Catalysts and inhibitors/unique ability and critical flaw

writing
#1

Looking for a fresh perspective on catalysts, inhibitors, and unique ability, critical flaw.

When looking at info for catalysts and inhibitors, sometimes I read them as bringing the story closer to the solution/conclusion or stopping it from getting it there, and sometimes I read them as causing more conflict or less. Is one of these interpretations accurate? Both? Neither?

And how do the rest of you use all 4 of these points? Are they something that’s meant to be used at 1 crucial point in the story, or are they more of a guideline to keep in mind throughout the entire story? Something that you use as your characters go through each option (or each tick of the clock) or just once right before the conclusion?

Is it preferable for a critical flaw to lead to an inhibitor and a unique ability to lead to a catalyst? If there no connection necessary?

1 Like
#2

Answering your questions in reverse order here…

First, the easy one – I don’t think there’s any special connection between Unique Ability / Critical Flaw and Catalyst / Inhibitor.

There is a subtle interaction between MC Unique Ability and MC Critical Flaw, depending on Growth of Stop vs. Start. See the last part of the definition here.

If possible, you should show the Unique Abilities and Critical Flaws at least a few times in the story (maybe once per Act), so that when they come up at or near the climax, they don’t seem to be out of the blue. Personally, I don’t think it’s critical to show the CF always messing up the UA; earlier in the story I think the MC can get a nice little “win” from their UA. (In this case, perhaps, you’re just foreshadowing a characteristic that will later have an impact on the overall story.)

Finally, for Catalyst and Inhibitor I would think more about speeding or slowing the pace towards resolution – you used the word conclusion and that’s pretty good too. Generally I think the Catalyst increases necessary conflict and the Inhibitor reduces it, perhaps leading to sections of the story with less conflict (in that throughline). By “necessary” I mean, the type of conflict that is necessary for the throughline’s difficulties to be addressed.

2 Likes
#3

And there’s the fresh perspective. I know i’ve read that definition before, but the start/stop part never stuck.

“In Stop stories, the Critical Flaw undoes work done by the Unique Ability after the fact.”

I’ve always looked at the Unique Ability as overcoming the Critical Flaw, i’m sure because of something I read once somewhere and no longer remember. But Dramatica is so open in how it can be used that of course the Critical Flaw can overcome the Unique Ability as well.

Thanks for the fresh look, @mlucas.

#4

Sure! Of course, in a Success story, there is a crucial moment where the Unique Ability does manage to work; the Critical Flaw is somehow overcome at that point.

#5

No, I don’t think you have to show the CF overcoming the UA every time it shows up when the ultimate resolution will be Failure. You should definitely show both of them, so the readers can start to think, “Will the MC overcome the CF and wield their UA effectively?”

As to the difference between the UA and the Catalyst, for me the chief difference is that the Catalyst is about a Throughline and what causes it to come to conflict, whereas the UA is embedded in a character and describes how they interact with another Throughline. The OS Catalyst is part of the Overall Throughline, which means characters pass it back and forth as the story wills. The IC UA (for example) is the IC’s special power to make the Main Character change. They never give that ability up, just use it to greater or lesser effect, depending on how heavy the CF is on them.