How does the process of writing a book as a pantser work? Do they at least plan the conflict or structure the story in some way, or do they write freely without worrying about that? If they write freely, do they structure the conflict later?
Can you give me a step-by-step guide on how a pantser writes a book?
I'm curious to know how this works and I want to try this freer style.
I don't like the term "pantser". I prefer Discovery Writer.
The difference is the "plotters" devise a plot, in detail, including the twists and turns, and then devise characters to populate the roles.
The discovery writer devises compelling characters, first. Often just one hero, perhaps a sentient villain, but sometimes a situational villain -- e.g. a natural catastrophe, or a plane crash. This leads to a "problem" that the hero has to solve, but the discovery writer doesn't begin with a solution -- we begin with characters.
Then every character does what their personality demands in response to the problem (aka the "inciting incident" in the 3-Act Play structure), and the story goes where it goes.
Stephen King is a discovery writer. His advice is to develop a character, make them likeable, then "put them in the cooker".
I've been thinking about a new character for a few weeks. I've got a few scenes with this character that I know have to be in the story.
The plot is unplanned. The only real rule is that the story cannot stall. Characters cannot choose to do nothing; none of them can. They cannot "circle" either -- If you strand them in 10,000 BC, they cannot just choose to live there, happily ever after. (At least the central characters cannot choose that.)
Doing nothing or giving up cannot be in their personality. Running away is a choice, but it cannot lead to escaping the "problem", whatever it is. Eventually every character must face it and win, lose, or die.
Otherwise -- character personality dictates that plot.
I think the essence of a hero in fiction is simply that they never give up. No matter how much they are beaten, cut, stabbed, shot, burned, kicked in the face, sooner than later they get back up and try again. The hero would rather die than lose. Don't say that, show it, by beating the crap out of them. Remember that trait when devising your hero.
Come up with your likeable character, get to know them well, then come up with the inciting incident, a setback they cannot ignore, and must solve. Then the plot goes where it goes.
I will say that Discovery writing often involves rewrite and scrapping scenes that don't work. Your idea of the ending may change ten times.
But for me, it avoids the most dreaded writing problem I find in Plotting: the characters start to feel forced to me, doing things that aren't in the personality I've developed for them thus far.
When I'm writing, my characters become real to me, the decisions they made earlier in the story define them, and I just cannot force them to follow the plot. Plotters may not have this problem, but I can't write a character doing something I feel is out of their character.
With plotting, knowing exactly how the story works out also makes writing the planned scenes just plodding work. I don't enjoy it.
I enjoy inventing the scenes as I go. I don't enjoy following an outline, at all. I quit half a dozen stories trying to follow a plot, before I tried discovery writing, and finished a novel in about six months. Because it is entertaining having to invent the next scene, as you go.
Major Edit: (due to WetCircuit comment): As far as the central conflict goes, this is something the MC (main character) experiences as the "inciting incident". It is an issue they cannot let go.
She discovers a discrepancy in the corporate books she is keeping. Accidentally discovering somebody is lying. Aliens landing on her lawn. Hearing something on the news she knows is wrong, or may be right but sticks with her. The neighbor's grade school girl goes missing.
In Stephen King's case, a bio-engineering lab has an accident and releases a plague that kills 99% of people on Earth, but the inciting incident for the hero (IIRC) was an infected lab worker dying at the wheel and crashing into a gas pump.
The inciting incident is something, dramatic or just unusual, that happens to the MC. I don't actually plan the conflict so much, as imagine, "What if X happened?"
Sometimes it is in reverse. "What if a person had X ability? What would they do with it? How did they get it? How did they first discover they had this ability? Who wants to exploit them, or hates them, or wants to kill them because of this ability?" All those are consequences of their ability.
Suppose Mike has an infallible (as far as we know) ability to tell when somebody is lying. What are the consequences? How would that manifest in his life? What job would he have, how could be best exploit this ability to create wealth? How could he best use this ability to improve lives? Who would oppose Mike?
The conflict is not planned, per se, as a Discovery writer I invent the characters, and the "conflict" is embedded in their capabilities and personality.
Typically, my characters always have an extraordinary skill and an extraordinary weakness. The story depends on both; the inciting incident is a problem the MC cannot fix with their extraordinary skill, and in fact solving the problem will depend on them overcoming their extraordinary weakness. That is what the story is really about.
In the end, the hero, beat up, cut, bruised, and limping away, has overcome their weakness and finally defeated the villain.
Structure and conflict arise from the strengths and weaknesses in the MC, with an inciting incident (1/8 of they way into the story, after we've gotten to know the hero and been acquainted with her normal world), a problem that the MC cannot ignore or let go; and how they deal with it.
Extra Edit As far as a step-by-step guide, I endorse the 3 Act Structure. It divides the story into 4 equal parts; Act I, Act IIa (escalating), Act IIb (descalating), Act III (resolution).
In addition, you will find diagrams dividing each of those parts into two more parts; so eight equal-length parts.
Each part serves a purpose. This is a useful guide for knowing basically what kind of writing you should be doing. In part 1, you are introducing your characters and their normal world, at the end of part 1, the "Inciting Incident" occurs. In part 2, the MC (main character, or Main Crew) has tried to deal with the Inciting Incident, but their situation has only gotten worse, and by the end of part 2, they have to "leave", their Normal Word (either physically or mentally; e.g. they can no longer feel or think as they once did, about someone or something).
And so on. These 8 parts, roughly equal length, act as a compass to guide you in what sort or writing you should be doing. In the first half, creating more complications, but starting in the second half (part 5) we begin resolving complications; not piling on.
It is worth studying. Not necessarily for plotting, but as a guide to how stories (typical, saleable stories) unfold.
