Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/35881
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

So I saw [Over Plotting My Story](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/35874/over-plotting-my-story) this morning, and I thought "Am I making the same mistake?" If so I'd rather fix it soon than later. I then did a search for multiple plot branches and found [Are subplots necessary for a successful story?](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/26092/are-subplots-necessary-for-a-successful-story/26133#26133). I'm not sure if what I'm doing falls into either of these, but I thought it would be good to check.

In one of the stories I'm working on (I'm terrible at focusing on one thing) there are three plot branches. These aren't subplots, but rather interconnected plots with their own casts working towards their own ends. As the story progresses the three come into conflict with each other until at the very end all three converge in the climax. In the beginning characters are reacting within their own branch based on the actions of the other branches, but ultimately aren't interacting directly outside their own branch.

The way I'm structuring this is by giving each branch a collection of chapters that form into an arc before moving on to another branch. When outlining scenes, chapters, and arcs I explicitly write out what each are suppose to accomplish so I don't have fluff subplots, or character interactions that neither advance the story, nor advance a characterization. Every scene is meant to produce a certain feel and add to either the plot or help define characters, events, or settings (showing instead of telling).

My question is then "is this okay?"

P.S. I mention that the branches come into conflict with each other, however each branch has its own internal conflict as well. Also, each branch is distinct in tone, and the source of the conflict.

P.P.S. A bit more information. The first branch has the chief protagonist who, at first appearance is on a cliche fantasy quest. The second has the chief antagonist and the ultimate objective of the protagonist (though the protagonist doesn't know it). However, the the chief antagonist, isn't actually in conflict with protagonist but rather using her as an unwitting proxy against the "bad guy" in the third branch, who has wronged the chief antagonist. This second villainous sort (who is actually introduced as a paragon of good) is working her own proxy games to halt the machinations of the chief antagonist. The first and second branchs have two MCs each, and the third has one. The protagonist is included in that count.

It should also be pointed out that no one is actually evil, and everyone is motivated by love, but the way they go about actualizing their vision of how things should be leads to some very twisted events.

Original score: 4