Home Start Here! Store About Contact Story Structure Database K.M.

Weiland Site

Search this website …

Novel
Outlining

PLOTTING YOUR NOVEL

Story JULY 22, 2016 by K.M. WEILAND | @KMWEILAND 65 COMMENTS

Structure

Character
Arcs 4 Places to Find Your Best
Archetypal
Characters
Story Conflict
Scene  Email Share 42 Tweet Save 4K+SHARE

Structure Welcome! I'm K.M. Weiland, the award-

winning and internationally published
Part 6 of The Do’s and author of acclaimed writing guides, such as
Common Structuring Your Novel and Creating
Writing Don’ts of Storytelling Character Arcs. I write historical and
Mistakes
According to Marvel speculative fiction and mentor authors.
Read More
Storytelling
Lessons Got a flabby story on your hands? No
SUBSCRIBE TO BLOG UPDATES
From problem, I got a flashy cure: story
Marvel
conflict. Now, before you roll your Subscribe To Blog Posts RSS
eyes and board the Yeah-Yeah-
Heard-That-Before-Got-It-Thanks Email
As an Amazon
train, let me check your ticket. Enter Email Address
Associate I earn
from qualifying Because story conflict is neither so
purchases. simplistic, nor so easy as many CAPTCHA
writers first think.

Write Your At its most basic level, story conflict

SUBSCRIBE
Best Book is nothing more or less than an
obstacle placed between your protagonist and his story goal. Conflict is not
arguments, altercations, or outright battles. Those things are all the result of SIGN UP FOR K.M. WEILAND’S E-LETTER
AND GET A FREE E-BOOK
conflict, but they are not conflict in themselves.

The other thing conflict is not is necessarily a standoff between protagonist

and antagonist. If you simplify conflict down to just good guy vs. bad guy,
then you’re missing a ton of opportunities for deepening the weave of your
story—as well as quadrupling its entertainment value.

Today, let’s take a look at four possibilities for expanding your story conflict
(affiliate link) and improving your book as a whole.

Story Conflict (or “Why The Avengers

Shouldn’t Have Worked, But It Did”)
Email
The Avengers was a landmark movie in a lot of ways. It did what no other
movie had (or has) successfully done: tied together four different franchise
characters into a single story—one that was somehow good enough to blast all
CAPTCHA
box office records up to that point.

(affiliate link) SUBSCRIBE

Love Helping Writers Become

Authors?

CATEGORIES

Personally, I was highly skeptical going into The Avengers. I thought the
Select Category
whole idea of weaving standalone characters into the same story sounded
ridiculously fun. But I had major doubts about the quality of the movie that
(affiliate link)
would result. How do you get a cohesive plot out of such wildly diverse
characters—much less one viewers can suspend disbelief over?

Naturally, like about a gazillion other viewers, I was delighted with what
director Joss Whedon turned out: a fast, expertly edited, interesting, funny
story.

However, it’s not, of course, without its flaws.

It’s not, in itself, a particularly innovative or deep take on the action or

superhero genres
(affiliate link)

Its use of the old kill-the-mothership-and-you-conveniently-kill-all-the-

little-minions trope is convenient, as ever.
(affiliate link)

CHECK OUT MY
LATEST NOVEL!

And Cap’s outfit. Seriously. It’s the worst.

(affiliate link)

What worked about this story—and indeed the main reason it launched the
Marvel series from interesting question mark to full-on blockbuster
2014-2022
powerhouse—is that it put the camera exactly where it should be: on the
characters and their conflict. The most interesting thing about The Avengers
is (think, think, think)… the Avengers. Whedon knew this, and he crafted a
FREE E-BOOK
tight script that didn’t get distracted by the genre’s demand for action at the
expense of this all-important character interaction.

4 Variations on Story Conflict

The other thing Whedon knew was that you can’t write a solid story about a
bunch of good buddies who sit around slapping each other on the back and
eating Shawarma all day.

Currently Free at:

Amazon (affiliate
link) | Kobo |
Apple |
Smashwords | My
Store

Nope, you gotta write a story about a bunch of guys engaged in full-on conflict
with one another.

Just as importantly, you’ve got to keep that conflict varied, depending on

which characters are involved and what their motivations are. Take a look at
the four different types of conflict Whedon used to gel this difficult story and
keep readers focused and entertained.

1. Moral Conflict
Most of the time, when you think about story conflict, you think about moral
conflict. In most stories, this is the foundational type of conflict. This is what
the story is about. It’s the old good guy vs. bad guy conflict. The bad guy
possesses one set of moral values and convictions, and the protagonist
opposes him with a set of his own.

In Avengers, we certainly see this type of conflict playing out between the
Avengers as a whole and the villain Loki, who wants to rule Earth by force.
But we also see it within the group itself. The fundamental lack of trust
amongst the Avengers (always an interesting story dynamic) opens up the
possibility for their investigating each other’s motives.

In particular, we see Tony and Steve prying into the secrets of SHIELD and
Director Nick Fury—who, as it turns out, is creating weapons of mass
destruction.

Your Takeaway: Moral conflict between protagonist and antagonist is one

thing. That’s expected; that’s safe; sometimes it’s even boring. But when you
can set up moral conflict amongst allies, that creates an entirely new and
interesting dynamic. Because the casting isn’t so black and white, it also
opens up interesting avenues for thematic exploration of the characters’
respective moral choices.

2. Physical Conflict
Moral conflict often leads to physical conflict. Words aren’t getting anyone
anywhere—so push starts coming to shove. Action stories, in particular,
revolve around physical conflict. But it is also present, in its own variations,
in any story in which the protagonist must physically labor to move past his
story’s obstacle to reach his goal (sports stories, survival stories, detective
stories, and quest stories are all equally obvious examples).

The primary example of physical conflict in The Avengers is, of course,

between the Avengers and Loki’s army—first the mind-slaved humans and
then the alien Chitauri. But Whedon didn’t fail to take advantage of it
amongst the allies either. The vast majority of the movie’s action sequences
feature Avenger-on-Avenger altercations: Tony vs. Thor, Steve vs. Tony and
Thor, Natasha vs. Hulk, Hulk vs. Thor, Natasha vs. Clint. (It is an action
movie, after all.)

Your Takeaway: The key is creating a story-centric reason for all physical
conflicts. Don’t fall into the trap of believing that just because characters are
fighting, the story is obviously presenting meaningful conflict that advances
the plot.

Remember: conflict is always about the character trying to get past an

obstacle in order to reach his goal. Every time he encounters an obstacle, at
least one of three things need to be happening:

1. He gets closer to the goal.

2. He gets farther away from the goal.

3. He learns new clues that will help him get closer to the goal the next
time.

Physical conflicts must also be varied (which was one of the reasons Whedon
added the Maximoff twins in Age of Ultron, so he could get away from strictly
“punchy powers“). You can only write so many straight-up fistfights or
gunfights or swordfights before readers start skipping pages.

3. Personality Conflict
Now, we reach my personal favorite—and arguably the biggest reason The
Avengers was a hit. My first thought on walking out of the Thor movie the
previous summer was that it was going to be potentially very interesting to
see Thor and Tony Stark in the same room together. Two egos that big?
Surely conflict must erupt.

And it did.

But wisely, Whedon didn’t stop there. He sowed personality clashes amongst
practically every character in the movie. This is just one big unhappy family.
Nobody gets along with anybody. Everybody’s got their own agendas, their
own views, and their own very large egos. And Whedon cleverly made that
the whole point of Loki’s evil plan and, thus, the entire story.

Your Takeaway: Interpersonal conflict is the secret to good fiction. It’s

where all the juicy stuff comes from. When everybody gets along—when the
good guys are always perfectly good, perfectly happy, perfectly agreeable, and
perfectly friendly—nothing interesting happens.

Interpersonal conflict is also the secret to great dialogue. I often hear writers
saying, “I wish I could write Whedon-esque dialogue.” You can! Because this
is his secret: give everybody a reason to get in everybody else’s way, and then
turn loose their personalities.

4. Natural Conflict
Finally, we have natural conflict. In some respects, we might almost call this
“inanimate conflict.” It’s conflict that arises from an impersonal source—such
as a force of nature, a storm, a hostile environment, or a malfunction of
crucial machinery.

This is usually the least interesting of the four types of conflict, since it
doesn’t involve the complexities of human interaction. But it is still a vital tool
to have in your story conflict toolbag, especially for use in further
complicating your already existing layers of conflict.

Whedon poured on an extra-large, extra-green dose of natural conflict at the

Midpoint when Bruce Banner hulks out into a mindless green rage monster.

The destruction of the helicarrier’s engines—threatening a crashlanding—is

another example of natural conflict.

Your Takeaway: The key to successful natural conflict is recognizing “non-

sentient” doesn’t mean “random.” Having a random car hit your protagonist
or a random tornado take out his house probably isn’t going to advance your
story in a mature and meaningful way.

Note how Whedon kept both his instances of natural conflict totally pertinent
to the story by ensuring they were both incited by characters. Bruce hulks
out because of Loki’s plan. The helicarrier is shot up because a mind-slaved
Clint comes to rescue Loki. Neither are random, even though the obstacles
themselves have no personal choice in the matter.

Whenever you find yourself writing a scene that feels like it’s lacking zip or
depth, consider your story conflict. Can you create a more interesting
dynamic by adding or enhancing one of these four layers of conflict? Give it a
try!

Stay Tuned: Next week, we’ll talk about how Iron Man 3 made the worst
possible mistake any story can make with its structure.

Previous Posts in This Series:

Iron Man: Grab Readers With a Multi-Faceted Characteristic Moment

The Incredible Hulk: How (Not) to Write Satisfying Action Scenes
Iron Man II: Use Minor Characters to Flesh Out Your Protagonist
Thor: How to Transform Your Story With a Moment of Truth
Captain America: The First Avenger: How to Write Subtext in Dialogue

Wordplayers, tell me your opinion! How are you

using these four levels of story conflict in your
work-in-progress? Tell me in the comments!

SIGN UP TODAY
Sign up to receive K.M. Weiland’s e-letter and receive her free e-
book Crafting Unforgettable Characters: A Hands-On
Introduction to Bringing Your Characters to Life.

Email

Enter Email Address

CAPTCHA

I'm not a robot

reCAPTCHA
Privacy - Terms

SUBSCRIBE

Related Posts

Here Are Two Your Story How to Pull Off 7 Tips for How
Ways to Write Isn’t Working? a Plot Twist to Add
Organic Here Are 6 Complexity to
Themes Problems to Your Story
Troubleshoot

About K.M. Weiland |

@KMWeiland
K.M. Weiland is the award-winning and internationally-published author of
the acclaimed writing guides Outlining Your Novel, Structuring Your Novel,
and Creating Character Arcs. A native of western Nebraska, she writes
historical and fantasy novels and mentors authors on her award-winning
website Helping Writers Become Authors.

Comments

Kate Flournoy says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 4:57 AM

I LOVE THIS!!!!!! Seriously, this tactic is where I get most of my

plot-twists. (Partly because I’m horrible at plotting, and this is a
convenient way out ).
I’m especially using this tactic in my WIP, because the theme (I think
I said before, somewhere, maybe) is man’s need for a moral compass
outside of his own wisdom; how he doesn’t have what it takes to
choose right from wrong and follow the right path.
So… I needed lots of different paths. Which got really interesting
really quick. I ended up having the good guys in a mess of political
strain resulting from different personal quarrels, where no one obeys
anyone and everyone is giving orders that no one listens to.
Aaaand the bad guys, on the other hand, have a perfect organization.
They’re all united behind one goal, and thus incredibly efficient. The
resolution of the story conflict hinges on the MC’s ability to choose
which side he’s on (and thus stop fighting his own side; he’s most of
the problem), but he doesn’t know how to tell which is right and
which is wrong.

Yeah. It’s fun.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 12:11 PM

Your story sounds awesome–on both the plot and theme level.
So much juiciness to explore!

REPLY

Kate Flournoy says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 5:35 PM

Thank you. Yes, I’m having a blast with it. It’s in second
draft stage right now, and I’m pretty happy with what I
was able to do with it.
You helped with some of that, you know. Your
articles are the best thing since sliced bread.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 6:40 PM

I’m sure most of it was you. But I’m honored

to walk the same writing road with you!

REPLY

Kate Flournoy says

JULY 23, 2016 AT 11:37 AM

J. A. Hagen says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 6:10 AM

Thanks for sharing that. I love “The Avengers” but getting the
mechanism why it worked explained makes it clearer.

I’ll try to use that in my story. So far, I only found out that putting
two characters that dislike each other face to face produces juicy
dialogue. It really takes on a life of its own.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 12:12 PM

It took me a couple views to totally get it as well. It’s really a

very simple movie, but the editing is so tight, it feels much
more complicated.

REPLY

Evelyn says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 6:31 AM

I kind of want to watch that movie now. . .

I struggle with putting in the right amount of conflict between

characters because I so dislike any kind of emotional conflict in real
life. And in fiction, I dislike stupid emotional conflict —
misunderstandings that could easily be avoided, characters being
uncharacteristically and irrationally stubborn, and so on — but real,
interesting conflict is the heart of story. I guess what I need to do is
work on conflict that isn’t necessarily about fighting and that has
interesting dimensions. . . .

I particularly struggle with how to include the right sort of conflict

between romantic leads, especially because I so dislike conflict that
artificially keeps characters apart. But without something keeping
them apart for a time, you don’t have a real love story, either.

This is a very helpful analytical framework for thinking through

potential sources of conflict.

REPLY

Mirkwood says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 8:46 AM

I have the same trouble. I have a hard time getting my

characters in arguments or fights, especially if it’s stupid
conflict—I find it too easy to get fed up with the characters if
they’re making a big deal over something silly. I guess for me a
good idea would be to look at stories I really enjoyed and see
how they pulled off interpersonal conflict.

REPLY

Evelyn says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 8:56 AM

That is really good advice! The category from the article

that I most enjoy is Personality Conflict. I love to see
characters behaving like themselves, so I should
probably go for personality conflicts and sometimes
values conflicts. Since I find that kind of thing
interesting, I will hopefully write it up in a more
interesting way!

The main thing that to me is a cheat is conflict based on

misunderstanding.

REPLY
 Laura says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 10:14 AM

I think the way to make the conflict organic, and not

the kind where you just want to knock the characters’
heads together to make them shut up, is to make the
conflict based on personality. Think about the times
you’ve gotten mad at someone, or just strongly
disagreed with them, on something important to both
of you. It’s probably because you’re both looking at it in
completely different ways, and neither of you can (or
maybe you can, but you won’t) try to look at it from a
different angle.

If two characters are trying to rescue someone, and A is

hot headed and impetuous while B is thoughtful and
cautious, boom, conflict. A will think that B is a coward
for trying to hold them back and think things through;
B will think that A is just being stupid and reckless. Of
course, they see themselves as the reasonable one. A
just wants to rescue their friend and truly thinks he can
do it, and thinks that delays to make plans are only
going to make it harder to do the job. B may have some
fear holding him back, which he may or may not
acknowledge to himself or to A, and he also thinks that
the only way to do the job is to do it right and plan it
out carefully.

REPLY

Jamie says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 11:02 AM

KM’s post excited me because she touched on what I loved

about “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.” If you’ve never seen it,
here’s a quick run down that I think might help you.

The setup is that after 50 years of brutally occupying Bajor,

the Cardassians are driven off the planet and have to turn over
their space station to the Bajorans. Starfleet, a science/
military wing of the United Federation of Planets, will jointly
operate that station with the Bajorans. The Federation wants
the Bajorans to join the Federation.

The Starfleet officer in charge, Commander Sisko, is used to a

hyperscience world … but he’s just been declared an emissary
of the gods by the Bajorans. Starfleet wants to avoid repeats of
what happened on Earth when natives thought foreigners
were gods. Starfleet and Sisko think the Bajoran gods are
actually just incorporeal aliens. However …

… Sisko’s liaison is a religious Bajoran, Major Kira, who

believes wholeheartedly in the prophets, and if the prophets
say he’s their emissary, then by golly he is. The two of them
must try to respectfully navigate their different outlooks.

Major Kira was a resistance fighter against the Cardassians,

and proudly has a lot of their blood on her hands. She’s wary
of the Federation because she wants her world to be
independent. She loathes Cardassians … and there’s a lone
Cardassian tailor remaining on the station who is suspected of
having been a very highly placed intelligence agent in the
previous regime … which would mean a lot of Bajoran blood
on *his* hands. He claims to be on the outs with his
government, but what’s he *really* up to?

Odo is a mysterious alien who is in charge of station security.

Even he does not know what race of alien he is, and conflict
arises when his quest to learn his origins results in the
discovery that his people are totalitarian conquistadors in
another part of the galaxy.

His people start coming after the Federation, and want him to
side with them. However, he considers the space station and
its crew to be his home and family.

Mind you, fisticuffs and arguments, don’t provide the

principal conflict in these situations. These characters rarely
shout at each other. The conflict is all inherent in the setup.
The writers were trying to get around Star Trek creator Gene
Roddenberry’s insistence that the Starfleet crew must be one
big happy family. Which saps so much conflict. So, the writers
introduced characters who weren’t part of Starfleet but were
obliged to team up with them.

Chances are your own characters have principles they stand

for, or beliefs they hold dear that even their friends might not
be on board with. They are naturally going to be on opposite
sides when certain issues come up, which could test their
friendship, honor, etc.

Good luck! I hope this helps.

REPLY

Astrid says
JULY 26, 2016 AT 1:11 PM

I so need to properly watch DS9. I never had the chance

to see it from start to finish but uuuuh, yes it is
AWESOME! Ithink it’s such a shame with the “one big
happy family”-thing, it really missed many cool
opportunities. Luckily there’s always fanfics…

REPLY

Joe Long says

JULY 26, 2016 AT 3:46 PM

I’ve been a bif fan of Ron Moore. He’s listed as

the supervising/co-executive producer for 128 of
DS9’s episodes (out of 173), and if I recall
correctly was the show runner. He took the
colleague conflict to a higher level on his re-
imagined “Battlestar Galactica”, one of my
favorite shows ever and better than any of the
Star Treks (I’ve watched them all). Moore does
the realistic dark and gritty very well.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 12:13 PM

Yes, stupid emotional conflict is definitely a lose-lose. It’s as

annoying in characters as it is in real life, and it often feels like
a cop-out by an author who is just creating conflict for the
sake of conflict. But dimensional conflict–ah, that’s the stuff of
great thematic quandaries and epic character turning points!

REPLY

Joe Long says

JULY 24, 2016 AT 8:35 AM

What Laura says above about personalities and Jamie

about principles reminded me of a new idea I had.

The biggest reason I was compelled to start a rewrite

was that I had done little to foreshadow a big, plot
changing argument coming up between the main
character and his father.

I created a plot thread, woven through the whole story,

that occasionally pops up to show how the two relate.
Dad means well, pushing his son to be the best he can
in order to prepare him for adulthood, but his people
skills suck, and most often it ends up as stinging
criticism to his sensitive son.

Yesterday I thought of taking Dad out of this setting,

repeated several times, to show Dad interact with HIS
parents, with his son as an observer. The son’s seen
variations of it before, but the readers haven’t. The
geographical setting had been touched on during a trip
to Mom’s family reunion, so I decided Dad’s parents
were poor potato farmers, who still lived there, along
with a few cows and pigs and chickens (recalling a
friend of my grandfather’s, as my grandfather was a
coal miner) Dad had the brains to go to college, become
a high school math teacher and have a nice house in the
suburbs – which is great, and what he wants his son to
do – but as a result sees himself as ‘better than just a
farmer’ and creates a rift with his own parents.

I’ll put that new scene in the middle to give Dad even
more depth, even if you still don’t like him. It’s all
fiction and I’m tearing up as I type this out just now.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 24, 2016 AT 10:22 AM

That’s really nice! Harks back to my Iron Man II

post about using your minor characters as
reflections of the protagonist–and each other
sometimes.

REPLY

R Billing says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 10:02 AM

There are complexities and inversions in conflict as well. From the

WIP, Jane is talking to the Space Fleet equivalent of a rear admiral:

‘I did tell you it was important that I didn’t explain.’

‘Because?’ Realisation dawned in the old man’s face. ‘Because if I
knew what you were doing I’d have to order you not to do it.’
‘I didn’t say that, but if you don’t know you can’t be blamed for
anything that happens.’
‘Well, in that case…’
‘Thank you,’ she said with a grin.
Spence shook his head and disconnected.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 12:15 PM

This is actually a really positive example of why all conflict

must have a *motive* behind it. Characters don’t fight with
each or make each other mad or withhold important info for
no reason.

REPLY

Nicole says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 10:28 AM

Bringing together such a dynamic and sometimes overwhelming

characters was a huge challenge for this franchise and where I
believe, the DC comics (example, Batman vs. Superman) failed. I love
how you broke down the different types of conflict here with the
examples, because I think it’s sometimes easy to overlook these
minor points when you are dealing with nonstop action.

If you had to pick a movie that wasn’t action that demonstrated

excellent uses of conflict, what would that be?

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 12:17 PM

The Departed comes to mind. It’s not action, but still violent,
so I’m not sure if that’s what you mean–but the conflict is
deep, articulated, and complex.

Oh, wait, I got the perfect one: Pride & Prejudice! Moral and
personal conflict coming out its ears!

REPLY

Katherine says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 11:03 AM

Such a helpful article, thank you!

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 12:17 PM

Glad it was useful!

REPLY

Tom Younjohn says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 11:23 AM

K. M. Weiland, Queen of Write.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 12:17 PM

Thanks for reading!

REPLY

Jamie says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 11:25 AM

My first thought on walking out of the Thor movie the previous

summer was that it was going to be potentially very interesting to
see Thor and Tony Stark in the same room together.

Yep (although I still haven’t seen Iron Man). I did see the Avengers,
and I thought that of course Whedon would have to have them fight
just to address audience questions about who would win. What I like
was he wasn’t mindless about it; Iron Man and Thor have a specific
and reasonable reason to be fighting each other in that scene.

I love this post, because I’ve been critiquing stories lately where
characters are shouting at each other just because the author thinks
there should be a conflict. But because the conflict is not organic it
doesn’t count. This is a nice handy framework for explaining how to
go about it. Really, you’ve been on such a roll lately! I felt a lightbulb
go off on the subtext post, and I’m going to make that my next
challenge as I do my edits.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 12:21 PM

There’s such a different feeling when you’re writing a scene

with deep, rich, inherent conflict versus one where the
characters are just opposing each other for no reason. The
former just feel *alive* with possibilities, and the scenes
usually write themselves. But you have to start out knowing
what the characters believe in and want–and why.

REPLY

HonestScribe says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 12:37 PM

I especially like the point you bring up about how natural conflict is
most interesting when it is incited by the characters. I think this is
the primary reason the whole “fighting-perched-over-a-raging-
waterfall” trope in action movies makes me roll my eyes. The writers
assume that just because a waterfall threatens death, it somehow
makes a fight scene more exciting, but the trope is so overdone that it
usually has the opposite effect. If the waterfall was made an integral
part of the story early on, it might work, but the fact that they are
almost always randomly thrown in at the end makes them completely
unnecessary. Of course, this complaint could apply to any other
action sequence where the characters are fighting at ridiculous
heights for no reason.
I’m actually challenging myself to write a scene in which this kind of
fight makes sense, but whether or not it works remains to be seen.
Maybe one character is more familiar with the natural surroundings
than another and lures the opponent there? This post has definitely
given me a lot to think about.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 2:41 PM

Story conflict is most powerful when it is about choices–and

those, of course, necessarily have to be made by characters.
Incidental natural conflict robs characters of their power of
choice, and that is why it is almost always less interesting.

REPLY

Lauren Gunter says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 2:13 PM

Siiiighhhh. Same old, same old . . . Amazing.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 2:42 PM

Hah. Thanks for reading!

REPLY

Ben says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 3:49 PM

Your definitely right, Avengers isn’t what you would call a smart or
flawless movie, but it didn’t need to be. It told a coherent (if simple)
plot, did a great job with inter character conflicts and he knew how to
use the camera in exciting ways. It’s still amazing that Avengers even
happened.

As for the interpersonal conflicts between protagonists, I try to throw

in at least a little bit of that, but now that you’ve mentioned them, I
noticed that I haven’t used them as much in the later books in the
series I’m working on, except for book 10, which gets very political.
Something I should look out for when I edit them.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 5:12 PM

Ah, the interpersonal conflict is the best. It takes everything

up to a whole new level–and gets readers to invest so much
more deeply.

REPLY

S. D. R. says
JULY 22, 2016 AT 5:05 PM

I have to confess I avoid “comic book” movies. I’m just not interested
in them. The advice you’re giving sounds interesting and sound, but
I’d love to see some examples drawn from different types of films and
stories.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 5:13 PM

No worries. As soon as I’m done with this series, I’ll be

addressing different stories.

REPLY

Benjamin Thomas says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 7:34 PM

Howdy!

Great post. Love the variation of conflict here. Especially the”

meaningful and story-centric conflict” that puts everything else into
focus. Either they’ll get closer or further away from their goals or find
a clue. That should keep the dominoes rolling! I think I’m beginning
to see something more about moving the plot. Something clicked
here as I’m considering this post.

When I saw the trailer for Ultron I wasn’t all that impressed actually.
Especially when they’re all hanging around the table eating being
“buddies” when Ultron suddenly intrudes. To me this was a complete
turnoff. Showing all of the Avengers together in one spot having
dinner together. I would’ve been more impressed if Ultron showed
up while they were fighting each other.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 23, 2016 AT 1:20 PM

The party scene in Ultron was one of favorites in what is

otherwise, for me, one of the worst entries in the series. At
that point, Whedon did need to evolve their relationships, to
show us why they’re *still* working together. But I’ll admit I
was disappointed we didn’t get an “assemble” section in the
First Act–which was one of my favorite parts of the first
Avengers.

REPLY

Tyrion Perkins says

JULY 22, 2016 AT 11:36 PM

I have been loving your tips, and things to learn from this series, but
I don’t agree that the film The Avengers worked. I went to see it
because I expected wonderful writing from Joss Whedon, and I liked
Iron Man 1 and 2, but it bored me due to too much action, and no
quieter times to get to know and like any of the characters. They were
all appalling!
Maybe you have to have seen all the previous movies in the franchise
first, or maybe super heroes are not really my thing, but this film
made no sense and did not draw me in like the Iron Man ones did.
With what you say about the conflict (after a couple of years I don’t
remember anything but the constant physical fighting), I wonder if it
was actually overdone in this film.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 23, 2016 AT 1:26 PM

“Too much action” is the common complaint about this film.

Were it a standalone film, I’d totally agree with that. Really,
the genius of Avengers isn’t that it’s a perfect film (it’s not),
but rather that it juggled its massive and tremendously
complicated to-do list as well as it did. And I do think it makes
much more sense in context of the overall series.

REPLY

Danie Botha says

JULY 23, 2016 AT 8:15 AM

” … why all conflict must have a *motive* behind it …”

Bottomline: don’t allow events in your story to become “random.” It
must make sense.
I love your breakdown into four types of conflict, especially the moral
and
personality conflict. This will raise the novel/story to greater heights,
but using a much more subtle approach.
Physical and Natural are more obvious–right in one’s face so to
speak.
Should one place internal conflict (personal) e.g. lone-survivor type
story – single character story – under #3 personality conflict?
Thanks, Katie!

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 23, 2016 AT 1:30 PM

I didn’t include inner conflict in this post since I’m talking

about plot-moving conflict, which is necessarily external.
(Which isn’t to say inner conflict doesn’t move the plot, but to
do so, it must first grow to a place where it manifests within
the outer conflict.)

We could make an argument for putting it under Personality

Conflict, but ultimately, I wouldn’t, just because it’s such a
huge and nuanced catalyst of its own. It deserves its own
section.

REPLY

Kelsey K. says
JULY 23, 2016 AT 8:39 AM

Loving this series Katie! So you said the Captain America movie was
your favorite by reason of 1. Cap and 2. Character
development/dialogue right? But which one do you think is the best
structured out of all the Avenger movies?

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 23, 2016 AT 1:32 PM

Winter Soldier is my favorite, followed closely by Civil War.

First Avenger is my favorite of the *first round* of movies, but
it definitely isn’t in the top tier overall (in large part because
its structure is problematic).

Best Structure Award is going to be a little arbitrary, just

because pretty much all of the good Marvel movies are good
because they have good structure. But I’m going to give the
trophy to the first Iron Man. It’s a lean, mean machine with
complex plot points that pull double and triple duty all over
the place. My Story Structure Database breakdown here.
 REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 23, 2016 AT 1:33 PM

Which is kinda ironic, since Iron Man 3 is probably the

*worst* structured, as I’m going to talk about next week.

REPLY

Kelsey K. says
JULY 25, 2016 AT 7:25 AM

Oooh, can’t wait

REPLY

Odd Guy says

JULY 23, 2016 AT 11:27 PM

Call it confirmation bias if you like, but this makes me think of a lot
of my WIP and the things I’ve been doing right. Must be on the right
track! Thanks KMW, as always!

— JMB

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 24, 2016 AT 10:21 AM

Boo yeah! You go!

REPLY

Joe Long says

JULY 24, 2016 AT 9:00 AM

I mentioned up above what I call “threads” in a story. With

everything following a logical structure of cause and effect, a
particular event in necessarily a point in a series of related points.

When considering an event, especially a major one, it comes

naturally to me to be able to visualize all the things that logically led
up to it, and the consequences that follow. I’ll imagine this series of
interconnected events and jot them down, later weaving the threads
together into the rope of the story.

Katie’s written often about foreshadowing, instructing us to drop the

crumbs that lead up, but there’s also the consequences, especially of
conflict. Occasionally I found myself writing a disagreement between
characters, and then I dropped it like they instantly made up. I
realized that even if they came to accept to situation, it might take
awhile for the feeling to taper down.

For example, at the beginning the big issue with my main character is
his shyness and inability to so far find a girlfriend. His male cousin
who’s moved to town vows to help him out and they go on adventures
– but the cousin is none too pleased when he finds the MC is with his
sister (also the MC’s cousin) It nearly comes to blows. It was a good
scene, lots of lead up, but I couldn’t drop the hurt feelings right there
– they needed to fade away. So the male cousin is still uncomfortable
with his little sister’s relationship, but each week becomes a little
more accepting that it’s nothing he can change.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 24, 2016 AT 10:24 AM

This raises a really good point, which is that, in a sense,

*everything* is foreshadowing. This is why random events are
so problematic. They lead readers to believe there will be
ramifications, and then, when there aren’t, it feels like a loose
end.

REPLY

Joe Long says

JULY 24, 2016 AT 12:37 PM

And even if people appear to be outwardly OK

(accepting of a situation) there may still be a buried
thorn waiting to jagged.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 24, 2016 AT 6:12 PM

So many delicious options.

REPLY

Jason Bougger says

JULY 24, 2016 AT 9:58 AM

Thank you for this post. It couldn’t have come at a better time, as I’m
struggling to increase the conflict in the WIP I’m currently revising.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 24, 2016 AT 10:24 AM

Excellent! And have fun. Creating conflict is a joy of fiction.

REPLY

Sarah says
JULY 25, 2016 AT 9:00 AM

In fairness, Joss Whedon is a master. His work is brilliant. And this

film is no exception. But I like how you broke this down into parts.
Why it worked. How it worked.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 25, 2016 AT 11:32 AM

True. But he’s also human. I hated Ultron—a fact I find oddly
encouraging. :p

REPLY

Kathleen Freeman says

JULY 26, 2016 AT 12:06 PM

Explained in the most brilliant of ways! Go K.M.!

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 26, 2016 AT 2:34 PM

Thanks for reading, Kathleen!

REPLY

Josh says
JULY 29, 2016 AT 1:46 PM

Great post! I love the depth of your posts about conflict! They help
me keep my stories focused so that I can create a riveting story.

REPLY

K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

JULY 29, 2016 AT 4:45 PM

You know what they say: Conflict is story! We just don’t

always realize at first how deep the rabbit hole goes.

REPLY

Rod says
MARCH 24, 2017 AT 11:13 PM

In my story, E. Nigel Wallace discovers (he thinks) a human-

trafficking ring within a larger community that is, by our lights, often
cruel and abusive. His original goal is to follow his mom’s wishes and
“marry a rich doctor on schedule” (trait: obedience) but he is
distracted by a new goal of finding out more about this community
and whether the stories are true (trait: curiosity/nosiness) and if they
are, what to do about it (trait: sense of justice, compassion). He
decides to play undercover detective (trait: deceitfulness). Finally his
deceit is discovered (trait: inability to keep a secret) and he is
rejected by the community.

Moral conflict: whether he should report it to the local police;

whether he should join in with the traffickers; which goal he should
pursue. Naturally, I have to establish, as early as possible, his moral
principles that would influence him in each direction.

Physical conflict: not very much, until maybe at the end. There could
be physical conflicts among minor characters.

Personality conflict: he has a controlling mom. During the story he

acquires a fiancee, and there’s some conflict all around.

Natural conflict: not very much.

I also have a conflict between E. Nigel’s beliefs about human nature

— are people basically good and kind? Or are people basically evil
and cruel?

If that’s the case, there ought to be two characters advocating for the
two beliefs — kind of like an angel on one shoulder and a devil on the
other. I already have the Barmaid saying the whole scenario “seems
fake.” And everybody else is tellng him it’s true, but only implicitly,
unless he voices his doubts by saying to one of them that he thinks
maybe they’re all liars.

He has no Mentor (except maybe his mom — a flawed Mentor) and

no Sidekick. Maybe I should have an imaginary-friend character,
whom he consults in quiet moments when he needs counsel. Or he
could pray — an unusual thing in novels these days, I think.

REPLY

Rod says
MARCH 24, 2017 AT 11:34 PM

He wants to marry a rich doctor (on a schedule, no less!) and

there aren’t any single rich doctors–especially not his age (21).
And if there are, they’re not interested in him. I guess that’s a
natural conflict.

Should he WANT to believe that people are basically good (or

vice versa)–this belief obstructed by the evidence he sees? But
why would he want that? Just because he always has–and
because his mom says so? Or maybe his mom says people are
evil and he wants to believe they’re good because it’s the only
shred of independence he has.

REPLY

Piers says
APRIL 1, 2019 AT 9:02 AM

It is also the biggest bore and flaw in Hollywood movies. People

getting into arguments all the time and massively over reacting.

You are kind of missing the main point (I may well be wrong here!).
A story essentially allows you to enter the lives and to some extent
the minds of other people. All it has to be is an interesting place to
be. The very most basic and hugely overused technique is to create
the conflicts as outlined above, which can be incessant and annoying
for me – and I think a lot people over the age of 30?

REPLY

Trackbacks

Writing Links in the 3s and 5…7/25/16 – Where Worlds Collide says:

JULY 25, 2016 AT 5:15 AM

[…] https://www.helpingwritersbecomeauthors.com/4-places-find-storys-best-story-conflict/ Moral

Conflict. […]
REPLY

Top Picks Thursday! For Readers and Writers 07-28-2016 | The Author Chronicles says:
JULY 28, 2016 AT 11:02 AM

[…] are off and running, you’ve got to nail all the elements of your story. K.M. Weiland shows us the 4
places to find your best conflict, Melissa Donovan explains how to spot split infinitives, J.E. Fishman
reveals 3 crucial elements of […]
REPLY

Writing Links Round Up 3/1 – B. Shaun Smith says:

MARCH 1, 2021 AT 2:37 PM

[…] 4 Places to Find Your Best Story Conflict […]

REPLY

Leave a Reply
Enter your comment here...

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Site Policy

Return to top of page Copyright © 2016 · Helping Writers Become Authors · Built by Varick Design

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Please read our privacy policy for more information Got it!