Steadfast symptom and OS Problem, not discussing the crucial element

If the main character is steadfast/stop (waiting\Holding for something pressuring him to stop), he will be motivated by order/MC Problem, and his motivation will be calmed by chaos.

He focuses on Actuality\MC symptom as he sees it’s the problem that must be solved, and the solution in his view will be Perception\MC response.

Then his problem will not be the same problem as OS Problem\knowledge, and the solution will not be the thought, but his symptoms will be the same with the OS symptom, and then the change regarding the OS problem will be for IC.

If what I built is right - because it might be wrong if I haven’t used the program yet - my question is:

This Storyform belongs to the Pilot. If the main character is steadfast in this Storyform, then the symptom (or what he thought was a problem) would be the real problem, because he maintained his belief and kept steadfast, and thus Actuality would rise from the symptom area to the problem area in the rest of the Season or Storyform for the whole work?

what is the relation between changing in IC and the OS Problem, how that could reflect on the story and the MC?

And what I want to know more than anything apart from that storyform is only for the first episode, is it possible in the case of a Steadfast character that what he thought was the problem was actually the problem, because he’s a Steadfast person.

I am concern with that because in my story The father\MC\Protagonist throughout the story focuses on actuality that it is the problem and that people have to see things as they are because what they think they see is not what is happening in reality, the world is an up side down version of what really is (what is inside their minds is not what is outside their minds for the same thing).

If he succeeds in this in the Pilot by holding his ground and his son IC will surrender and change, he will change in the Storyform Season and respond to his son/IC\Gurdian\Contagious\sidekick that the problem is not in the reality of things outside his father’s mind, nor how he sees things that happen as they are, because the father’s head and soul\internal world is the source of evil and inequity that revolves around him and not what is just outside. The father has been blinded by his unique ability/sense of self from seeing the real problem which is himself.

I told myself i shouldn’t annoy dramatica kind people with my questions but i am stuck in here while i am writing and I just can’t figure it out by my self.

I glanced over a few sentences at the beginning of the post and at it’s end, and this seemed complicated. I would just write something fun, something enjoyable to you while written. Your brain would automatically create adjustments. We may not structure the perfect storyform before writing the story, but our brain would take over the story to make your fun come true. After the whole complete first draft was finished, anything off would be the focus.


I was afraid an answer would change what you wrote, with the audience losing out. What you had sounded powerful. Traditionally, writers inquired about these things after a work was completed.


I’ve already finished writing the work for so long i can’t even remember, after years collecting the data and doing my research, during which I wrote a novel for the same work in a social biography form, but when I wanted to turn it into a Series, I had to learn the arts of script-writing, and one of them was dramatic, so I had to return to implement the Beast into it.

The work is finished and includes the pilot, Bible, episodes’ summary, story synopsis, science fiction guides, etc. This pilot is at its third rewrite, with each rewrite there is a change in the world of the story, the engine, or the plot and it is a lot, a change that makes the first version completely different from the second in the previous aspects).

Now I am the fourth time considering dramatica points within the work, which before was built on the 22 steps of the anatomy of the story, but most of the focus of course was on the aspect (the hero’s weakness, his psychological and moral need, and his final decision).

if you’ve got enough time and would like to take a look at the work, it would be a great honor to me, of course it was written before dramtica so there are great editing happened regard the Theme, Synopsis Structure, and Log line for example, but the story and every thing else is about 80% Accurate for what i want to do with Dramtica to the story.

The Bible’s link:

So figuring out the relation between the OS Problem\Solution, MC Symptom\Response, and how the IC Change would relate to the OS story and the MC is Crucial for me, specially if the OS Symptom\Response could be raised - from the pilot storyform - to the Problem\Solution in the Season storyform due to the steadiness of the MC in the Pilot’s Storyform.

My life experience had me use a short story written in a fiction writing class as a tool to practice/use Dramatica. I discovered the original was charming and sparse, while the Dramatica rewrite was wordy and expounded. The original had a charm and was a complete storyform. Since the 1990’s, I noticed the advice of not using completed work as a way to learn/practice Dramatica was always posted by experts in Dramatica-use mailing lists and boards. I learned they were right. I had hired one of the Dramatica experts to go over some of my writings and decided on my own to make the short story that had been a complete storyform ’better’.