The Plot Structure I Swear By (That You've Never Heard Of)

An introduction to Kenn Adams' Play by Play Approach to Story Structure

There are a handful of well-known, widely taught ways of understanding the plot of great stories. 

Beginning, Middle, and End; Aristotle. 

Pyramid of Rising and Falling Action; Gustav Freytag. 

The Hero’s Journey; Joseph Campbell and Christopher Vogler. 

Three-Act Structure; Syd Fields. 

We’ve heard of these. People talk about them all the time, and for good reason. They’re poignant, they’re simple, they’re classic. But, in my opinion, they’re not the most helpful. I’ll put The Hero’s Journey aside, as it is not – nor was ever attempting to be – universal to every genre. Of what remains in the widely taught cannon, my issue with them is simply that they are vague. They’re not wrong, but they only describe how certain sections and moments in a work should affect the plot while offering little to no suggestion of what those sections and moments should consist of. For example, “the inciting incident” should end the exposition and launch the central conflict of the story. But what should the inciting incident be? The skill to determine the answer to that for each work one writes is what some may argue is impossible to teach and can only be developed through repeated practice and study. I argue, instead, to add these ideas to the cannon: 

The Plot Proposition; Bernard Grebanier. 

The Play by Play Approach; Kenn Adams. 

The latter is a development on the former and, while I absolutely suggest reading the former’s book (Playwriting: How to Write for the Theater, 1961), I find the Play by Play Approach to be the most useful tool to consistently developing well-structured, emotionally satisfying plots in any genre or medium. Similarly to most that came before, Adams’ approach is not an invented conceit that he suggests stories should be constricted to, but rather a scholarly discovery of patterns of the form that storymakers now can use to replicate the success of the masterpieces.  

Adams named the Play by Play Approach after the production of the completely improvised full-length play of the same name that he directed and developed with Freestyle Repertory Theatre, led by Laura Livingston, in New York in 1991. The Play by Play Approach was created to allow for arguably the most difficult and admirable of artistic tasks – collaboratively making up a new play, and being sure to do so skillfully and impressively, again and again, night after night, play after play. For this to succeed, the structure needed to be open and flexible enough to allow for every type of story possibility while being specific enough to meld (originally) five different minds into one collaborative spontaneous storytelling powerhouse. He clearly and engagingly outlined the approach in his book How to Improvise a Full-Length Play: The Art of Spontaneous Theater (2007) and in doing so immortalized what I think is the best approach to consistently crafting flawless plots in any type of storytelling genre. Also, in full disclosure, he’s my dad. 

If you’re interested in a full defense and description of the Play by Play Approach, complete with examples, exercises, and an equally useful zoomed-in look at the structure of individual scenes (and more), read the book. But I’ll give you the sense of the thing here: 

The Play by Play Approach to Story Structure: 

There is a Character #1 and a Character #2. This may be a traditional protagonist/antagonist, this may be two lovers, or any other imaginable combination, so long as the relationship between these two characters is understood to be the strongest force driving the action of the story. 

It starts with... 

“The Foundation” - This is the beginning, expository material. Most importantly, this establishes the routine of the characters. This is usually around 25 percent of the piece. In a two-act play, it’s roughly the first half of act 1. In some cases, it may seem that the characters’ usual routine is broken much earlier, such as if the first moments include a massive earthquake that disturbs everyone’s lives, but this only speaks to the significance of the clarity provided in the next step. In the above example, the routine includes the fact that the characters are working through the aftermath of an earthquake and the current state of their relationship dynamics in response to it. 

“The First Significant Event”- This is the event that breaks the routine of the central relationship dynamic and launches the middle of the story. A description of it can always be phrased like this: “Character #1 [does this thing to] Character #2.” As with all events described in this structure, it importantly happens on stage (or screen, or page, etc) as opposed to having happened at some point elsewhere.  

“The Foundation Focus” - This section “raises the dramatic stakes of the First Significant Event. It robs the characters of their comfortable, well-known routine and propels them into some sort of emotional or physical danger” (Adams 38). All events in the Foundation Focus are directly caused by the First Significant Event. If you’ve heard of The Story Spine* (known more widely as “Pixar’s”, but was originally created by Kenn Adams as a warm-up circle exercise for the improvisors in Play By Play - copied below), the Foundation Focus is the part that goes “Because of that... Because of that... Because of that...” And it leads to... 

“The First Significant Repercussion” - This “is the final and ultimate consequence of the First Significant Event” (Adams 38). In this moment, Character 2 does something pivotal back to Character 1 (phrased “Character 2 [does this thing to] Character 1”). In a two-act play, this is commonly the moment right before intermission. Most importantly, this action raises... 

“The Question of the Play [or book, or movie, or whatever you’re making]” - The Question is a clear articulation of the story’s dramatic conflict. It can always be phrased as “Will Character 1 [do this thing to/achieve this thing from/etc] Character 2?” It’s simple. It’s clear. It’s Yes or No. Note, it has nothing to do with any philosophy or theme the work might be trying to explore. Those are important elements in a piece of art, but they aren’t mechanisms of the plot. The Question, in this context, is purely about the plot, and thus purely about the relationship between the two central actors (as in, people taking action) in that plot. Strictly adhering to the correct phrasing of the Event, Repercussion, and Question (and Climax, later) allows you to ensure that you are not getting sidetracked by non-central elements of this essential throughline.  

“The Foundation Funnel” - This part also goes “Because of that... Because of that... Because of that...”, launching from the First Significant Repercussion, but you need Adams’ Expanded Story Spine (page 52 of the book) to see it clearly in the exercise. More specifically, this section is where each character in the story works towards attempting to answer the Question to their liking (either as yes or no), funneling down their available tactics, continuing to raise the dramatic stakes of the Question itself with each action. This is the section which should give every character a somehow significant connection to the central relationship between Characters 1 and 2, if that had not yet already been achieved. This continues, until finally... 

“The Climax” - In this, Character 1 does something to a third character (“Character 1 [does this thing to] Character 3”) which begins an inevitable sequence of events that will ultimately answer the Question one way or the other. It is important that a third character be involved in the plot in this moment. Even two-character plays abide by this through the introduction of something significant and new, often an object. For example, in “The Zoo Story” one of them pulls out a knife that neither the other nor the audience knew he had. (When possible though, this is another Character.) 

“The Foundation Finale” - This is the end. As Adams describes it, this is where “The Climax bears its fruit, the fates of the characters are played out, and The Question of the Play [or whatever form] is finally answered. [...] The potency of The Foundation Finale lies in the fact that some of the characters may be unaware that they have entered it until it’s too late for them to do anything about it. That’s because [...] it is often impossible for the characters to know that The Climax has been committed until The Question of The Play is finally answered. The characters, then, go through The Foundation Finale as if they were still in The Foundation Funnel, fervently striving to answer The Question according to their individual desires, blissfully or pathetically unaware that The Climax has already taken place, that the outcome has already been decided, and that they are now acting in vain.” (Adams 68-69). 

***** 

The particular beauty of The Play by Play Approach lies in the speed with which it allows you to describe the plot of a work of any length, be it short or painfully long, reflective of Grebanier’s Proposition which aimed to concentrate a plot down to its simplest, most logical form. Engrossing yourself in the complexities of each section and event of the structure is valuable study. After a lifetime of absorbing these principles, they’ve become muscle memory for me. Now, for every project I sit down to write, at some point, I simply stop for a moment and make sure I can cleanly answer these few questions: 

Who are Characters 1 and 2? 

What is the First Significant Event? 

What is the First Significant Repercussion? 

What is the Question? 

What is the Climax? 

What is the Answer? (Yes or No)

If your story feels like its writing itself, these questions might all have been answered beautifully and naturally through creative inspiration. In that case, ask and answer them anyway just to double check. If the answers are all there, pat yourself on the back. If they’re not, do some thinking, and consider editing in those areas. If you feel like you’re getting tangled in story threads, ask these questions. If you can't find the answers, rearrange things or create new moments that allow your work to contain the answers, and the effort might untangle you.  

Like all great rules, there are great ways to break them... or rather, so I’ve found, clever manners of following the essence of them in highly unexpected ways, but – unless a particular project is screaming for a creative twist on the structure – I would recommend simply allowing it to lead you, both in your own writing and in the analysis of the works of others. I discovered my favorite play because as I was watching its First Significant Repercussion for the first time I suddenly realized in what brilliant (albeit unintentional) way it was using the structure to reflect the play’s theme in its very form and I would not have so intense an appreciation for the play if I didn’t understand the structure of the plot so deeply as the Play by Play Approach allows. It’s an immense development in the understanding of drama and story, and I’m so grateful that I’ve been studying it since childhood. I only hope I can be a part of bringing this understanding, and the infinite new stories that can be masterfully crafted with its guidance, to the greater world.  

**** 

*The Story Spine, as created by Kenn Adams: 

Once upon a time... 

Every day... 

But one day... 

Because of that... 

Because of that... 

Because of that.. 

Until finally... 

And ever since then... 

---

Click here for a full list of my available essays and short plays on Substack: https://addamledamyen.substack.com/p/index