Dramatica Use Cases
Upload a screenplay PDF, prompt Narrova to evaluate it against a Dramatica Storyform, and review the Four Throughlines with evidence plus Storyform candidates.
Start in Narrova, follow the guided steps, and leave with a concrete story-development artifact you can carry forward.
Starter prompt
review the uploaded screenplay and evaluate it across a Dramatica Storyform, identify Four Throughlines (if they exist) and potential Storyforms for itAdditional prompts
Assume we want a single, internally consistent Storyform. Identify conflicts between Issue/Counterpoint and Problem/Solution across Throughlines and propose minimal edits to resolve them.Between the candidates, prefer the one where the OS Concern is Obtaining and the RS Concern is Becoming. Re-justify with page-level evidence.If we choose the strongest candidate, draft likely Signposts and Journeys with suggested page ranges based on the current cut.Steps
Give Narrova the draft first so the Storyforming Agent has something concrete to read against the Storymind.
Use the starter prompt to get the first pass on summary, Throughlines, and candidate Storyforms.
review the uploaded screenplay and evaluate it across a Dramatica Storyform, identify Four Throughlines (if they exist) and potential Storyforms for itLook for page references, quotes, and scene-level support behind each Throughline before trusting the candidate.
For each Throughline, list 5–8 page-anchored moments that justify Domain → Concern → Issue → Problem.If Narrova returns more than one viable Storyform, force it to choose in light of the Author's intent.
Between the candidates, prefer the one that best serves my intended message and re-justify it with page-level evidence.Once you know the best candidate, ask Narrova to identify what keeps the draft from fully expressing it and what to fix next.
Generate a scene-by-scene checklist to move this draft toward a coherent Storyform without changing the premise.Deep dive
Want Narrova to read your script like a seasoned Dramatica analyst? Here’s a quick, repeatable workflow you can use right now—plus what to expect from the Storyforming Agent once it takes over.
Upload your PDF in Narrova.
Paste this prompt (or your variation of it):
review the uploaded screenplay and evaluate it across a Dramatica Storyform, identify Four Throughlines (if they exist) and potential Storyforms for it
Narrova hands off to the Storyforming Agent (fine-tuned for Dramatica analysis).
You’ll get: a one-paragraph summary, the Four Throughlines with evidence, and—if warranted—one or more viable Storyform candidates with tables (Domain → Concern → Issue/Counterpoint → Problem/Solution).
If Narrova proposes two close Storyforms, choose the one that matches your intent or ask Narrova to help reconcile conflicts into a single, thematically consistent Storyform.
Dramatica models a complete story as a single Storymind seen from four distinct perspectives (the Four Throughlines):
Each Throughline sits in a Domain (Universe / Physics / Mind / Psychology), drills down to a Concern, explores an Issue/Counterpoint, and resolves a Problem/Solution dynamic. A Storyform selects one consistent path through these choices (out of 32K+ possibilities) to capture the Author’s intent.
Reading a finished script is therefore both analysis and inference: we study the storytelling on the page to infer the subtext underneath—what the Author likely intended to say.
Upload your script PDF.
Paste the prompt above.
Narrova automatically routes to the Storyforming Agent, which outlines a plan:
Review the output:
What a candidate table looks like (abridged example)
Candidate A (classic neo-noir read)
| Throughline | Domain | Concern | Issue (↔) | Problem | Solution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OS | Physics | Obtaining | Self-Interest ↔ Morality | Pursuit | Avoid |
| MC (Brendan) | Mind | Subconscious | Desire ↔ Ability | Control | Uncontrolled |
| IC (Laura) | Universe | Future | Prediction ↔ Interdiction | Oppose | Support |
| RS (Brendan/Laura) | Psychology | Becoming | Commitment ↔ Responsibility | Temptation | Conscience |
Candidate B (more procedural/cognition read)
| Throughline | Domain | Concern | Issue (↔) | Problem | Solution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OS | Physics | Doing | Attitude ↔ Approach | Pursuit | Avoid |
| MC (Brendan) | Mind | Conscious | Appraisal ↔ Reappraisal | Consider | Reconsider |
| IC (Laura) | Universe | Present | Security ↔ Threat | Help | Hinder |
| RS (Brendan/Laura) | Psychology | Conceiving | Expediency ↔ Need | Temptation | Conscience |
These are illustrative of what Narrova shows—your script will yield its own evidence and candidates.
This is common when the text implies one pattern while your intent leans another. Two possibilities:
Both are close, but one better expresses what you meant.
Signals conflict (e.g., OS feels like Obtaining, but much of the on-page action looks like Doing).
Important: Sharp-eyed Dramatica users may notice that even “close” candidates can contain theme-level contradictions (i.e., not a viable Storyform). Narrova explicitly balances what’s on the page with the Author’s aim. If you want to tighten to a strict Dramatica Storyform, say so and Narrova will prioritize internal consistency over what’s merely implied.
Lock to intent:
“Between the candidates, prefer the one where the OS Concern is Obtaining and the RS Concern is Becoming. Re-justify with page-level evidence.”
Tighten to Dramatica:
“Assume we want a single, internally consistent Storyform. Identify conflicts between Issue/Counterpoint and Problem/Solution across Throughlines by checking the Storyforms and propose minimal edits to resolve them.”
Evidence sweep:
“For each Throughline, list 5–8 page-anchored moments that justify Domain → Concern → Issue → Problem.”
Revision punch-list:
“Generate a scene-by-scene checklist to move Candidate B toward a coherent Storyform without changing the premise.”
Signposts/Journeys draft:
“If we choose Candidate A, draft likely Signposts and Journeys with suggested placements (page ranges) based on the current cut.”
That can be a valid choice. Narrova’s default posture is to err on the side of the Author. If your artistic aim accepts asymmetry or incompleteness, you can stop there. If you later decide the draft needs firmer thematic coherence, tell Narrova to optimize for strict Dramatica and it will help you close the gaps.
Uploading a screenplay and running this one prompt hands your draft to a specialized Storyforming Agent that reads like a Dramatica pro: it extracts the Four Throughlines, proposes coherent Storyform candidates, and—crucially—shows its work. From there you can either lean into your intent or tighten to a single, fully consistent Dramatica Storyform. Narrova supports both paths.
If you try this on your script, post your candidates and questions below—happy to help adjudicate edge cases and suggest the cleanest path to a rock-solid Storyform.