A few things I noticed when reading this:
- He separated his Sentence into eight grammatical constituents (each 2-5 words long, average 3.5), seven of which introduced at least one Story Point that had not been mentioned before.
- The Relationship Story is not mentioned once.
- He mentions both the Overall Story Problem and the Influence Character Problem, which happen to be the same. If you know Dramatica, you know this means that IC is the Change character. The Main Character's problem is not mentioned at all.
- The Overall Story gets the most mentions, then the Influence Character, and finally the Main Character.
- He mentions the Concerns of three Throughlines, Domains of two (OS&IC), Issues of two (OS&MC), and Problems of two (OS&IC), Unique Ability of two (MC&IC).
- Even with the Betrayal part, the sentence gives the impression of a typical action story (OS Physics "freedom-fighters", MC Universe "poor college athlete").
What I'm trying to say is, if you were trying to combine Dramatica with The Sentence, there are certain things I would do differently.
Imagine that you're collaborating with someone and The Sentence is your common ground.
- The lack of a Relationship story should probably be different if it were a Romance (or something to that effect) instead of a Science-Fiction Novel.
- The emphasis on the Influence Character over the Main Character gives the impression, that she is the one to focus on*. Whether that would result in her being treated as the Main Character or making both of them Main Characters, it would not help your intentions. I would suggest emphasizing MC over IC or going equally deep.
- The Sentence gives the impression of a different kind of story. While obscuring the Story Form might be a good thing overall, I don't think it's incredibly helpful at this stage. Focus on the actual source of conflict.
- Romance -> Relationship story
- Don't spell out whose problem is the same as the Overall Story's. Don't "spoil" who will likely change.
- We don't know the motivation/problem of MC, but the IC we do. We would expect the story focuses on IC rather than MC. It sounds like the MC would be a passive observer in the story.
- The Sentence promises capital-A Action. It's fine if the source of conflict is actual dysfunctional psychologies (or something like that), but that should not work against that promise.**
Footnotes:* Even though she is mostly described in terms of how she relates to MC... She seems more active and interesting than MC.
** This might seem to work against the idea of trying to obscure the Story Form, but it doesn't. The overlayed form is the story the characters subjectively think they're in; the real form is the story they're actually in, but they don't realize it right away (or ever). They don't know the source of conflict, but they do know the conflict itself.