Story Engine mechanics + games

questions
#1

I’m in the process of developing a game, and I want to use the theory behind Dramatica to create the story. The most important thing is that decisions the player makes affect how the story progresses – but this is proving to be difficult to wrap my head around. There’s 2 major problems:

1: when roughing out my ideas in the Story Engine in the software, I quickly realize that in many (most) cases, the outcome is set in stone way too early in the story.

2: as a result of this, I’m trying to get a better understanding of the mechanics of the Story Engine. That is, how the various parts work together to narrow down to a single story form. This is important so I know where I have leeway and where I’ll have to tread carefully, if I want to ensure that the game’s story is … well-formed.

Domain & Concern are pretty intuitive. I have a good handle of how those are related. Same with most of the static plot points & benchmarks. But it’s those middle specifics that I’m having a lot of trouble with – every time I think I understand how the Issue / Catalyst and Problem / Solution / Symptom / Response work, I realize I’m missing something. Things like setting the MC Issue results in 12 possible OS problems, and sometimes it makes sense which 12 those are but certain combinations leave me scratching my head.

I’m open to suggestions on #1, but I’m hoping wrapping my head around #2 will answer that for me. I have the book, but unfortunately it doesn’t really go into the sort of detail I’d like on this issue. Is there someplace that actually has this information?

#2

On the subject, given the total # of possible story forms, it seems likely that each story can be represented as 15 bits (2^15 = 32,768). But studying the story engine screen, I can’t for the life of me understand how that would work. Has anybody figured this out?

#3

Melanie wrote a bit about Dramatica and gaming that you might be interested in.

#4

Out of the 12 essential questions, 8 are binary and 4 are quaternary*, meaning (2^8)x(4^4) = (2^16) = 65,536.
But, you have to keep in mind that two of the 8 binary questions (MC Approach and MC Growth) have an effect on the quaternary options, cutting them in half.
Stop+Do-er OR Start+Be-er -> OS Domain in {Universe, Physics}; Stop+Be-er OR Start+Do-er -> OS Domain in {Mind, Psychology}.
Therefore it’s actually (2^8)x(4^4)/2 = (2^15) = 32,768

In addition, if you’re using Dramatica Pro 4.0, the Brainstorming tool contains the “Spin-the-Model” which, if you spin it, shows you the ID of any particular storyform. And that ID can be calculated by using the 12 essential questions (starting with #1 and not 0). The organization is kind of arbitrary though, and you might find a more practical one for your purposes: Limit, Resolve, Outcome, Judgment, MC Growth, Driver, MC Approach, MC Problem-Solving Style, OS Domain, OS Concern, OS Issue, OS Problem.
Concern, Issue and Problem can be written in two bits describing their position within a quad. First bit determines whether top or bottom, second bit left or right.

* For each of the four Domains, there are four possible concerns; for each concern, there are four possible issues; for each issue, there are four possible problems. So 4 x 4 x 4 x 4

#5

Thank you both, these are both very useful. Melanie’s post (and related) has given me a lot of food for thought regarding my 1st question. Some pretty good ideas for how to maintain agency while working within the limited constraints of a well-formed story.

Bob, your math is really helpful. While I was trying to work things out, I noticed that the 12 essential questions seemed to produce too many possibilities (2^16). I assumed I was just missing some hidden internal logic – turns out I was right! Only problem was, I couldn’t really figure out what I was missing. The combination of MC Approach & MC Growth looks like it might be it.

#6

Hmm, curiously, I had assumed that Benchmark was 2 of the “story bits”. And it seemed to work, but it’s not one of the 12 essential questions.

It seems pretty likely that while a story can be represented by 15 (or 16) bits, it’s not in practice.

#7

If all you need is a quick way to ID a storyform, 15/16 bits are enough.

If, on the other hand, you require all storypoints, and don’t want to calculate them each and every time you start your whatever, then that will take quite a few more. There are 72 storypoints (8 binaries, 64 quaternaries) you can take from the software (not counting plot sequence report). If you give each quaternary 2 bits and each binary 1 bit, you need 136 bits (as long as you can refer to the Dramatica Table of Story Elements).

If I may ask, how exactly do you plan to use this representation anyway?

#8

Ultimately, what I want is a way give myself some wiggle room with regard to a “final” story form, instead have the story form be determined dynamically during the course of the game. At the absolute minimal level, for example, Outcome and Judgment would need to remain open-ended until the 3rd act / journey.

What I don’t want to do is just pick one story form (or 4, for the 4 combinations of outcome/judgment) and write everything around that.

The representation isn’t really important per se – that’s more a tool for me to understand how the Story Engine works. What’s important is understanding where I have leeway, and which choices result in locking down the story too early.

And… maybe I’m really going about this completely wrong. Maybe it’s not possible to build a story form in this manner (signpost by signpost) and still leave it open-ended – maybe it’s a feature of Grand Argument stories that the starting conditions inevitably lead to certain conclusions.

#9

Some of the things I’m still struggling with, for example:

  • Setting the OS / Relationship Issue always sets the opposite’s Issue to the dynamic pair, which makes sense. But I can’t figure out the rhyme or reason to the 4 possible choices for the IC & MC Issues.
  • What in the world is the relationship between the choices for Problem? Let’s take “Knowledge” – now I know since it’s a theme, it could be any of 4 different "Knowledge"s. Then why are there only 3 possible values for its opposite (OS vs Relationship or MC vs IC). If you narrow it to just 1 domain, how are “Knowledge” and “Inertia” related to one another? Or “Knowledge” and “Projection”?
#10

You might be trying for something that can’t be done. The storyform is a message of intent, almost like you have to know what you want to say before you say it. Keeping it open ended is too much like real life, i.e. No meaning.

#11

Let’s say you pick OS Issue Fate (so RS Issue is Truth) and OS Problem Knowledge.
- If MC Resolve is Change, then MC Problem is also Knowledge;
- - if MC Approach is Do-er -> MC Domain is Physics
- - - the Variant above Knowledge in the Physics Domain is Instinct, so MC Issue is Instinct and IC Issue is State of Being
- - if MC Approach is Be-er -> MC Domain is Psychology
- - - the Variant above Knowledge in the Psychology Domain is State of Being, so MC Issue is State of Being and IC Issue is Instinct
- If MC Resolve is Steadfast, then MC Symptom is the same as OS Symptom (Chaos/Order)
- - If MC Approach is Do-er -> MC Domain is Physics
- - - the Variant above Chaos/Order in the Physics Domain is Interpretation, so MC Issue is Interpretation and IC Issue is Circumstances
- - If MC Approach is Be-er -> MC Domain is Psychology
- - - the Variant above Chaos/Order in the Psychology Domain is Situation, so MC Issue is Situation and IC Issue is Senses

Does that make sense?

One thing you should notice is that all throughlines share either problem/solution pairs or symptom/response pairs with another. So choosing Knowledge as your OS Problem means that the RS Problem is either Knowledge (which incidentally also means that Outcome is Failure) or an element that is in the same quad as the OS symptom/response pair in the RS domain. (That’s my interpretation of what goes on behind the scenes.)
Let’s say OS Domain Universe, OS Problem Knowledge. OS Symptom/Response pair is Chaos/Order. Since RS has to be diametrically opposed to OS, RS Domain is Mind. Chaos/Order in the Mind Domain is in the same Quad as Inertia/Change. And Inertia is chosen over Change because Knowledge and Inertia are both on the top of the quad.
RS Problem Inertia would also happen if OS Domain was Mind instead.
RS Problem Projection would happen if OS Domain was Physics or Psychology.

The relation between MC and IC works a bit differently, but I’m not going into that right now.

(One thing to keep in mind is that the story engine only generates a fraction of what would be possible with the Dramatica theory. For example, the engine was apparently built from a Western perspective.)

I’m afraid that this is exactly the case. There is a rather strong link between static story points and the signposts. In the thread about Interactive Fiction and Dramatica, I made a suggestion to “cheat” a bit by leaving the true nature of some story points ambiguous until you reach a certain point in the story.

But as @jhull said, “the storyform is a message of intent.” And it’s called Grand Story Argument after all. Any “wiggle room” you leave, muddles the argument and seems to go against the entire point behind Dramatica. It might be useful to ask why you want to use Dramatica for your purposes.

#12

I have a much better idea what’s going on, now, thanks.

I’d assumed until now that Domain > Concern > Issue > Problem always corresponded. That is, for each throughline, the Concern was always one of the 4 subdomains in that throughline’s domain, and likewise for the Issue and Problem.

With our current example of OS Story Situation > The Past > Fate > Knowledge, that holds true.

But the RS Story is Fixed Attitude > Memories > Truth > (Knowledge / Inertia).

In this case, Inertia breaks that pattern. But I think I understand what you’re describing.

…

I guess my question, then, is if the OS Problem is Knowledge (Situation) and the RS Problem is also Knowledge, which one is it? I’d assumed it’d be Knowledge (Fixed Attitude), but what you’re describing makes it sound like it could also be Knowledge (Situation)

#13

If OS Domain is Situation, OS Problem is Knowledge (Situation) and Outcome is Failure, then RS Problem is Knowledge (Fixed Attitude)
If OS Domain is Fixed Attitude, OS Problem is Knowledge (Fixed Attitude) and Outcome is Failure, then RS Problem is Knowledge (Situation)

Knowledge (Situation) and Knowledge (Fixed Attitude) can exist at the same time, no problem. Although I’m not sure if you can easily tell the difference between these two.

#14

Excellent, thank you! I think I’m starting to get a pretty good idea of how the overall story engine fits together, and how certain changes affect the remaining choices. This is incredibly useful information for me.

I’m still having trouble with the signposts, though. Sometimes choosing one thing for a plot point (say, Requirements) will narrow down a signpost, but even without changing anything else a different choice will have no effect on the same signpost.

Clearly I need to spend some more time with it. (I sure do wish there was a way to have the “Master” Story Engine view include the Signposts, though. Not having to switch back & forth would make the effects of changes more visible)

#15

In the beginning I spent a lot of time trying to decipher the Story Engine and why and how Signposts are affected. You eventually figure out that you won’t be able to figure it out and that it’s much more important the stories you write with Dramatica rather than understanding Dramatica.

I’ve been working with Dramatica for over 20 years now and I never once thought that changing the Story Outcome from Success to Failure would have ZERO effect on the order of Overall Story Signposts, yet this is exactly what happened when I reassessed my analysis of Sicario.

1 Like