Problem remaining in Start story?

[actingpower]

Hi, everyone! I’m tinkering with a theory of compromise and “take a third option” in Dramatica, and this question occurred as a useful component of it. Suppose we have a story where the essential growth is to Start the Solution. In most stories, requisite to this is that the Problem also stops, but that’s not critical to the resolution of the story. What am I asking is, does the Problem actually have to stop in this case, or can the resolution of the story be, “You have the Problem; that is good. But you can’t achieve success until you have both the Problem and the Solution?”

Suppose we have a Main Character who stresses over the Process of completing the tasks assigned to them by their superior. Their Influence Character notices this and says, “You must also consider the Result in order to see the full picture.” In the end, the Main Character doesn’t fully avoid considering the Process, but they incorporate Result-based thought into their analysis, and this wins them the day. In other words, it’s not a 100% conversion from one to the other, but simply the willingness to go halfway represents significant Change on the MC’s part.

How kosher is this in Dramatica theory? Are there any good examples of stories that have been analyzed through Dramatica that encapsulate this idea? Or am I off-base here?

[mlucas]

Cool question, @actingpower. I’m a bit unclear in your question and especially the example what part is the OS vs. the MC throughline. But I’m pretty sure your idea works fine with Dramatica because:

First, you can achieve the OS Goal (Outcome: Success) without embracing the OS Solution at all. See this thread:

What does Outcome tell you about OS Throughline & OS Solution?

For the MC Throughline and IC Throughline, the MC & IC Resolve specifically tells us whether their Solutions are embraced. For the OS Throughline, I had the idea that Outcome tells us whether the OS Solution is embraced but its actual definition is simpler, it just tells us whether the Story Goal is achieved. Still, am I wrong to think that an Outcome of Success means the OS Solution was embraced or somehow used to bring about that success? I also think you can extend that to say that Succes…

Second, the MC Resolve is best determined by seeing if they changed their perspective on their personal issues between the beginning and the end of the story. A Change character will also necessarily embrace their Solution, but that doesn’t specify what they must do with their Problem element. I think in your example, by changing their perspective and incorporating Result-based thought, their problem with the process is no longer a problem for them.

[jhull]

It would help to know how Process was a problem for this Main Character. “Stressing” about it doesn’t define an actual inequity.

My guess is that if you defined an inequity that exists because of Process, your Result Solution will do away with the Process…they both won’t continue to exist.