Sorry, I thought I capitalized MC in the thread heading. For my screenplay, I have been tackling with what ending I should use, and I finally came up with one that should be much more satisfying where all the plot elements come together more simply and sensibly. I can write it out all out and get more opinions. However, in order to have this ending happen, I have to kill off the main character near the end of the second act, then another more minor character from before takes over and becomes the MC that drives the story from then on. I am wondering if it's okay for a more minor character, to switch and become the driving MC for the third act only. I thought about retooling the story so he was the MC the whole time instead, but I do not really have a lot for him to do for the first half, so it I don't think I could and still have it make sense to tell the first half from his point of view, when all this other important stuff is happening to the other character. So I was wondering, how risky is it to use this unconventional method, and kill off the MC at the end of the second act, and a more minor character, becomes the MC as a result? I mean most stories are about following a main character, and see if he reaches his goal, or if he learns something more important along the way. But in this case, there is no resolution for the main character because he is killed off before he can have one. But the ending for everyone else and for the story as a whole could hold up a lot better. What do you think?