This morning, reading @jhull relationship article, it occurred to me I could get a clearer handle on this if I made it explicit to myself.
So in my substory, my overall story throughline is, say, Obtaining.
now for the other throughlines I spell it out in my notes:
MC Concern: Innermost Desires (obtaining)
RS Concern: Changing One’s Nature (obtaining)
IC Concern: The Future (obtaining)
and suddenly I had a verb, and it all made more sense to me.
For the main story:
OS Concern: changing one’s nature
MC Concern: innermost desires (changing one’s nature)
RS Concern: Obtaining (changing one’s nature)
IC Concern: The Future (changing one’s nature)
For second substory,
OS Concern: the Past
MC Concern: Developing a Plan (the Past)
RS Concern: Memories (the Past)
IC Concern: Understanding (the Past)
This is the sort of thing I’d like to see in the software, to support the users as they try to dope this thing out. With the flat presentation of the data, the relationship between a lot of the points can take a long, long, long time to learn, when it really should be kind of obvious. In this case, I had a moment of, d’oh, this is how the throughlines are knit together into a something that has the ‘feel’ of a single story.
Comments always welcome, especially if I’m wrong!