Question about Relationship Throughline

questions
#51

I agree with @mlucas that sleeping dreams work as well as aspirations. Since Dramatica is about a story mind and not about a necessarily realistic interpretation of reality, I think a sleeping dream and an aspiration can function the same within the story. Just make sure that the dream or nightmare does fulfill the proper role in your story form and it should be fine, I think.

I was wondering what PS Style you would choose as well. I didn’t know if this disorder was causing a problem that the MC would go through a linear set of steps to solve, like washing hands and avoiding cracks to save lives, or if the disorder would cause the MC to see a smudge as such a large imbalance that they feared it would cause some big tragedy. And i sure don’t know how to balance out a smudge to prevent tragedy.

#52

Note there is more about Dream vs. Hope from Melanie here: http://storymind.com/blog/hopes-and-dreams/

#53

I like that, which gives me an OS and IC Symptom of Hinder and Response of Help, which works, but I wonder if having the MC Problem be Temptation is like putting the cart before the horse since I’d think Uncontrolled anxiety would cause the Symptom of being Tempted to stop it as fast as possible with compulsions, which would cause more Uncontrolled feelings then Temptation, and so on, not the other way around.

I wanted IC to have a Unique Ability of Approach (I’ve written MC being impressed by IC just recklessly doing things instead of getting intimidated), not Morality, so that choice gave me a PS of Holistic. I find Holistic kind of confusing and I don’t know how and when to show it. I wish there was an example of the same problem solved in each PS, rather than different examples for each one. I could see that balancing aspect in regards to a mental compulsion-- MC gets a slew of bad thoughts and tries to balance or counter them by thinking good thoughts.

#54

Just a sanity check here. Is it at all possible we got the MC Throughline wrong, and it’s actually the MC who has the stuck mindset? and the stuff you wrote about the MC’s responsibilities might actually be part of the OS throughline (or partly in both OS and MC throughlines)?
I’m asking because of a couple things I noticed:

  • You said at one point that Manipulation gists apply well to your characters (plural)
  • All the stuff about caretaking, trying to help relatives with their business, etc. seems to be where you’re going with the OS. And that really smacks of the Responsibility/Commitment/Obligation/Rationalization quad (esp. Responsibility and Obligation). Now, it’s a bit dangerous to use Issues to determine the throughline, but they can be one interesting data point.
  • Also, the stuff in Jim’s article about the MC of Collateral who seemed at first to be in Manipulation, but turned out to be stuck in his fixed Mind-set, did remind me of your MC a little bit.

I wouldn’t say any of that is a smoking gun of OS being Manipulation, but it might mean you shouldn’t rule it out.

I wouldn’t get too hung up on a particular Unique Ability yet – it may turn out what you think, or you may find Dramatica highlights something you never considered, which gives you a way to make your story richer. You might even find something like the MC being impressed by the IC’s recklessness actually fits in perfectly somewhere else. e.g. I thought Rationalization was perfect for my IC Critical Flaw, but when Jim fixed my PS Style, it ended up as RS Inhibitor instead. I kind of scratched my head at that, my now that I’m deep into encoding my RS I can see how Rationalization works perfectly to kind of put their issues to the side temporarily, slowing down their approach to a resolution. (because they are able to make excuses for the way they’re behaving in the relationship)

Regarding examples of Holistic, here are some that might help:

#55

It’s possible. Manipulation covers all kinds of good stuff I want in OS-- dysfunctional relationships, persuading, OCD, dementia, envy, etc. I could fill up that side section with gists already in the program.

I wonder if I can keep Changing One’s Nature. When considering that Domain for OS, I also considered Playing a Role (since there are characters who don’t want to lose roles, like the relative who doesn’t want to stop being manager and I want to put some acting/performing in there, but I like Becoming better) or Developing a Plan since they would need to figure out how to save the business and fix relationships (don’t characters in all stories have to plan to reach their goals? What makes this Concern special?), but when I mess around with my story form, I keep coming back to Becoming and the Responsibility quad-- not sure if I should trust the instinct or if that means I’m afraid to try something less familiar. The stuff under Developing a Plan is more abstract, less exciting to me (except for Ability vs Desire, which is a good conflict in the story).

Ideally, I’d say:

OS: Manipulation, Changing One’s Nature, Responsibility, sort out Control/Uncontrolled and Temptation/Conscience later

MC: Fixed Attitude (he does have a problem with low worth), Innermost Desires, Denial, sort out Temptation/Conscience and Hinder/Help later

IC: Situation: Situation, Future, Preconception. I’m not sure how situation works here, although him being a (comparatively) normal person and being the one to find MC has influenced MC. MC relies on him. I don’t know if I need something more concrete. I like Hinder/Help, Control/Uncontrolled. IC does challenge MC’s Preconceptions about what will happen in the Future.

RS: Activity, Obtaining, Morality. They do a lot of stuff together and I like Morality vs. Self-Interest in their relationship. I’d thought Activity would’ve gone under IC for being something that IC pushes on MC because he wants to Obtain benefits from it, but I guess it involves both of them if MC flakes out due to his fears.

I also considered:

OS: Playing a Role
MC: Impulsive Responses (Worry/Confidence, Value/Worth are relevant)
IC: How Things Are Changing (he influences MC in matters of Threat/Security. He also learns that if just diving in to face a fear doesn’t work, which is an incident that makes his steadfastness waver, taking small steps to expose himself to it can work and he passes that on to MC)
RS: Doing

OS: Developing a Plan (Sense of Self and Circumstances seem relevant)
MC: Memories (he’s haunted by past regret and failure)
IC: The Past (he deals in fixing up old stuff, seeing the worth in “junk,” including MC. He’s also affecting MC’s predictions of how his life and the future may go)
RS: Understanding (Interpretation and Conditioning seem relevant)

I wonder if MC could be in Situation and IC affects his Fixed Attitude. He’s in a rough situation and wants to fix it, but I figured his mental problems were worse (and one situation could possibly be resolved if not for someone else refusing to participate with good reason, but couldn’t one character’s internal issue be another’s Situation?) so I used internal Domains. I don’t know if Do-er works. I guess acting on an external compulsion and/or hiding might be Doing, but a lot of times he thinks a lot, trying to figure out what to do before acting.

EDIT:
Re-read the Collateral article. I could say that the OS characters are stuck in a dysfunctional rut (the caretaker and relative really need their relationship changed, but it only became a problem when her condition changed her thinking to make her paranoid), but MC’s thinking is stuck. Sure, a stream of thoughts is something that needs to be halted, but those thoughts are composed of the same stuck cognitive distortions (like black and white thinking or focusing on the negative, but aren’t those ways of thinking, which is Manipulation?) and beliefs.

#56

I’d say that’s a very good sign!

Yes but don’t forget that Developing a Plan (Conceptualizing) can also show up as one or more of Requirements, Benchmark, Prerequisites, Preconditions, Consequences, or Dividends… and will definitely show up as a Signpost in one of the throughlines. Also, sometimes planning might be in the story but the planning itself might not be a source of conflict so not part of the storyform.

When it comes to OS Concern, because it’s the Overall Story Concern, it really affects the feel of the whole story. It will be a source of conflict, all of the characters will be concerned with it or doing it etc. Think of Being John Malkovich – everybody is literally concerned with Being John Malkovich, even John Malkovich himself!

Or in the film A Man For All Seasons, which you can read the group online analysis for, everyone is trying to get others to Conceive something. The whole movie is basically people going “I want you to conceive this” “well no, why don’t you conceive this instead” “but it’s inconceivable that you won’t take the oath; I can’t conceive of any reason you won’t take it other than you’re a traitor” “this is why I won’t take it, can’t you conceive that?”. And it’s awesome!

So what I’m really trying to say is, when you order up the OS Concern, you’re not asking for a side dish, it’s your main course. An OS of Playing a Role will have a whole bunch of problematic pretending / conning / behaving / Being / etc. and something along those lines will be the Goal too. An OS of Developing a Plan will have a whole bunch of problematic planning / scheming / figuring out how to X / etc. Same with Conceiving. Or Becoming (growing up, dying, evolving, devolving, transforming, changing one’s nature, being changed). The only thing with Becoming is that it’s not as easy to Become as it is to plan or pretend, so often you see them trying to become, or in the process of Becoming.
NOTE: in case it wasn’t clear all those list items should be separated by “and/or”!

Anyway, that thing you wrote before about peace of mind, the human condition and taking the first of many steps into the sunlight … it does feel like Becoming to me, like all the characters need to change their nature. But I could see Developing a Plan too, i.e. figuring out how things really work when you have these sorts of problems. What about the business they’re helping with, do they need to change the nature of it? Or do they just need to plan it better, figure out how to make it work?

If that Situation was suddenly fixed, like maybe he won the lottery, would his personal problems go away completely? I don’t get the sense that they would.

For the IC in Situation, that’s a lot easier than having OS in Situation. Is there something about him or his situation that causes him problems, that he can’t easily get out of? Even “being a normal person” could be a Situation if it was problematic for him.

Anyway, I could go on but rather than comment on every arrangement it might be better to see if we can rule some out first.

#57

I like OS: Becoming, Responsibility.

I originally imagined that most of the business assets had been sold to pay for the owner’s care, but she kept forgetting, so seeing her missing property would add fuel to delusions that her caretaker is out to get her. Then I thought it’d be interesting if the business was still around and she was fighting someone else over running it and unintentionally screwing things up. Also, I want to get in ideas I had about performing, so I figured maybe I could use those in the form of putting on a show or something to drum up business. I don’t know what has gone wrong with the business. I’m more interested in the tension it causes and how I can use it as a platform for some other ideas.

It’s hard not to think of emotional things, like he was abandoned (Situation) in his backstory and wants fame to prove himself, but he wouldn’t have a problem if not for a grudge (Fixed Attitude?) over it. Having to take care of MC could cause problems. Another idea was that his home got wrecked and he needs money to repair it. He “rescues” old stuff like diaries and antique doorknobs (an interest in history seems like it’d go well with those Situation Signposts) and maybe he sells that stuff online, but his business is also failing. There are some parallels going on in my ideas-- not sure if good theme stuff or my brain is lazy and repetitive.

#58

Cool. For the business it sounds like it’s somehow devolving and that’s causing tension. And they may want to stop it from dying, get it back on its feet, which is a source of further conflict. (Just wondering, if it’s a restaurant, have you considered them turning it into a dinner theatre?) Remember to keep this external stuff in the Manipulation domain, i.e. the true underlying source of tension is their conflicts over ways of thinking, but given the types of characters you have I don’t think that will be a problem.

For the IC in Situation, I love the idea of the wrecked home and being stuck without enough money to repair it. It’s possible that fixing the ruined home could be part of the OS too (transforming it into something better), though I wouldn’t worry about that when you’re thinking about / encoding the IC throughline.

The parallel ideas are good theme stuff for sure! I don’t think your muse can be lazy, you just have to develop the ideas afterwards so they are interestingly alike without being repetitive. But I think good structure will help here too, i.e. the same exact thing looks different from the different perspectives.

#59

@SharkCat, i haven’t read everything since my last reply carefully yet, but have scanned through it, so forgive me if I’m repeating or missing something. But I see that you and @mlucas have decided your OS goes in Manipulation, which I agree with because of a lot of what is said in this thread. I probably should have said that before but I wasn’t really sure if you wanted to focus on the MCs fear or how that fear affected his behavior and hoped that my agreeing with you would help you feel good about going with what we came up with so you could pick a form get to work writing this thing! I hope I didn’t steer you wrong, but as I said many times I was trying to work through it too to help myself just as much.

Anyway, what I really wanted to say now is that I think maybe you can still use that work we did when thinking of the MC in manipulation. If you think about the type of events that would have happened when we were talking about the MC in Manipulation, those should now be how your main character fits into the OS vs how your main character fits into the MC through line. That’s kind of what I was talking about with that weird analogy about spaghetti and separating the noodles. Similarly, if you look at the RS vs how the MC or IC are meant to operate individually, hopefully you can see how to keep them separated and not have them bleed together, which was a concern I believe you mentioned early on. I’m not sure how much that helps but thought I’d mention it in case it did.

I had planned on writing out examples of an MC in an MC through line and the same character in the OS through line, and maybe doing the same with the RS and MC. But I’m not sure if you still need that help after working through your form with mlucas. I’m also not sure if come up with the best examples.

#60

One thing I’m really understanding now, that I didn’t when I was newer to Dramatica, is this: All the work you do is useful, especially if it gets to the heart of your story.

Getting to the heart of your story is important because I’m not sure how useful it is to try to encode every last point like Unique Ability etc. when you’re still unsure of the Domains. But you can definitely just talk about your story and characters and explain them to others and that can help.

So, it may turn out we’re not even correct about OS being Manipulation – it certainly feels right but it shouldn’t be written in stone. But like you said, all the work @SharkCat is doing to illustrate the guts of his story is useful and most of it will belong in some throughline!

2 Likes
#61

Exactly. And since @SharkCat seemed to be so unsure of a form, I figured the best thing was to help pick something close and start working. It’s not fun to start a form and find a bunch of wrinkles to iron out, but it beats not getting started at all.

Anyway, what’s the word @SharkCat? Has this stuff been helpful to you? I know thinking through it has helped me to focus on some areas where I’ve been weak, so it’s helped me!

#62

I didn’t know that Becoming could be related to non-character things.

No, but that’s a great idea! Restaurant was an old idea, but I thought of adding one on to the ranch.

Wouldn’t that be covered by the analysis examples in the program?

That’s good. I’m often worried about “wasting” time.

Yes! Thanks for everyone helping. I’m glad that it was also helpful to you.

It seems kind of hard to sort out an MC’s personal problem into an MC throughline when his part in OS is already related to struggling with a personal problem. Are we allowed to do that in an “objective” throughline? I’ve referred to them by their roles in the illustrations, as suggested in that thread about separating MC from role as Protagonist (in that story’s case), but I’m not sure how it’s going to work.

For MC I get a Concern of Innermost Desires and an Issue of either Hope or Denial. IC is Future and Preconception or… I think it was Delay. If I decide that everyone in OS has a Problem of Temptation, then the MC/IC Issues are Denial/Preconception.

#63

Depends on how you use them, I guess. They have examples of how characters fit into their respective through lines, but not really with an emphasis on how one character fits into multiple through lines, right? I guess you could look at it either way.

#64

I agree it’s hard to sort out the MC’s personal problem from the OS issues, especially when both are internal domains. Can you ask yourself what parts of the MC’s issues are the most like the OS issues, and what parts are the most different? Does it make sense that out of all the characters, even though they may have similar issues, the MC will be the most “stuck in his ways” or with a “made up mind” about something?

Later, you can try MC playground exercises for developing the MC throughline further. (I think you said you’ve done some OS playground exercises before, right? I think MC & IC playgrounds work even better than OS ones; I find the gists are too ‘focused’ for OS, it’s almost like you should use several gists for each OS appreciation.) Of course, you’ll need to have the storyform down better before you can try the playgrounds.

I can totally see your MC with issues of Denial… Denying to himself how much his anxiety is costing him, denying how much it hurts others, denying himself a better life because he’s afraid, etc.

#65

I guess before I can do the exercises, I have to figure out PS Style and Driver to fill in the rest of the blanks. I think it’s an Action Driver-- IC is wandering around and MC sees him, which knocks the first domino of MC thinking about what to do and having to make a decision. Act 1 ends on… I don’t know. An OS character rejecting MC/IC, but arrangements are made, so that sounds like decision.

I don’t know how I’m supposed to choose Linear vs. Holistic.

I’m not sure what the Outcome of a Story Goal of Becoming is. Everyone will be changed by the end, but maybe not in the ways they’d hoped. If it’s a general goal like to become a better person, that’ll succeed. I wonder if I could phrase it as characters trying to fix things.

Can I still use that if other characters are stubborn too?

#66

Driver: Is the MC physically seeing the IC the Driver, or is it the decision the MC makes upon seeing him? Like, I’m imagining a story where a high-school girl MC sees the most popular cheerleader in school and realizes she (the MC) might have a crush on her. The Driver in this scenario isn’t seeing the cheerleader, but the subsequent realization. I know, that seems weird for a Driver, but consider this: if she looked at the cheerleader but didn’t have the realization, would the story start? No. But if she didn’t look at the cheerleader and yet still realized she had the crush, would the story start? Yes. The revelation itself is what drives the story, not the action of looking. (You could imagine an alternate version of this story where, say, the MC stares at the cheerleader and gets teased for it. Rather than the revelation driving the story, it’s the teasing leading to more trouble as all of the other students start to latch on to this idea and spread a rumor.)

Linear vs. Holistic: Is the question that you don’t know the difference between the two, or you don’t know how to decide which one you should pick? The former is pretty complicated, but if you read up on it, you may find some helpful answers. (I’d recommend figuring out which one you predominantly use, then focusing your attention on the one you don’t use.) The latter… you know, I’m not sure. When in doubt, matching it to the gender of your character is usually a safe bet (i.e. Linear->Male, Holistic->Female). Alternatively, if you want your character to seem a little strange or unorthodox, swapping their PSS is a quick and dirty way to do that. (Of course, if your character doesn’t have a traditional gender, you’re out of luck on that front.) Ultimately, so long as you grok the difference between the two and can depict them accurately, it really doesn’t matter what you pick.

Outcome: If the Story Goal is Becoming, and the characters do significantly change, that sounds like a Success to me. It kind of sounds like you want an Outcome of Success and a Judgment of Bad, but I might be wrong in that regard.

#67

Sure! Stubbornness can fit other Dramatica terms too, Preconception especially, and lots of OS Character elements could be expressed through stubborness I’m sure. (stubbornly Opposing someone, staunchly Supporting someone, sticking to your Evaluations, Nonacceptance, etc.)
Plus, I think @MWollaeger put it best when he recently said:

I think we have to be open to characters acting like people. Not everything they do has to be dictated by the storyform. Nor should it be.

As far as the storyform goes, if you’re feeling stuck and want to start some playground exercises, you could start them before knowing the PS Style and Driver, since those will only affect Signpost order and UA/CF/Catalyst/Inhibitor, as far as I know.

But we can definitely try to dig into Driver and PS Style more – maybe you could start a new thread as this one is getting kind of long!

Tip About Action Driver

One thing about Action Driver, it’s not so much “an action happens so then they have to deliberate carefully over a big decision”, it’s more like “an action happens and that action forces them to make a choice they wouldn’t otherwise have made”. Like in Star Wars we don’t see Princess Leia deliberating much over whether to send the Death Star plans with the droids, but obviously she would not have done that if the Empire hadn’t attacked. The action of the Empire’s attack forced her to make that difficult choice, something which under normal circumstances she wouldn’t have chosen.

I think there can be a little deliberation to show that the choice is difficult, but with Action Drivers you have to be careful not to have much or it risks making it feel more like a Decision driver. The particular decision/choice that is made has to be FORCED by the Action, not arrived upon through a Decision process. At least that’s my take on it. (This was a misunderstanding of mine that Jim corrected me on – I originally thought “Actions force Decisions” meant “Actions force long Decision Processes where they weigh their options carefully trying to decide which option to take”. In my job, the word Decision usually means a Decision Request process, with a document analysing the pros and cons of each option, several meetings, etc.)

2 Likes
#68

I mostly get the difference, but… I don’t want to sit and fuss over “is my character thinking the right way for what I assigned?” or something. I’m guessing that maybe Holistic is the way to go, but I don’t know. IC is direct. MC worries about all kinds of things that may go wrong-- I don’t know if that’s Holistic. Then he might take those outcomes and think something like “I might do a bad job and screw over my friend, so I’ll make up an excuse and back out.” I’m not sure if that’s Linear since the solution of backing out to avoid an outcome is straightforward, or Holistic since he makes an excuse to balance away some potential tension. Being hyper vigilant of potential harm would mean picking up on details like body language and trying to interpret them- Holistic? Seems easy to mix up Be-er for Holistic if they involve indirect manipulation type stuff.

Is PS style just about MC throughline like the Do-er/Be-er thing?

I guess I probably have a Decision Driver, but if my MC had his realization that he’d wasted his life without IC to help, I’m not sure he’d get out of there and be able to go through the story.

I want a Judgment of Good. When I had Innermost Desires as Goal, I was going to have Outcome of Failure since I wanted to show the characters having gone after the wrong goals, then failing, but things turn out for the best.

#69

Something that might help is imagining what the combinations of Approach and Problem-Solving Style might look like and how they differ. As in, “how is a Holistic Do-er different from a Holistic Be-er?”

It’s easy to match up Linear with Do-er and Holistic with Be-er, it seems kind of intuitive, but examining the opposite pairings could help you sort out the two variables.

Some starting examples:

Also, Problem Solving Style applies to both the MC and the IC (dynamically paired). You could say the same for Approach. It’s more important to illustrate the MC on both counts, but it’s there regardless.

1 Like
#70

That sounds pretty logical to me. I’d be willing to bet your MC is Linear. Holistic as I understand it would be more like, “I might do a bad job and screw over my friend, so I’d better compose a symphony” or “I might do a bad job and screw over my friend, so I’d better get a present for his cat”. Though I must admit my understanding of Holistic is minimal. We should both (re)watch Princess Mononoke or Moulin Rouge!