Unless you're writing a CSI or Law and Order-type story where all the characters are more or less interchangable and serve only to relate expository dialogue, I think some character growth is expected and inevitable, even if it's just an increase in competence or acquisition of a new skill. A friendship can grow into love, an enemy can become an ally or vice versa, the protagonist can suffer a crisis of conscience or PTSD and decide to give up his/her role as an action hero, or can have some kind of epiphany that helps to solve the current problem. All these things function as a character arc, whether it occurs over the course of one book or several.
Really? That's awesome!
I DO plan for this to happen. I generally start with relatively normal (compared to the story world's "major players") main characters who are fairly competent at using what they have. They get smarter, stronger and more experienced as my stories progress. Their relationships with people change and they do reel from the major things (like ruined friendships, regrets, deaths, etc). They also learn from mistakes...
What threw me off was how a lot of articles and editors say "change" means some permanent internal change... that protags need to overcome some flaw or part of themselves before they complete a book's story arc. It didn't ring true to me. So I've been sort of agonizing over this for the past few days. By that definition, most of the things above wouldn't count, because they're usually not fundamental; forging friendships/making enemies/altering opinions of individuals/getting more badass are physical and worldly.
For example, if the heroine's partner dies, the grief may make her angry enough to track down the killer, but when he's been defeated and she comes to terms with her friend's death she's still the same (unless she permanently becomes colder or something else due to the events that happened). So it's not really a fundamental change so much as a temporary emotional response to a major knock. No beliefs/attitudes are altered.
As another example, if a hero is always getting messed around by a love interest, and he finally decides to cut things off, it doesn't necessarily mean that he's changed, just that he's hit his limit.
Ya, I'd probably be good with learning more about them.
Maybe change isnt even the best word, maybe I should say I'm looking for reaction to the events going on.
Yeah, if this counts as change I'll be REALLY happy because my MC always reacts to events... I just don't want to have to change him fundamentally every time something major happens or in each book I write!
As in, I'd rather not have to make him more paranoid or less trusting, etc. if his mentor is killed, or to have him struggle with an emotional issue and then have an epiphany at the climax of every story arc.
