Plotting a Series with Dramatica Pro

questions
#1

I’m in the process of writing a series. So for the larger story that stretches over the complete book series I have one detailed Storyform.

My question is how to structure the individual books. If there are too many elements it can be confusing to the reader. So I hesitate making a unique storyform for each, though it needs it. The main character and influence character stays the same throughout, so which Throughline should I change for the smaller parts and which should I keep?

I have a feeling I should set up the remaining books with one or two of the Throughlines the same as the overarching plot’s, but the plot of the individual books will be different. Any advice?

1 Like
#2

My advice would be to look at the first book, decide (independent of the larger storyform) what the inequity is and treat it like it is its own thing. Trust that it will work within the whole during this process, then double check at the end that it actually does.

1 Like
#3

The bold is actually not true. With a novel you have more than enough real estate to cover everything.

I just helped an Author do this very same thing - storyform for the series, storyform for the first book (and will do additional for second and third).

Did the same thing we did for the Tangled series where the OS Signpost 1 of the Series storyform sets the OS Concern of the storyform for the 1st Book, and then do the same with the following books.

You have more than enough room, and your novel will be better for it.

3 Likes
#4

Silly question, but for a trilogy, how do you break up the signposts for the overall storyform? Does each book represent a journey?

1 Like
#5

If your trilogy storyform has a Z-pattern (bump-slide-bump, 3 Act feel) for Overall Story signposts, that would make it easy to break into three books – the middle book would account for the middle two signposts of the trilogy storyform.

Another option, which might work well with the other patterns (2 Act and 4 Act) would be to have the final book in the trilogy account for the last two signposts of the trilogy storyform, giving that last book a more “epic” feel. (In that way the final book might not even need its own storyform; its story could wholly serve the overarching story.)

If anyone needs a good discussion covering Signposts, Journeys and the different Act patterns, I found this:
https://www.screenplay.com/chatchrishuntley
(it appears to be an oldie but a goodie!)

3 Likes
#6

One other note, if your trilogy is heavy on romance (e.g. Twilight series) you might want to consider using the Relationship Story throughline of the trilogy storyform to figure out how to break things up, as it’s possible that throughline is more “important” than the Overall Story throughline. Just a thought.

2 Likes
#7

No silly questions!

If the middle book is intended to be the same length as the other three (give or take) I would take the Signpost that most speaks to you as an Author given the concerns of the characters and the dramatic material you want to cover.

For instance, if the Plot Progression is:

Understanding - Doing - Obtaining - Learning

I would set the Overall Story Concern of the first book to Understanding
the Overall Story Concern of the last book to Learning
and then the Overall Story Concern of the middle book to Obtaining

You’ll note that this feels like a “better” plot progression for a Trilogy and I would venture to guess that those who can’t break their books down into four parts are likely looking at a similar 3-Act structure for their series storyform and naturally want the middle section to be a bridge between two Signposts

In this example Obtaining would work better as an OS Concern if for nothing else than the primary focus, or Goal of the Overall Story, would fall into line with the end of the Journey - where they “end up” at the end of the story.

No rules, of course, but it’s cool and I think sophisticated of the Author to align the format of their presentation with the actual narrative structure of what it is they are trying to say with the material.

7 Likes
#8

Thanks @mlucas @jhull - both of these answers have lightbulbs going off.

Z-pattern Act structure – totally make sense.

Makes sense, the Doing-Obtaining of Book 2 would work as an Act 2 “slide,” and it makes sense to set that story concern as Obtaining.

I guess it goes without saying that you should probably keep the OS’s in the same domain throughout? (I guess it might feel weird if the overall story was Physics and one or more of the novels was Psychology or something…)

This is all hypothetical for me right now but as soon as I finish this prequel I’m working on I’ll be very interested in revisiting this topic! :slight_smile:

4 Likes
#9

here’s where you get to manipulate the theory to work for your story. you’re going to need a complete storyform for each episode or novel in the series. otherwise, your audience will be unsatisfied at the end of your book, and that’s just scandalous. so w/out revealing (and sometimes without addressing at all) story points of the overall scheme, you can tie ends to what particular problem the current episode is exploring. it’s even possible to use multiple storyforms (but not too many!) in a novel throughout. remember the process of storyweaving. our reality is a matrix and stories are 2-d reflections.

4 Likes
#10

I’m currently using this to figure out a trilogy, and I have a related question.

I like the idea of using the Overall Story Signposts for the Concerns of each book (with Book Two covering the slide in the middle). But I’m wondering… In each book, should the other three domains remain the same, or could switching the Main and Influence Character domains works?

For instance, the domains and concerns in my trilogy storyform are:

  • OS: Activity - Doing
  • MC: Fixed Attitude - Preconscious
  • IC: Situation - Progress
  • RS: Manipulation - Being

In Book One, could I switch things up so that the domains and concerns are as follows:

  • OS: Activity - Learning
  • MC: Situation - Present
  • IC: Fixed Attitude - Conscious
  • RS: Manipulation - Conceiving

I guess I’m wondering if that would mess something up within the storyform for the trilogy, or if it wouldn’t make a difference.

1 Like
#11

I had a similar question (up thread) -

… but after reading @jhull 's analysis of Empire Strikes Back (which has two storyforms, one in Physics and the other in Psychology) I now think there’s a lot more flexibility on this (including changing up the MC/IC arrangements) depending on what you’re trying to achieve. But it would be good to hear others weigh in.

3 Likes
#12

Wouldn’t make a difference - it’s really about what you’re trying to say. Figure that out first, then use Dramatica to figure out how to say that best.

Dramatica doesn’t tell you what you should do, it helps you say what you want to say.

3 Likes
#13

To add to Jim’s post, it can also help to really think of the two storyforms (series and book X) as different narratives, different stories, where one is contained within the other. The same characters (players) can have different roles in each narrative: maybe Be-er in one but Do-er in the other, Protagonist in one but Sidekick in the other, etc.

The Sound of Music is a great film to watch because the two different narratives – Making a Family and The Rise of Naziism – are very clear.

(I want to comment on something else about Jim’s post but I think I’ll start a new thread.)

1 Like
#14

Yeah… I ended up doing it anyway before I saw Jim’s response because I started looking at what I wanted to say. So now I have a storyform for the trilogy, a storyform for each book, and two additional storyforms for the first book.

This should be interesting…

5 Likes