The POV of a story

It can work sometimes, but when it happens too often it gets annoying to me. POV flips can help make long scenes less monotonous, like switching to a more peaceful POV during a long battle scene. However, if POV flips happen too often it just gets exhausting, and the whole story can feel disjointed and aimless.

One of my comics had multiple main characters...so multiple povs. I guess it's good if done right.

i dont mind it! i dont read a whole lot of books besides harry potter tho. but in comics and tv it doesnt bother me. i think itd only be bad really if it ruins a surprise or plot twist and we just gotta sit around waitin for the rest of the characters to catch up. but if its written in a good way then i got noooo problem with somethin like that

I'm most curious about this comment:

Because knowing things the main character doesn't can be a huge part of suspense! The example I've always heard is this (ETA: this example is from Hitchcock, I am silly and couldn't remember, thank you Michelle!!):

Imagine a scene at a restaurant. The main characters come and sit down at a table. They have lunch, they're chatting, having a little quiet moment. Suddenly, they notice something's wrong, dive out of the way, and something under the table explodes, killing everyone in the restaurant. Whoa! I guess there was a bomb there!
That's surprise.
Now imagine the same scene, but juuuust before, you get a scene where you find out the bad guys have planted a bomb under the table. The main characters come in, and when they sit down at the table you know that's the table with the bomb, but they don't. You know it's going to explode, but they're having a casual chat -- and this once pointless conversation is now full of tension. Any small moment where they almost notice they're in danger gets you worked up. NOTICE THE BOMB!! PLEASE! LOOK UNDER THE TABLE AND NOTICE THE BOMB!
That's suspense.

Dramatic irony can be used poorly, sure, and this kind of set-up, if it teases too much, can become comedic or obnoxious and wreck that suspense that it's building. And if the hero's quest hinges on the answer to a question you've already learned, then yeah, that's boring. But there are a lot of other ways to handle those sorts of cutaways, and learning things the main characters don't know isn't bad storytelling across the board. It's just bad storytelling when it's done badly.

To be fair, I use the "switch to a scene with the opposing character's POV" in my story! For me, if I didn't, a lot of the later conflicts would seem to come out of nowhere, like the surprise bomb in the first example. There can't be any suspense or tension if you don't even know what's at stake, and it'll be important to learn what's at stake for the villains, too!
And though this isn't true in every story, I like to be able to invest, at least a little, in the characters who are on the "other side." Getting to know the antagonists as characters, separate from the heroes, is something I do really enjoy as a reader, so it's found its way into my stories, as well!

TL;DR, I think it's not about whether a POV switch is good or bad in and of itself, but about what the POV switch is being used for. You don't just throw one in just to have one -- what purpose does it serve, and why is that important to this story?

Aah yeah, the Hitchcock example of suspense. Definitely a good source of learning material for creating effective suspense!

I do agree that poorly-done suspense is obnoxious, and maybe that's what @angelfire is talking about. The kind where the plot is too predictable and we've guessed the turn of events faster than intended, rather than learning information the story purposefully wants us to know ahead of time. You know something's wrong when a story gets to a big reveal and you're shouting "I KNOW UGH" at the screen. >>

Mmmh, I never thought of this. I guess I am okay with POVs changing from time to time. So far I haven't had a need to do that for my comic, but I have created a character whose powers of telepathy work as an expository character kinda thing since it might get boring only seeing Jon's POV all through the story. I usually change POVs during flashbacks, but I don't think that's the same thing, right?

I like the example @shazzbaa gave! You can use POV changes to really drive a story forward or to create a certain feel (like the villain's monologue about their evil plan while they are secluded and what not.) However, you can also create a really amazing narrative like Fullmetal Alchemist where we only see the perspective of Ed and Al throughout. It really comes down how you use your writing techniques and if it fits in your narrative. I guess it comes down to just that, what works and what doesn't.

What about stories that don't really have MC? My comic doesn't really have one. I find, personally , sticking with the same character quite boring. XD I switch between characters, but I use a 3rd person point of view, more speicifcally I use 3rd Person Objective or Dramatic... (you can read more about it below). None of the thoughts of my characters are given. So I'll never use thought bubbles! XD I either have them keep their thoughts to themselves or say things out loud.

Taken from: http://learn.lexiconic.net/pov.htm These are more for novels, but the basic idea still applies.

Here are the six major types of point of view:

3rd Person Omniscient: Told from the p.o.v. of an outside narrator, the "omniscient" author nevertheless gets inside the thoughts and feelings of any character he or she wishes (in other words, two or more characters). This p.o.v. offers a lot of information, and is suitable for large, complex novels. This was a common p.o.v. in 18th and 19th century novels [authors of the time often entered the story as all-judging moralists], but it's much less common today. .

3rd Person Limited Omniscient: In order to limit the information, and focus the attention of the reader onto one character, the author will sometimes tell a story by entering the mind of one key character (usually the protagonist). As in all 3rd person p.o.v.'s, limited omniscience does not use "I" or "my".

3rd Person Objective or Dramatic: Here the outside narration is completely bereft of (lacking) any interior thinking. The author, and the readers, can only observe exterior actions and dialogue, and from that infer a character's thoughts. In other words, the author must describe gestures and actions that indirectly show how a character feels, thinks and deals with internal conflict. Authors will use this p.o.v. to achieve a high degree of realism, since it mimics how we interact in real-life. It's also useful to shield the reader from the true thoughts and feelings of the characters, as in Shirley Jackson's suspenseful "The Lottery".

1st Person Central: This perspective is told from the p.o.v. of the main character. It allows the author to bring the reader closer to the character, and create more sympathy for the character's struggles. However, it also limits the reader to one person's perspective, and we don't have a broader, more balanced point of view. Nevertheless, this view grants a sense of immediacy: we see everything through this character's eyes.

1st Person Peripheral: This also uses "I" or '"my," but from the p.o.v. of a minor character who observes - usually in a more neutral and detached manner - the actions of the main characters. Like with 3rd person objective, the detachment from the main character(s) creates a lack of knowledge, and heightens the suspense.

2nd Person: This is a relatively rare point of view and is difficult to sustain. It is based upon the address of one speaker to a second person. It uses the "you" and "your" pronouns throughout, which, as you can imagine, is difficult to maintain without sounding repetitive. Here's an example: You will receive the revised essay criteria by Tuesday, September 22. You will have an opportunity to respond to it in writing before October 17. In fiction, the "you" being addressed is often a central character, and the effect is to turn the reader into the character. A classic example of this is Will Baker's "Grace Period".

You would probably not like my comics then.

I do it so I can integrate the story better. I feel it also fleshes out secondary characters more.

I do that with Grassblades, because I'm handling a lot of different strands of the plot, and the characters are still spread out quite a bit geographically; I need to switch between them so that important characters don't just suddenly show up right in the middle out of the blue. We just dropped in on the main antagonist in chapter 5, for example. We don't know his motives, or exactly what he's after yet, but the readers got to meet him.

I'm trying to do it in a way that flows well, though. I don't reveal every single detail of what's going on; there are characters who are keeping secrets from other characters, and in so doing, keep them from the readers as well. I'm hinting at plot-information and conflicts without spelling them out point by point, so the reader can learn as we go along, and then I can do a bigger reveal later.

As a reader, I enjoy it if it's well done. I don't like it when the writer jumps from character to character, and lets the villain do a "Mwahahaha, this is my evil plan and the hero doesn't even know!"-speech - that ruins the suspense - but I do like getting different POVs on the story, and I like getting to know characters through their own eyes, unless they're intended to remain mysterious.

If the story has a big bunch of characters who all want different things, and it's important that we as readers KNOW what those things are to make sense of the story, it is sometimes necessary to jump between POVs. Third person limited (i.e: the POV of just one character) isn't always enough in those cases.

Or, you know, do your own thing. You don't have to do something just because other people prefer it that way. If you want to tell your story in limited POV, tell it in limited POV. Sometimes, that is what works best for a story!

I actually tend to dislike stories that only have one POV. It's just very frustrating.

Even more so when it's a first person POV.

Yeah, I don't mind 3rd person limited, but if it's going to be first person, it has to be REALLY good for me to enjoy it; if I'm going to be stuck in one person's head for the entirety of a story, they need to be interesting.

The only example I can think of right now where first person POV worked for me at all was Nick Harkaway's Gone-Away World, and that one has sufficient layers of weirdness on top of its POV to keep me interested.

I don't mind this really, I know it can be done poorly. But if done right, POV-Changes can really help enhance the tension (for instance an impending disaster which the main protagonist is unaware of). It also lets you get to know other characters more in-depth.

The main problem I have with this is if it's done too frequently and leads to a story losing momentum. that's a problem I have with a lot of fantasy novels. Not saying this can't be done well, but it requires each and every "Person of View" to be interesting enough to make me cope with the switch. And I find that more often than not is not the case which in turn then leads to the pacing suffering.

I rally love it when it switches pov. I think it is because I usually get very invested in the side characters and want to get inside there heads

Stephen King does this sometimes. 95% of a novel will be from the perspective his protagonist (or protagonists, sometimes, rarely, usually one central character) ... but 5% of a novel might be from the perspective of whatever evil force is at work.

It's very effective, because you get a hint at the mad workings of that evil force, but it also doesn't really make sense (Lovecraftian in that way); it sort of builds a sense of psychological dread knowing that it's an alien, powerful, menacing presence in the story even when it's not actually present in a scene. It's almost like that evil force is reading you as you read it, dabbled into the narrative just enough to not let you forget that it's there, waiting.

Brilliant, really.

Of course a ton of other authors play effectively with POV. The important thing is that every POV shown to the reader is important to the narrative, either directly or atmospherically.

I am very very very very guilty of showing POVs of different characters in my story. I personally enjoy reading stories being told from different point of views, BUT it must be done right!

One of the reasons I like reading/writing like this is because I love character driven stories. Getting to know each character, finding out what drives them, their different personalities and how they will handle a certain situation is something I always enjoy. In other words, being able to connect with the characters in some way.

As a reader, if the storytelling is done right, knowing something the MC doesn't will not spoil the fun for me. Pretty much like what @shazzbaa said about surprise and suspense, I think that's a pretty good example. Even if the MC remains oblivious, doesn't mean I don't feel the suspense and the thrill of how the MC comes to find out a certain fact/plan/plot point etc, whatever that may be. It's a different form of enjoyment.

Like what some of the above posters have mentioned, I think GoT is a good example!

Personally my story is told under the POV of 1 single main character, but everything about the story is more or less highlight another main character more than anything. From time to time I would shift the story to show little action coming from the other main character (not dwelling too much into their thought though), I call this a "hint", or maybe a sort of foreshadowing. It's usually something very ambiguous and vague to keep my readers guessing. I like this sort of "throwing hint" because it allows people to piece together all the hint to come to a specific conclusion about the character.

my best experience with a work full of POVs is with Hayao Miyazaki's Nausicaä (the manga)
while you read, you slowly jump from a character to another, each one has its own moral code, affiliations, goals, locations and concerns, plus they are moving at the same time in a big detailed world
so, it was impossible by all means to compress all such POVs into the MC's
i think using multiple POVs requires a good talent and a lot of pre-planning

I like seeing multiple POVs get used, because if things are only from the main character's perspective, it can get very one dimensional and annoying at times, like nothing isn't allowed to happen without the main character being in the shot. Having multiple POVs allows you to see how different characters react in different scenarios without the main character being involved. Events that weren't on screen don't have to be explained to the main character. Instead, they're shown to the audience, which I find gives a more personal connection between the other characters and the audience. I couldn't picture my comic if I did everything through my main character's perspective. As much as I love using her, that's too much of her (not to mention it would be boring always drawing every scene with my main character present). Even right at the beginning of my comic, I have a scene where she's not even present, and my audience is loving watching my villain rage at the current event that's unfolding. I intend to show a lot of different stories and sides to many of my characters, and I don't think that I can accomplish that effectively by always sticking to one viewpoint.