Caveat: This stems from a post by Lisa, here. For the purposes of these threads the moral implications of deceit should be ignored. This is really the only way to reasonably discuss these matters.

Deception during play is a very common behavior, especially in the dysfunctional play which the Big Model attempts to correct. One of the problems that happens when someone attempt to authoritatively apply the Big Model is the contrast between what a player claims or believes is his or her type of play.

This deception is typically either rooted out, (by player selection) as Lisa describes, or is eventually removed by improved communication (in the best of worlds.) However there is no certainty, and the limitations of player honesty make the Big Model of little use as a therapeutic tool outside of these ideal cases.

In the glossary dishonesty is often correlated with dysfunction: such things as El Dorado, Illusionism (and its techniques), and Typhoid Marys indicate exactly that. However, this implication inhibits the discussion of positive deceptive techniques, and ways to accomodate the impact of deception in play, other than attempting to remove it entirely.

One central idea that is necessary to solve this problem is that of layered deception. Since the SIS is, in essence, fictions built by the players it is only natural for them to manage in game rough spots by applying the techniques of introducing fictions. However, these can exist at the level of fictions accepted even though known to be false, fictions uninvestigated to retain the potential for truth, and fictions which are given enough passion to be more convincing than the contrary evidence.

In essence, when the social contract doesn't lie fully overt and full disclosure of motivations and desired results of SIS changes do not occur a new Meta-SIS is built with contains these deceptions and inaccuracies, which then build the actual dynamic of the social contract.

If we've identified some techniques in the SIS, what can we discover by searching the Meta-SIS?

I hope this is food for thought,

- Mendel S.

Any chance of an actual play example? Not hypothetical - really did happen, what game, who was involved, what was said, etc.

Best,
Ron

Ron,

I'll see what I can do. Although this will mean locating and writing up a rather large number of play examples, it may be worth it. The problem with a singular example is that it will serve only to illustrate the particualr Meta-SIS structure of the example and hence obfuscate the concept as a whole. I'll post them in Actual Play when I have the opportunity. However I maintain that the Meta-SIS is present in nearly every comprehensive example of play (the problem being a tendency to leave out non SIS information in accounts of play).

In the interests of continuing discussion here are some places to find examples of this:

1) Any account of Illusionism or Participationism where the players never put it out in the open what was expected or occuring.

2) Drifting (otherwise it would be just an overt re-design).

I hope that helps,

-Mendel S.