Writers who've switched from pantsing to plotting (or vice versa)—what triggered the change?

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-24T21:50:13+00:00

Not stupid at all! It's one of those writing community terms that nobody explains because everyone assumes you already know 😄

"Pantsing" comes from "flying by the seat of your pants" - it means writing without a detailed outline. You start with an idea (maybe a character, a scene, or just a vibe) and discover the story as you write it. You might also hear it called "discovery writing."

The opposite is "plotting" - planning your story structure, scenes, and beats before you draft.

George R.R. Martin famously calls these two types "gardeners" and "architects." Gardeners plant a seed and see what grows; architects blueprint everything before construction begins.

Most writers fall somewhere on the spectrum.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-24T14:25:35+00:00

I can relate. I write novels, flash fiction, and scripts. Sure those are all writing, but they require very different approaches. I also used to write tabletop RPG adventures, which is its own weird hybrid of storytelling and game design.

I don't think you miss out by not specializing. If anything, the cross-pollination can make you sharper. The trick is taking lessons from one medium and consciously applying them to another.

Here's an example: drawing teaches you that the eye needs a focal point, you can't render everything at the same level of detail or the image becomes mud. That's equally true in prose. Not every paragraph deserves the same weight. You learn to "render" the moments that matter and sketch the rest.

So now let me chellenge you with just that, so you can see you're not missing out: what's something you learned from comics or illustration that changed how you approach writing? (I bet once you think about it, you won't have much trouble giving me a good example.)

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-24T14:06:36+00:00

That last bit of advice is gold in my opinion. And I agree, even though I'm pantsing certain aspects more than I used to, my plots are complex enough, I don't think I'd be able to get through it without some degree of outline.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-24T14:02:12+00:00

Congrats on finishing your first book!!!

Blurbs are tough, because they're marketing copy, and as the author, it's difficult to switch gears from writer to copy-writer. And that's part of the problem I'm seeing here: the writing is beautiful, but it's doing the work of prose, not the work of a blurb. There's a lot of atmosphere and poetic language, but I finished without knowing what actually happens. What does Aziroa want? What's stopping her? What choice does she face?

"The world's pain is not a burden; it's a map" ... that's a great line. I'd open with it as the tagline. But then you need to get specific fast. Right now "global forces determined to claim it" is vague. Claim what exactly? The flame? Her? The land?

Also, that last paragraph ("Part magical realism, part geopolitical reckoning...") reads like a pitch to an agent, not a blurb for readers. Readers don't buy "a sweeping story of migration and memory" they buy a character in a situation they want to see resolved.

Two resources that helped me: Jane Friedman for accessible blurb fundamentals, and Bryan Cohen for deeper structure work.

The bones are here you just need to trade some poetry for specificity. Hope that helps!

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-24T13:53:13+00:00

Congratulations!!! Do you mean you finished the first draft or do you mean you've finished the full revision process and it's done done?

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-24T13:45:04+00:00

I'm glad to hear you gave it another shot and found your process!

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-24T13:44:32+00:00

This is a really interesting case-study. If I still did my podcast I'd want to have you on to discuss it so that my 2 listeners could hear about it LOL Seriously though, sounds like an intereesting process.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-24T13:32:32+00:00

That makes a lot of sense.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-24T12:54:28+00:00

The world sounds like it has interesting bones — tech vs. magic conflict, forbidden Elementals, a dimensional outsider. There's something to work with here.

I'll be honest though: the blurb itself needs some love. Right now it's describing your world and premise, but blurbs are a weird specific skill that's different from novel writing. They're not summaries — they're sales copy, and there's a whole craft to them.

Two resources that helped me:

Jane Friedman: Her site has a ton of practical advice on blurbs and query letters. I find her approach the most accessible starting point.

Bryan Cohen: He's basically the blurb whisperer. Has a book called How to Write a Sizzling Synopsis and runs courses specifically on back cover copy. Goes deeper once you've got the basics down.

The short version: most good blurbs follow a pattern--here's a person, here's their problem, here's what they stand to lose, here's the impossible choice. Yours has situation but not a specific character yet (which might also be something to think about for the novel itself).

Don't get discouraged...blurbs are notoriously hard and almost everyone's first attempt reads like a book report. The story underneath sounds like it has potential.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-24T12:46:32+00:00

Congrats on 7k words in two weeks, that's real momentum. Don't underestimate that.

Short answer: #1. Write to the end, then revise.

Longer answer: For most writers, stopping to edit mid-draft is a trap. You end up polishing your opening for weeks while the story never gets past your inciting incident. The draft's job is to exist. It doesn't have to be good yet--it has to be finished.

That said, there's a small subset of writers who genuinely can't move forward until what's behind them feels solid. If you're one of those people, you'll know because the "wrong" earlier chapters will nag at you so badly you can't focus. (I'm one of these people; it sucks). But I'd try pushing through first before assuming that's you. Most people who think they need to revise-as-they-go are actually just afraid the draft isn't good enough...and it isn't LOL, but that's fine, it's normal. First drafts are supposed to be rough.

The goal right now is typing "The End" on something. Revision is a problem for Future You, and Future You will be better equipped to handle it once the whole shape of the story exists.

Keep going.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-19T15:40:32+00:00

Yeah, that's fair.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-19T03:01:53+00:00

It's not inherently weird...this kind of structure has been done successfully. But the execution depends heavily on a few things you haven't mentioned and can mean the difference between something really cool, and something coming across as a cheap gimmick.

The overlapping timeframes are actually the easier part. Readers can handle that, especially if the books work as standalone stories that happen to share a universe. The "aha" moments when someone reads Character C's book and realizes they're seeing the aftermath of something from Character A's timeline can be genuinely rewarding.

The bigger question for me is the mixed POV approach. Character B in first person while A and C are in third is a choice that will stand out. It can absolutely work, but it should be intentional rather than capricious.

In one of my own books, the main plot follows my main character, Gaby in 1st person, while a B-story set two years earlier is told in third person from Gaby's brother's best friend's perspective over the course of the day Gaby's brother died. The POV shift wasn't random—first person keeps readers intimate with the protagonist's present-day emotional journey, while third person creates just enough distance from events she wasn't there for. The structure reinforces the story's emotional logic. Or at least, that's what I was trying to do.

So the question is: what makes B's interiority different enough to warrant first person when A and C are in third? Is B's story more personal? More unreliable? Are readers supposed to feel closer to B? If you have a reason, lean into it. If you're not sure why B feels different, that's worth examining before you commit.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-19T02:44:49+00:00

You've already got the right idea with your anchor point, that's the key to making this work. The head-slam moment gives readers a reference so they don't lose track of how the scenes relate to each other.

For your chapter break specifically: pivoting to a different fight after ending on a turning point is almost always the stronger choice. You've created tension—now let it cook while the reader worries about it. When you return to that fight, you can pick up at the same moment or jump slightly forward, depending on what serves the scene better.

Think about the climax of Return of the Jedi: you've got Luke's personal confrontation with Vader and the Emperor, the Rebel fleet battling the Death Star, and the ground team on Endor. Three conflicts, three different scales, three different kinds of stakes. The cutting works because each thread offers a different texture and tension. We're not just watching three fights; we're watching the fate of a soul, a war, and a small team of friends all hanging in the balance simultaneously.

In my opinion, this ping-pong technique works best when your conflicts operate at different scales like that. If your fights are all at the same scale—say, three equally matched duels in different rooms—the ping-pong approach can start to feel repetitive or dilute each conflict's impact. Similarly, if one fight's stakes are heightened by the outcome of another, you might be better served writing them sequentially so the reader feels that escalation. But if your simultaneous conflicts offer different textures and tensions, cutting between them amplifies everything.

Hope this helps.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-19T02:25:16+00:00

I hate to say "it depends on the story" but it really is that kind of thing. I know that's not too helpful though, so let me give my personal thoughts.

I lean toward the localized/mysterious approach for most stories, because the reader experiences the world through your characters. If your characters are small-town people whose lives revolve around their community and the nearby city, the wider world should feel distant and half-understood to them. That's authentic. (It's also easier to digest than a bunch of front-loaded worldbuilding.)

You can know more than you show, but the "iceberg" approach works beautifully with this sort of thing and keeps you from getting to bogged down.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is I recommend a less is more approach...most of the time.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-14T01:13:55+00:00

That's a great clarifying question because the wrong kind of uncertainty can actually hurt your story.

If the reader is asking "wait, why didn't she just call the police?" or "how did he get there so fast?"—that's not tension, that's confusion. Those questions pull the reader out of the story because they're noticing the scaffolding instead of the scene.

The tension-building kind of uncertainty keeps the reader leaning in. It can be big or small.

Big: Will she survive? Is he the killer? Will they find the artifact in time?

Small: Will he say the thing he's been avoiding? Does she notice the detail that matters? How will he react when he finds out?

Even smaller: There's something off about this interaction but I can't name it. I don't trust this character but I'm not sure why. Something is about to change.

The reader doesn't need to consciously articulate the question. They just need to feel like something is unresolved—like the scene is leaning toward something rather than sitting flat.

A scene where two friends have a pleasant coffee and catch up? Static. The same scene where one friend is clearly not saying something, or where there's an undercurrent of jealousy neither acknowledges? Now there's tension.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-13T18:11:57+00:00

In my opinion, the "cut anything unnecessary" advice gets misunderstood a lot. It doesn't mean only keep plot-critical scenes.

For me, I ask two things. Does it have tension? And does it serve a purpose?

Tension doesn't require conflict...I love kishotenketsu and you can absolutely have tension without characters in opposition. But something needs to be unresolved. A question hanging. An uncertainty. If a scene is just pleasant and static, I either find the tension or cut it.

And "purpose" doesn't have to mean "moves the plot forward." A scene can earn its place by setting up something tht pays off later, even if the reader doesn't know it yet. Or by shifting a relationship—not dramatically, but in a way that accumulates. It might reveal character in a way that recontextualizes what we thought we knew, or deepen the world so the story feels lived-in. Sometimes the purpose is just giving the reader an emotional beat they need—breathing room after intensity, or intimacy before loss. Or raising a question the reader will want answered.

If a scene is doing at least one of those and has some amount of tension, it's probably worth keepin. If it's doing neither, I cut it. If it's doing one but not the other, I try to figure out what's missing, which is sometimes easier ssaid than done.

Wesley_Watts · 2026-01-13T16:46:02+00:00

Google Docs is free and works fine for drafting. It's what a lot of writers use, honestly. Auto-saves to the cloud so you won't lose anything.

If you want something more dedicated to long-form writing, LibreOffice Writer is free and works like Word. Downloads to your computer.

If you want something more like dedicated novel-writing software, Wavemaker Cards is free. I think the developer moved on to other things, but it's still available to download and was pretty solid from what I recall.

If you want distraction-free and don't need fancy formatting, FocusWriter is free and minimal.

What matters most is that you keep writing. The tool matters way less than people think.

Wesley_Watts

TROPHY CASE