A bit later than intended, but it finally cooled down yesterday so my body decided to catch up on much missed sleep due to the heat instead of giving me the energy to write a blog post. Anyway, it’s Friday which means it’s time for another Let’s Talk Bookish post! Today we’ll be talking about duologies vs. trilogies. Lately, most books, within all genres, hardly are standalones. Authors immediately write duologies, trilogies or even longer series. I definitely have my preferences, so let’s discuss those!

Let’s Talk Bookish is a weekly meme that was originally created and hosted by Rukky @ Eternity Books starting in August 2019, and was then cohosted by Dani @ Literary Lion from May 2020 to March 2022. Since April 2022, this meme is hosted by , Aria @ Book Nook Bits and since February 2025, Dini @ DiniPandaReads is the co-host. Let’s Talk Bookish is a meme where participants discuss certain topics, share their opinions, and share their love by visiting each other’s posts.

Prompts: Do you prefer duologies or trilogies, and why? What are the pros and cons of having two books vs. three books in a series? What are some of your favourite duologies and/or trilogies? Do you think there are benefits to these shorter series, compared to ones with 4+ books, or are fewer books limiting?

Do you prefer duologies or trilogies, and why? What are the pros and cons of having two books vs. three books in a series?

Honestly, I prefer trilogies over duologies. In a duology, the author has definitely more time to explore a story in all its facets compared to a standalone, but the danger of just having two books is that the second book feels pointless and just to be there for contract purposes. I know this might sound negative, but I’ve had such reading experiences on multiple occasions, so yeah. With trilogies however, there is even more time to finish exploring a story and it doesn’t feel rushed at all. The danger however, is the famous “second book”. This one often seems to be dragging and to be feeling right in the middle, where it belongs. The build-up of the plot and characters are done, but it’s not the time for the final explosion yet. So, there has to be a book  in between. This book serves as a build-up for the final one and often has a slower plot. I always hope that authors spend more time developing the characters, because I love my character driven novels. This often happens, so that’s a pro of having three books. Whereas the middle book can be a con as well. The pro of having a duology on the other hand is that the author is forced to wrap up a story quicker. If there’s nothing more to tell, they can simply round it of. It has to be satisfactory though. However, with duologies I often have the feeling they would have been better of as standalones.

What are some of your favourite duologies and/or trilogies?

As I’m not the biggest fan of duologies, I don’t have many favourites. If I have to mention one, it has to be the “Letters of Enchantment” duology by Rebecca Ross. After the first book, the story continues in the second one without feeling dragging. I have to admit I enjoyed the first book more, but a duology is obviously the best choice to tell Iris’ and Roman’s story. I also really enjoy Chloe Gong’s “Shanghai Duet”, as Roma’s and Juliette’s story clearly continues instead of being dragged out. A duology that would be better off as a standalone however, is “Everless” by Sara Holland. The first book was phenomenal (I just got back into reading back then so I definitely wouldn’t have rated it 5 stars by now), but the second book really felt pointless and like a contractual obligation to me.

When looking into trilogies, I have several favourites. First of all, unpopular opinion here, the original Grisha trilogy by Leigh Bardugo. These books made me want to read all of Bardugo’s books, but unfortunately the rest of them were not for me. I really, really don’t like “Six of Crows”, and the “king of Scars” duology was not for me either. The “Shadow and Bone” trilogy is a great example of a good build-up in the first book, more development in the second one and an explosive finale in the third book. The same applies to Julie Kagawa’s “Shadow of the Fox” trilogy. Again, build-up, development and finale. Even though the second book feels a bit dragging, but still necessary for the story to reach its final destination. Another favourite of mine is the original “Shatter Me” trilogy by Tahereh Mafi. I don’t like the second one that much though, this is so dragged out, it’s unbelievable. A great example of original trilogies getting prequels and not feeling like the universe has been dragged out however, is “The Hunger Games” by Suzanne Collins. All books are great, the latest addition to this universe has been my first and only 5-star read of 2025 so far.

Do you think there are benefits to these shorter series, compared to ones with 4+ books, or are fewer books limiting?

There’s something to both sides here. Yes, I do think duologies and trilogies are more beneficial to series with 4+ books. This depends on the author and the series of course. I’m really, really intimidated by Robert Jordan’s The Wheel of Time, or Diana Gabaldon’s Outlander to name a few, because of the number of books in the series. Moreover, al books are huge! No, not for me. I tend to get bored pretty quickly and I would definitely end up DNF’ing the entire series. An example of a series where more books are working really well is Throne of Glass by Sarah J. Maas. This series consists off 7 books, but the story never feels dragging as we follow multiple characters and there is a lot at stake.  Same for Marissa Meyer’s “The Lunar Chronicles”, as we follow a different main character in each book and they come together in the end. Oh, and Twilight by Stephenie Meyer of course! Okay, there are more series having 4+ books that actually work well, but they are mostly young adult ones.

However, some can argue that duologies and trilogies are limiting the authors, but I don’t think they are. They tend to attract a larger audience than the longer series as the number of books is more appealing to its target audience. The bigger series are more often for high fantasy fans, who are more often from another generation than the romantic fantasy readers. The latter sub genre is rather popular nowadays and finds its origin in the young adult genre. Many romantasy readers, not all of course, started out reading YA fantasy when they were younger. As the genre evolves and grows up, the reader does as well. So, many YA readers naturally transitioned into romantasy, and they have been used to duologies and trilogies from their YA days. Of course, romantasy readers branch out into longer high fantasy series, but the romantic aspect is often missing from these books. Furthermore, they might feel very, very intimidating.

---

So, I think they are not limiting, just for a different target audience.

Okay this post has gotten SO much longer than anticipated. But now it’s your turn!

Do you enjoy reading duologies and/or trilogies? Do you think they are more beneficial than longer seies or do you think they are limiting? What are your favourites?