Even when you're writing fantasy you need the story to be internally consist (which maintains plausibility) - that is, once you establish a rule that's in play in the world you shouldn't break it - not without giving the readers a reason why the rule is being broken.
For example, if there's a huge amount of drama in chapter 2 focused around an elf trying to get a fire lit during a blizzard, centered on his use of a flint fire starter that doesn't want to work (and the knowledge that the heroes will freeze to death if the fire isn't lit) then in chapter 9 you can't have the same elf casting fire spells. A different elf, sure - different training, different talents, what have you. Maybe the same elf if he's been studying magic since chapter 2. That works:
"Zap!" Glowmoon said, producing a spark of flame. The small mound of kindling caught instantly. Looking around he told the stunned onlookers, he said: "Ever since that night on the snow fells of Husja I've made it a point to focus on my fire magic. I'm never to going to get caught that way again."
Or maybe if you explain that the circumstances are different. That works: "Zap!" Glowmoon said, producing a spark of flame. The small mound of kindling caught instantly. Looking around he told the stunned onlookers, he said: "Here, surround by the trees, my magic is strong enough to do that - barely. Alas, there were no tress on the snow fells of Husja the night we almost died."
But just "Zap!" Glowmoon said, producing a spark of flame. The small mound of kindling caught instantly. With camp set up, the conversation turned to coming battle with the Witch.
That leaves the reader with a "huh? What about the flint? What about all the drama in chapter 2? Why is no one screaming BULLSHIT or demanding to know why he didn't do that in chapter 2? Where's the explanation?" feeling and nothing destroys suspension of disbelief faster.
Going back on topic, if you've set up a world where Good Girls don't get spanked but Bad Girls (if caught doing something bad) are put on trial and face a long, formal hearing where everything they've done since grade 1 is trotted out (i.e. that "permanent record") and (if the judge convicts them - which is a big "if" and one the heroine is counting on) they get publicly spanked - then you can't have a girl grabbed at random and added to the mass spanking. Not without explaining it someway, not after telling us that there needs to be that trial. While including another girl could be fun it breaks the web of plausibility that you've built up.
If, in your world, babysitters can legally spank only after they turn 18, and you've spun a tale about a girl counting the days until her birthday (with her young charges asking "Um, you won't start spanking me after your birthday, will you?") then you've established how things work. Bringing in her younger sister, cousin, friend, whatever - who is 16 and a spanking babysitter - that destroys the foundation of the story.
If someone is a life long "non-spanker" then he/she generally needs a reason to shift sides. Establish that the character is whimsical, or the family has recently moved and wants to fit the new norms, or there's a new parent or in-law who convinces the character, or reference long talks with a friend or childcare professional, or maybe drugs or a health problem(head injury, Alzheimer, or depression) is involve, or the spankee has done something so far beyond the pale that extreme measures get experimented with - give them a reason beyond "I woke up and decided that this would a good day to start spanking the kids".
Keeping things plausible and internally consistent - that's a big part of successful storytelling.
Goodgulf |