobi playing the Mentor for this movie. We need Obi-Wan because he's a Jedi who understands the Force. We need him on Tatooine because we have to get Luke off the planet somehow. Heck, we have to burn down the moisture farm because we have to get Luke off the planet somehow. We have to get him onto the Death Star because we need that "Inmost Cave" moment where the hero goes into the belly of the beast. We need that chase scene at the end because every hero's journey has a "Road Back" sequence.

What we don't need is a scene where Luke goes on a bunch of dates with Captain Kirk's girlfriends. What we don't need is a scene where Luke performs with the Blues Brothers at Mos Eisley Cantina (Space Quest shout-out!). What we don't need is a bunch of walking-to-somewhere scenes when we can just cut to where he needs to be.

We need only what brings him closer to becoming the hero.

Regarding other cast members like Han Solo, Princess Leia, and Chewbacca, they all have their own goals, and they're all interesting characters that inspire fans to buy their toys, but their job in the story is to get Luke closer to becoming the hero (aka, the one who destroys the Death Star), not to become central to the plot themselves. So, while we may like them, and we may even care about them, we know that Luke must be the one to push the story forward if the story is to work and stay interesting, so the others, while strong and worthy of their own scenes and action figures, have to act in a way that gets Luke closer to destroying the Death Star and facing off against Darth Vader. If we spend even a minute watching Han Solo and Chewbacca go fedora and whip shopping at the local space mall, and that's the only reference we get to either the fedora, the whip, or the space mall, we just wasted the story and the viewer's time.

Typically, the first edit should be used to find those scenes that DO NOT TURN or move the story forward (aka solving the story problem). Ever hear the term "Kill Your Darlings"? That means that no matter how much you love a scene, you'll likely be the only one who loves it if it doesn't move your story forward. Walking scenes, for the record, don't move the story forward unless some kind of conflict happens in that scene or if it orients the main character to his new world (like in The Wizard of Oz). This isn't to rag on walking scenes (sometimes they can be quite useful--think of the ending to John Wick 2 in particular--one of the best walking scenes of the modern era) but to emphasize that the scene needs to move the hero closer to resolution for it to work. It's a good idea to give the story to your beta readers after the first edit for relevance, not the first draft.

I've recently started a series on my YouTube channel called The Writer's Bookshelf. It's designed to lead writers who want to improve their education and skills to the best books on the topic. If you all want to really study this stuff in-depth, check it out. Each video is about 15 minutes or less (the first few are about eight minutes each) and explains briefly what the book is about and why it might help you improve. It won't tell you everything the book covers (because you're supposed to actually read it--that's how you learn!), but it'll give you enough of an overview to understand why it's useful and can better your education. It's called "The Writer's Bookshelf" because these are books that are on my bookshelf and have helped me become better at what I do. Check it out if you want more guidance on how to write better books.

Here's an alternative link to my blog if you want a little extra information about each book before watching the videos.

Note: New videos go live at 10am EST each Friday. The articles post 12 hours after that. The final video for the season will go live on Christmas Day.

Let me know if you have any questions or need clarification on anything.