Are these neat encodings okay for Oppose? (not Hinder!)

questions
#1

Quick backstory… When I finally got down to my One Storyform that I was happy with, it had a lot of Oppose & Support (Oppose is Problem for 3 Throughlines). Only when getting down to serious illustrating / story-encoding did I realize how indirect Oppose is defined as. It threw a slight wrench in my understanding of my story, as I’d originally pictured the Opposes as more direct tactics – preventing goals, blocking, fighting. But that was a good thing – it ended up adding a lot of details and new directions to my story, including a whole political dimension with conspiracies, stuff happening in the shadows, etc.

Now for my question… The issue I have is that I encoded the IC Problem: Oppose and OS Problem: Oppose pretty much the same, as “Political Opposition to Legal & Government Reforms”. It’s hard to come up with a lot of different “indirect opposition” encodings, especially when you’ve already got a good picture of your story and characters.

To fix this, I’ve started down the path of some really interesting encodings of Oppose, trying to keep them indirect (since Oppose is not the same as Hinder). Do these look like acceptable encodings for Oppose?
Note the IC is the First Mage, a 200-year-old wizard type who is Obsessed With His Grand Plan To Save His Dying Country (my gist-y encoding for IC Domain: Fixed Attitude).

  1. IC Problem: Unknown Variables That May Interfere With My Plan (Oppose). e.g. he is driven by the factors that he cannot predict, that may mess up his calculations and thereby interfere with his carefully plotted and executed Plan.
  2. IC Problem: Someone Is Secretly Practicing Eugenics on My Country’s Population (Oppose). This one’s really cool, but he doesn’t know about this at all until at least halfway through the book. I guess he can be driven about it without knowing about it - focusing on the effects of it which he sees as his Symptom? That said, I think I can fold this into #3 below… as one particular hidden plot…
  3. IC Problem: Hidden Conspiracies And Disloyal Plots That Are Detracting From My Plan (Oppose). Similar to #1, but a bit more specific. There would be hints and signs of hidden disloyal forces, which are the root of his drive. Because these conspirators don’t know his plan, and he doesn’t know theirs, it’s all Oppose rather than Hinder.

Does that make sense or am I straying too far?

I do really like #3 … I think it’s an awesome way to encode Oppose as a “wannabe Hinder”: Everyone involved would all prefer to directly interfere with each other, but the hidden nature of the conflict, the lack of knowledge about who their adversaries are and what their plans are, means they can only make indirect moves. (However, #3 actually might fit the OS Throughline better than the IC Throughline … I think I’m having trouble here because my IC may be my Protagonist, at least partially. Oh well that will have to be the subject of another question!)

#2

I think #3 is the closest to the intent of Oppose. #1 feels more like the Prediction vs. Interdiction variations, rather than Oppose.

Though you mentioned the political angle, you could explore that more in additional encodings. It doesn’t have to be secretive – publicly stirring up animus or persuading key players to withdraw support are examples of Oppose as well. Often I think of Oppose as “Denounce” (though that’s hardly the only synonym one could use).

You are spot on about the indirectness being key to Oppose, it creates a different feel from Hinder.

#3

Thanks Brant.

I actually thought about this more after posting (I tend to find the process of posting clarifies my thoughts – maybe because I know there is so much crazy-awesome narrative thinking happening here!). I tried applying two tests to each Problem encoding:

  1. How much does it drive him to influence the MC?
  2. How much does it get at the root of his character … like if you picked him up and plopped him into another story, would this problem (or something very similar to it) still define his character and drive him into conflict?

Applying those tests helped me realize that none of my encodings was quite right. I’m working on another one, but that leads me to a further question. Is it okay to have Problem:Oppose be an external opposition, or an inability to tolerate opposition? Like Problem: So-and-so Disagrees With Me, or Problem: I Cannot Tolerate Disagreement ?

Or does the character (IC in this case) need to be the one doing the Opposing?

#4

Yeah, my response was just talking about Oppose generally. You are right that there’s more to consider if it’s the IC Problem.

  1. Yes, this is the main test of what defines the IC Problem – how does it enable the IC to influence the MC?
  2. This question is better aimed at the main character, IMO. It isn’t necessarily a bad question to answer about the IC, but it can be a distraction. The point of the IC is to show an alternate approach to the MC’s preference. If considering how the IC would operate elsewhere takes away from your ability to define its influence on the MC, then you should refocus.

Others on this forum have put it much better than I can, but no, you can apply Oppose in a number of ways, so long as it directs influence at the MC, e.g. it might be influenced to consider another approach because of how the IC is beset by opposition, rather than how the IC provides opposition.

That being said, be sure to check how your use of a Dramatica term compares with other definitions. “I Cannot Tolerate Disagreement” sounds more like Non-Acceptance than Oppose to me.

2 Likes
#5

Thanks so much Brant. That really helps. I won’t worry so much about the #2 test then.

I agree about the “I Cannot Tolerate Disagreement” not being quite right. (Something like that fits better as his IC Symptom: Disbelief anyway, like he doesn’t brook skepticism and tries to get people to believe in his Plan, even though he won’t give them enough info to judge for themselves.)

I’ve finally decided what my IC Problem encoding will be. I’m surprised at how much effort I’ve spent on this, but it’s very possible if I’d left it more vague and just started writing, I would have ended up on the right thing anyway (or maybe something better!). That said, I’m trying to learn Dramatica as I do this, and I also found this deep thinking about what really drives my IC has furthered my understanding of the story as a whole.

Anyway, to get the bottom of it I ended up making a mind map with five (!) potential encodings for IC Problem:

IC Problem xmind.PNG1491×453 45.4 KB

The mind map helped me realize what was at the “root” of his drive and motivation to influence my MC – it’s the He Now Disagrees… one in the top right. Even though on the surface, the bottom-right encoding about needing to choose a new Apprentice (and opposing all choices until the MC comes along) seemed like the more “influential” encoding, I realized that what was at the root of his drive was actually far more influential. The Usage text from Dramatica Pro also helped here, it says “The Impact Character Problem is the source of his drive. Something of this problem is behind everything the Impact Character chooses to do.”

So I ended up with IC Problem: He Now Disagrees With The Terrible System He Himself Built (Oppose). It feels right and since it’s at the root of the other potential ones, I don’t feel like I wasted time on this exercise – all those items and details will come out in the story. I also now have a better grasp on the OS and Relationship Problems too, and how they relate to this.

Phew! Thanks for bearing with me!

1 Like
#6

Oh, I forgot to mention how excited I am about how well the IC Solution: Support works here. (shouldn’t be so surprised I guess, it’s just Dramatica at work, but I am still pretty new so not yet taking it for granted!)

Anyway, Support as a Solution could theoretically nullify his need to influence the MC – if enough people (especially the former Apprentice) suddenly became loyal (to him or the King) and supported his Plan he would be able to fix the problems he sees with the “Terrible System” easily, and he wouldn’t need MC Caitlin’s help.

Of course, things will not be so easy … and because the MC is Steadfast in my story, the IC will Change to embrace his Solution thereby solving his personal problems. He does so by giving up his rigid grasp on his Grand Plan and in the end choosing to support Caitlin’s way of doing things – it is, after all, her country too.

1 Like