Word of caution regarding that kind of advice: It is okay to read those helpers, to try them out and so on, but the surest way to write a totally bland story is to follow these narration formulae to the dot. You should always read them as "if nothing else helps use this"-type of advice.

That doesn't mean you could totally write a meaningful impacting story that follows that pattern, it just means if you have the problem of what to write, it is probably misleadingnyou into writing crap.

So my advice (as a MA of Arts who studied film and did their own writing) would be to read all of these helpers, extract the narrative advice from them and then write freely without following any simplistic formula that everybody and their dog has seen a million times in thousand low budget television series.

Or better: If you want to write good stories, instead of reading these "How to tell a story"-books take your favourite stories and analyze them meticulously: What are the major beats of the story? How does the story interact with the setting? How are figures introduced? What perspective is the story told from (and does that change throughout the story — if yes why)? Which part did impact you the most? Why did they impact you? What was used to create that impact? Which parts appeared to be just ornamental and without narrative function? What would happen if you left them out? And many more questions.

Do that with your ten favourite stories, series, films, theatre plays or whatever and you will probably learn more than in all of those books combined. And more important: You will do the thinking and it will give you story lessons that are relevant to material you like.

As my prof once said: the crows over Van Goghs field serve no direct function yet they are part of the picture, art does not need to be formulaic and it does not need to explain itself.