I agree with the excellent responses to the OP.  When it comes to writing, I think of conflict as the incentive(s) to move the story forward.  It can be big -- an epic war, or small -- annoyance at a co-worker who always eats at their desk, and chews with their mouth open.  Conflict can be antagonistic and brutal, however, conflict can also stem from love and caring (your beloved, very kind mother hopes you will wear her wedding gown for your nuptials, but you think the gown is hideous).  The primary conflict of a story does not have to be the grandest event, the one that impacts the most people.  A war is huge, but the primary conflict in a story can be a character's need to return home to visit a loved one, making the war a secondary conflict (impeding the character's return home).

And I don't think everyone has to use the two line - or the 13 line rule.  I think readers have a little bit more patience than that, but not much.  For me, personally, having to read a long, drawn out description at the beginning (unless very well done) is boring and makes me wonder...what is this book about?  But then I'm not one of those patient readers.   

I agree.  As a reader, my patience depends upon the story's setting.  With contemporary settings (regardless of genre) I need to be introduced to the main character immediately, and quickly given a reason to be interested in that character.  I'm already familiar with the contemporary world, and I will not spend time reading descriptions of the mundane in the opening pages.  My patience lasts for only one, maybe two (if very well written), pages.  With settings in, or on, other worlds (for example, high fantasy or science fiction), introduce me to the main character, but also tell me about the world.  In these instances, my patience lasts for around 1,500 to 2,000 words, maybe double that if the writing is exceedingly well done.

Hi CWG!  The situation is where a series of misfortunes begin for my main character.  The events are tied together, and pile one on top the other beginning at that time, and place.  Other danger is known to be in the area, danger my MC is aware of, yet I had my MC blithely ambling around even though her knowledge of the danger meant that she should be anywhere except there.  The question, "why was she there?" had no logical answer.  I put her there because I needed her to be there.  In order to validate her presence, I had to change some rules of my urban fantasy novel's world -- from my character's abilities, to the relationship between humans and non-humans.  I had to restructure many aspects of the entire story to be consistent with the new rules.  All of that was necessary because I forgot to really look at the beginning of my story, and make sure that the main character had a logical reason for being present.  My bottom is still sore from kicking myself.   

I hope your schedule improves, allowing you more time to write.   

I see someone has fallen prey to the "spiders are cute and fluffy and good for you and nice-smelling" propaganda.

And, they smell good, too?  Awe-some!   

Because spiders are evil. I don't care what good they inadvertently do by feeding themselves; they are eight-eyed, eight-legged emissaries of Satan who shoot silk out of their asses. You can't tell me that's right.

Aaah, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!  ... "eight-legged emissaries of Satan" ... Bwa-ha-ha!  Whoa!  That was just wonderful.   

... and I'm not clear on what third person omniscient is.  How is it different from plain ole third person?  Just curious.

My understanding is that third person omniscient is a narrator that literally knows everything about the novel's world (past, present, and future), plot(s), as well as each character's inner thoughts and motivations.  Every single thing.  As opposed to third person limited, where the narrator of a novel has some sort of limit to their knowledge put in place by the author.  A third person limited narrator might not know, or have access to, anymore details than the main character.

edited: to change "may" to "might."  Why?  _*sigh*  Because my inner editor keeps bugging me ...

Trying out the beta of Scriveners. I'm a little uncomfortable with it right now. The walk-through wasn't very helpful and it was a bit more complex than I'd expected. It's not too terribly difficult but a bit more trouble than I, as a lazy drunk, have the time to invest in figuring out atm.

Yeah, I hear you.  Scrivener is like a full orchestra, and I only know how to play the kazoo.  I went through the interactive tutorial to get a grasp of the basics.  I regularly use only about 10% of Scrivener's features.  Still, that 10% serves me well.  Being able to consolidate every document, web page, and image related to my novel in one location, and the cork board feature, are the main things that sold me on the program.

My issue is, I'm worried about two things:

1. There's not enough back story - Since we're on the JB boards, I'll use the Dresden Files as an example. My book is essentially JB writing his first Harry Dresden novel at the point where

(click to show/hide)

Harry is picked up by DuMorne and begins his training as a wizard, learning exactly what's out there

2. The main character isn't conflicted or complex enough. Me being a first time writer, I'm not exactly sure how complex or conflicted the main character should be? He's essentially just an average joe at the moment. For the most part he's satisfied with his life.

I think answering #2 will fulfill #1.  I love characters that are "average joes" who have to face fantastical, and dire, situations.  I immediately relate to "average joes" on some level.  Using Dresden as an example, he is a powerful wizard, facing incredible obstacles.  But, he has to concern himself with the mundane -- like rent, and earning money for food.  Touches like how Harry assesses his appearance makes him easy for me to connect with.  Your character can be satisfied with his life -- for a few pages.  Then, kick him out of his comfort zone with problems.  I think characters who are scrabbling to get to, or back to, their perceived comfort zones are usually engrossing.  I think this helps in making them interesting.  Then, readers also get to see the impact the struggles have on the character.

I think this leads to an answer for #1.  Readers will learn about your character's back story as they see how he addresses these problems.  One's past heavily influences how one reacts to problems.  Even if your character hasn't dealt with any major problems in the past can be used to generate interest in, and empathy for, him.  The character will have to change, or be overwhelmed in facing the newly surfaced problems.