Fiction Workshop

Fiction Workshop

Editorial workflow for collaborative fiction writing in three stages: Story Bible Building, Chapter Development, and Reader Testing.

When to Use

This skill is for:

• ✅ Long-form fiction (novels, novellas, short story collections)
• ✅ Multi-chapter manuscripts requiring character/plot consistency
• ✅ Fiction projects needing developmental or line editing
• ✅ Stories with complex worldbuilding or multiple POV characters

When NOT to Use

This skill is NOT for:

• ❌ Flash fiction or single scenes (< 2000 words) - too lightweight for the workflow
• ❌ Poetry or experimental prose - needs different editorial approach
• ❌ Screenplays or stage plays - different format conventions
• ❌ Technical writing, documentation, or academic papers
• ❌ Business writing or marketing copy

For narrative nonfiction (memoir, self-help with story elements), use the narrative-nonfiction skill instead.

Editorial Personas

Switch between these roles during Chapter Development by requesting a specific lens:

See references/ for detailed guidance on each role.

Stage 1: Story Bible Building

Goal: Establish shared story foundation before drafting or editing.

Initial Questions

1. Genre and target reader?
2. Core premise/logline?
3. Protagonist: who they are, what they want?
4. Central conflict?
5. Reader's intended emotional journey?
6. How much written vs. planned?

Story Bible Components

Plot: Premise, three-act structure/beat sheet, major turns, ending (even if rough)

Characters: Protagonist (want/need/wound/arc), antagonist (motivation/threat), supporting cast (function/relationships), POV voice notes

World: Setting (time/place/rules), tech/magic systems, social structures, sensory palette

Theme: Central question, moral argument, recurring motifs

If a Story Bible document exists, review it. If not, offer to create one using assets/story-bible-template.md.

Example Story Bible entry (character):

ALEX CHEN - Protagonist
Want: Expose the conspiracy and clear her name
Need: Learn to trust her instincts over institutional authority
Wound: Mentor betrayed her at previous agency, causing career setback
Arc: Lone wolf → realizes she needs allies → builds trust with team
Voice notes: Analytical, dry humor when stressed, avoids emotional language
Key relationship: Tension with Handler (wants to trust, can't fully)

Exit condition: Confident grasp of story fundamentals. Can discuss character motivations, predict plot implications, and identify thematic threads without asking basic questions.

Stage 2: Chapter Development

Goal: Draft or refine chapters through brainstorm → curate → draft → refine cycles.

Drafting new? → Creation workflow | Editing existing? → Editing workflow

Creation Workflow

1. Scene Planning

   • What must happen (plot)? Whose POV?
   • Chapter's emotional arc?
   • What reader learns/feels by end?

2. Brainstorm Beats (5-15 options): Opening hooks, key moments, dialogue, sensory details, closing

   Example (thriller scene): Same car outside coffee shop three days running | Phone buzzing at 3am with blocked caller | Surveillance photo under door | Colleague mentions detail only surveillance would know | Camera lens reflection in window | Dead drop cleaned out | Safe house key doesn't fit | Contact misses first check-in

   Then curate: "Which create immediate tension? Combine any?"

3. Curate: Ask which to keep, combine, or discard. Reasons help calibrate.

4. Draft: Write chapter. Use str_replace for revisions, never reprint.

5. Refine: Iterate on feedback. After 3 passes with minimal changes, ask: "What could be cut?"

Editing Workflow

1. Read and Diagnose: What chapter tries to do, where it succeeds, where it loses energy/clarity

2. Invoke Persona: Structure/pacing → Developmental | Prose → Line | Voice → Character | Facts → Continuity

3. Propose Changes: Specific, surgical edits with brief "why"

4. Implement: Use str_replace. Link to file after changes.

5. Iterate: Until chapter achieves purpose

Role-Specific Guidance

When a specific editorial persona is invoked, load the corresponding reference file:

• Developmental editing → references/developmental-editing.md
• Line editing → references/line-editing.md
• Character work → references/character-work.md
• Continuity → references/continuity-tracking.md
• Brainstorming → references/brainstorming.md
• Thriller-specific craft → references/thriller-craft.md
• Sci-fi worldbuilding → references/scifi-worldbuilding.md

Stage 3: Reader Testing

Goal: Verify manuscript works without author context.

Using fresh sub-agent (no story bible):

1. Comprehension: Can they summarize plot, understand motivations, identify stakes?
2. Engagement: Where did they lose interest, have questions, feel confused?
3. Emotional: Did key moments land? Ending satisfying? Theme clear?

Common issues: Unclear motivation | Pacing lags | Unearned moments | Confusion

If struggles: Identify gap → Return to Stage 2 → Re-test

Exit condition: Reader understands and engages without author explanations.

Self-Check: Is This Working?

Use these checkpoints to verify you're following the workflow correctly.

After Story Bible building:

• Can you describe the protagonist's want vs. need without re-reading notes?
• Can you predict how the antagonist would react to a new scenario?
• Do you understand the thematic question the book explores?
• Could you summarize the three-act structure in 2-3 sentences?

After invoking a persona:

• Did you explicitly say "As [persona name]..." in your request?
• Is the feedback focused on that persona's domain (developmental = structure, line = prose)?
• Did you avoid mixing feedback from multiple personas in one pass?

After making edits:

• Did you use str_replace for surgical changes, not reprinting entire sections?
• Can you articulate what changed and why it's better?
• Is the change consistent with the Story Bible (character voice, plot logic, world rules)?

After brainstorming:

• Did you generate 5+ options before selecting one?
• Did you curate collaboratively rather than taking the first suggestion?
• Can you explain why the selected option is stronger than alternatives?

Before claiming "done":

• Has a fresh sub-agent (without Story Bible context) read the manuscript?
• Did the fresh reader understand plot, character motivations, and stakes?
• Were any gaps or confusion points identified and addressed?

If you answered "no" to any checkpoint, return to that stage before proceeding.

Common Mistakes

Example: Developmental vs. Line Editing

Same passage, different lenses:

Sarah walked into the office. Her boss looked angry. "We need to talk," he said. She sat down nervously.

Line Editor feedback (prose-level):

• "Walked" is weak—try "strode" or "slipped"
• "Looked angry" tells rather than shows—describe furrowed brow, tight jaw
• "Nervously" is an adverb crutch—show the nervousness through action

Developmental Editor feedback (structure/stakes):

• What does Sarah want in this scene? What does her boss want?
• If this is the confrontation, we need setup—what's the conflict history?
• Stakes feel low—why does this conversation matter to the story?
• Pacing: Is this the right chapter for this confrontation, or should tension build longer?

The difference: Line edits polish sentences. Developmental edits ensure the scene earns its place in the story. Always developmental first.

Quick Reference Commands

Files

• references/developmental-editing.md - Plot, structure, pacing analysis
• references/line-editing.md - Prose-level refinement
• references/character-work.md - Voice, motivation, arc tracking
• references/continuity-tracking.md - Timeline and fact consistency
• references/brainstorming.md - Idea generation techniques
• references/thriller-craft.md - Genre-specific guidance for suspense
• references/scifi-worldbuilding.md - Technical accuracy, speculation rules
• assets/story-bible-template.md - Blank story bible structure
• assets/scene-worksheet.md - Scene-level analysis template