Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/24727
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/24727
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Certainly a story can have this structure. But your analysis of it seems to assume that the antagonist is a role equal to that of the protagonist in story structure, and that is not the case. Story structure is about the desire of the protagonist and the things that frustrate that desire. Generally this builds as the protagonist faces progressively greater frustrations and puts forth progressively greater effort to overcome them. An antagonist is merely one form of frustration. Sometimes their role is comparatively minor --- series of rivals in a romance plot, for instance --- and the real frustrations comes from another source. (The titular vices in _Pride and Prejudice_, for instance.)

So your hero is probably not going to wake up one morning and decide to overthrow tyrannous mundi. They are going to have a run in with some minor official, get into trouble, and have to face progressively more senior bad guys as they gather strength and attract the attention of first local and then regional authorities. Only when they have made a sufficient nuisance of themselves at the lower level will tyrannous mundi take any interest at all and start sending progressively more powerful lieutenants to deal with them, leading at last to the final confrontation.

All this fits perfectly with classical story structure of rising action and rising challenge leading to the great climactic moment. Not only does it work, it is in no way exceptional.

Original score: 3