Skip to main content
Back to path

Welcome to a Grasp lesson

Create a free account to keep studying and create your own study path.

Lesson 31

Character Values: Sacrifice Ranking

Recommended resources

Introduction

In our last lesson, we defined the character's primary fear as the specific, intolerable emotional cost they are engineered to avoid at all costs. This fear is the enforcement mechanism for their core misbelief and the psychological bedrock upon which their personality is built.

Now, we will construct the logical system that governs their decision-making in response to that fear. This lesson will focus on a critical mechanical objective: constructing a character's values hierarchy by ranking what they will sacrifice first versus last.

Think of this hierarchy as your character's ethical operating system. When faced with a choice, especially one under pressure, this internal ranking determines their actions. It dictates what they will give up to protect what they cherish more. By understanding this system, you can predict and write consistent, compelling character choices.

1. The Values Hierarchy as a Decision-Making System

Every character, like every person, operates on a ranked system of values, whether they are conscious of it or not. When two values come into conflict, the one ranked higher wins. This is the engine of difficult choices and internal conflict.

To see this system in action, let's start with a conceptual overview.

1 Simple Trick for Complex, Conflicted Characters

The video '1 Simple Trick for Complex, Conflicted Characters' by Jane Kalmes provides an excellent introduction to the concept of the character value hierarchy. It demonstrates how this simple tool is responsible for characterization, conflict, and even comedy.

Watch from the beginning to 05:28. Pay close attention to these key ideas: The basic hierarchy: How values are ranked unequally. Character arcs: How stories force a character to re-rank their values (like in Liar Liar). 'Screwed up' values: How villains and anti-heroes are often created not by valuing 'evil' things, but by ranking legitimate values in a destructive order (e.g., money over honesty).

As the video explains, conflict is generated when a character is forced to choose between two things they value. A character who values both their career and their family will face a crisis when a promotion requires them to move away from their loved ones. Their decision reveals which value sits higher in their personal hierarchy.

This creates an "ethical paradox" for the character, forcing a choice that redefines who they are. External conflict works the same way, pitting one character's value hierarchy against another's.

Value Hierarchy in Character Conflict
This diagram illustrates how internal conflict arises from a clash between two of a character's own high-ranking values (an ethical paradox), while external conflict stems from the clash between different characters' value systems.

2. A Systematic Method for Constructing the Hierarchy

To make this concept a practical tool, we need a repeatable process. We will adapt a method from personal development and apply it to character engineering.

This process involves three steps: identifying potential values, establishing the foundation, and ranking them through pairwise comparison.

Step 1: Identify Potential Values

First, you need a "library" of potential values your character might hold. This is a brainstorming phase. You are selecting the raw material for the character's moral code.

Rank Your Values Exercise 1

The document 'Rank Your Values Exercise 1' contains a comprehensive list of personal values. We will use this as a reference catalogue.

Scan the extensive list of values under 'Step 4'. Don't read the whole document yet. Just familiarize yourself with the range of options, from 'Accountability' and 'Honesty' to 'Power' and 'Spontaneity'. For your character, select 5-7 values that feel appropriate to their personality.

For example, for a driven, ambitious detective, you might select: Justice, Truth, Autonomy, Security, and Reputation.

Step 2: Establish the Foundation (The Non-Negotiable)

From our previous lesson, we know the Primary Fear is the emotional cost the character will do anything to avoid. Therefore, the value that represents the opposite of that fear is the highest, most foundational value in their hierarchy. It is the last thing they will ever sacrifice.

  • If a character's primary fear is humiliation, their top value will be Dignity or Reputation.
  • If their primary fear is helplessness, their top value will be Control or Autonomy.
  • If their primary fear is abandonment, their top value will be Connection or Loyalty.

In our detective's case, let's say their wound was being powerless to stop a crime that harmed their family. Their primary fear is helplessness. Therefore, their #1 value is Autonomy (the ability to act, to have control). They will sacrifice anything else to avoid being helpless again.

Step 3: Rank the Remaining Values via Pairwise Comparison

Now we need to sort the rest of the list. The most effective, systematic way to do this is through pairwise comparison. You pit every value against every other value in a series of forced choices.

This method is detailed in the same resource we used before.

Rank Your Values Exercise 1

Now let's look at the core algorithm for ranking. The 'Prioritize your top values' section of the exercise provides a clear, step-by-step method.

Read 'Step 5: Prioritize your top values'. The key instruction is: 'Look at the first two values and ask yourself, "If I could satisfy only one of these, which would I choose?"' The example of choosing between 'service' and 'stability' is a perfect illustration of this forced-choice scenario.

Let's apply this to our detective's remaining values: Justice, Truth, Security, Reputation.

  1. Justice vs. Truth: The detective discovers the real killer is a powerful figure, but framing a known low-life would still put a criminal behind bars and close the case. Does she pursue the difficult Truth, or settle for a form of Justice? Let's say she chooses Truth.
    Current Ranking: Truth > Justice

  2. Truth vs. Security: Revealing the truth about the powerful killer will put her and her family in danger. Does she pursue Truth or prioritize her Security? This is a tough one. Let's say her drive for truth is stronger.
    Current Ranking: Truth > Security

  3. Truth vs. Reputation: The truth is so strange that no one will believe her. Revealing it would make her a laughingstock and ruin her career. Does she pursue Truth or protect her Reputation? She chooses Truth.
    Current Ranking: Truth > Reputation

We now know Truth is her #2 value, right below Autonomy. Now we repeat the process for the remaining values: Justice, Security, and Reputation.

  • Justice vs. Security: Let's say she'd risk her Security to see Justice done. (Justice > Security)
  • Justice vs. Reputation: Let's say she'd sacrifice her Reputation for Justice. (Justice > Reputation)
  • Security vs. Reputation: She'd rather be safe than look good. (Security > Reputation)

By assembling the results of these pairwise comparisons, we get the final, sorted hierarchy:

  1. Autonomy (The opposite of her Primary Fear)
  2. Truth
  3. Justice
  4. Security
  5. Reputation

This hierarchy is now a predictive engine. We know this detective will sacrifice her reputation for her safety, her safety for justice, her sense of justice for the absolute truth, and the truth itself if it means preserving her ability to act (autonomy). This is the core of her character.

Test your understanding!

A soldier has the following values: Honor, Loyalty (to his comrades), and Duty (to his country).

He is given a direct order from his command (Duty) to abandon a wounded comrade (Loyalty) on the battlefield because a rescue is deemed too risky. Publicly, abandoning the soldier would be seen as a necessary but difficult command (Honor is maintained through obedience). Going back for him would be an act of insubordination.

Using pairwise comparison, create two different, conflicting value hierarchies for two different characters in this same scenario.

  1. Character A (The "Good Soldier"): Ranks the values. What does he do?
  2. Character B (The "Band of Brothers" type): Ranks the values differently. What does he do?
Show answer

  1. Character A (The "Good Soldier"):

    • Hierarchy: Duty > Honor > Loyalty
    • Decision: He follows the order. His primary obligation is to his country and the chain of command (Duty). Abandoning his comrade is agonizing, but it is a sacrifice he makes in service of his highest value.

  2. Character B (The "Band of Brothers" type):

    • Hierarchy: Loyalty > Honor > Duty
    • Decision: He disobeys the order and attempts to rescue his comrade. His primary obligation is to the men he fights alongside (Loyalty). He is willing to sacrifice his standing with the army (Duty) and even his personal reputation (Honor) for his friend. This creates immediate conflict with the command structure.

3. Using the Hierarchy to Engineer the Story

Once you've built your protagonist's hierarchy, you can use it to design the entire conflict web of your story. The goal is to apply pressure to this hierarchy.

As writing instructor John Truby notes, great storytelling isn't just conflict between characters; it's conflict between their values. You design opponents and allies who represent variations on the protagonist's moral problem, forcing them to constantly defend or question their hierarchy.

The Anatomy of Story by John Truby

The article on John Truby's 'Anatomy of Story' explains this principle of using a 'web of opposition' based on values.

Read the sections titled 'four-corner opposition,' the practical exercise list, and 'Splitting the Theme into Oppositions.' The key ideas are: Four-Corner Opposition: Your hero shouldn't face one opponent, but several, each with a different value system. Values in Conflict: Give each character a 'cluster of values' and make them as different as possible from the others.

Using our detective example (Autonomy > Truth > Justice > Security > Reputation):

  • The Protagonist: Believes in uncovering the Truth above all, as long as it doesn't render her helpless.
  • A "Four-Corner" Opponent (The Politician): Hierarchy might be Reputation > Power > Security > Truth. This character will suppress the truth to protect their public image.
  • An Ally (The Old-School Partner): Hierarchy might be Security > Loyalty > Justice > Truth. This character would advise our protagonist to drop the case because it's too dangerous.
  • The Antagonist (The Mastermind): Hierarchy might be Control > Victory > Autonomy > Justice. This character values not just their own autonomy, but controlling others. Their values directly challenge the protagonist's at the highest level.

The plot emerges from the collision of these competing value systems.

Conclusion

Today we transformed the abstract idea of "character values" into a concrete, hierarchical system that functions as a predictive algorithm for character decisions.

Key Takeaways:

  • A values hierarchy is a ranked list of a character's priorities, which dictates what they will sacrifice in a moment of conflict.
  • This hierarchy is anchored by the character's primary fear: the value that counters this fear sits at the top of the list and is non-negotiable.
  • A systematic way to build the hierarchy is through pairwise comparison, forcing a choice between two values in a hypothetical scenario to determine their relative rank.
  • Compelling stories are engineered by putting a character's hierarchy under pressure, either from an internal "ethical paradox" or from external conflict with characters who hold opposing value systems.

Preview of the Next Lesson:
We've defined our protagonist's internal operating system. Next, we will begin populating their world. In the next lesson, we will assign functional roles to supporting characters, such as ally, mirror, or foil. We will see how these roles are defined by how their own value hierarchies interact with—and apply pressure to—the protagonist's.