I want to answer my own question. In case it helps others here.
My WIP IC is actually the MC of a redemption story trilogy. He is the antagonist, and represents the larger antagonistic society, but the impact of the MC in the three books enables his change. (see: http://dramatica.com/questions/how-can-i-use-dramatica-to-help-structure-a-massive-trilogy for the Combination Trilogy)
I demanded of myself (this time/finally) to find a premise that doesn't just "work" but is my POINT. Both for the Tr-OS and the first book. I started in Dramatica with the consequences then the focus. In the first book that would be failure, the consequence was the unfortunate but "good" result. I had to press for this, looking at the different slants for the words, but wanting an accurate premise in light of the whole, and for the first book as part the whole.
AFTERWARDS, to make sure it was working for the development of the IC, I switched the MC and IC roles for the first book in Dramatica, to see how the same storyform affected him. (Answering the question, 'What if he were the MC?') EXACTLY THE SAME concern, elements and variations.
THEN, in Dramatica, I changed the consequence/judgment to his perspective. Strangely, though the MC is steadfast in the original, and the IC is the one who changes, when I flipped it, he remains steadfast (!)--which actually is what needs to happen in the trilogy. He budges on one significant point, but in NOT ENOUGH. He's still steadfast in the long run. (note: other aspects of the OS/RS changed, and they also accurately reflected HIS perspective of what was going on in the world and relationship).
...and I uploaded that into Subtext to see how it would sound there...
It was exactly the point I needed to make for him in Book One!!
I sigh, thinking this is meaningful.