What Would Master* Do.
Context
This pattern completes the Protocol layer. It addresses how the dynamic is carried into the world beyond the safety of the walls of the house. At its core it deals with the level of internalisation by the follower of the values of the Leader — coming from the Extraordinary Protection that the leader offers the follower and their eye on the follower's Growth, Potential and Power.
This pattern is informed by the bigger questions addressed in Why Would You and The Nature of your Relationship and gracefully integrates all that is entailed in The Contract — it infuses both Surrender and Dominance. The link with Asking for Clarity is evident and there is a sweet connection to Yes, Sir. The structures laid down in the Protocol Gradient in the form of Standing Orders and Structured Agreements provide nutrients for this pattern. The connection to Vanilla is remarkable — this pattern provides much of the Extraordinary Protection that the follower receives while moving through the vanilla world, encountering exactly the sort of situations that require in-depth knowledge and receiving reassurance from what it is that Master would do and expect from their follower.
Core Dynamic
The submissive who has reached this pattern is not simply following orders. They are a living extension of their dominant — carrying their values, their preferences, their way of engaging with the world into every situation the submissive enters. The dominant does not need to be present. Their presence is already there, in how the submissive moves, speaks, decides, and holds themselves.
This is not blind obedience. It is something more demanding: a genuine identification with the dominant's worldview, deep enough that the submissive can represent it faithfully in situations the dominant has never encountered and never anticipated. The sub who arrives here does not guess at what the dominant would want. They know — because they have spent enough time with the dominant's values to have made them, in part, their own.
Dan and Dawn Williams describe this level of integration as one of the hallmarks of a mature M/s relationship: the slave who acts as the Master's extension in the world — as a trusted representative. Rubel's protocol work points in the same direction: the protocols most deeply internalised are the ones that no longer require instruction. They have become the person's natural way of operating. Fegatofi names it from the inside: the slave who truly knows their Owner does not need to be told. They have learned to see through the Owner's eyes.
The dominant never falls. What the leader decides is the right choice — because they are the leader, and that trust has been fully given. The submissive who questions the dominant's judgment in public, who second-guesses their decisions, who visibly distances themselves from what the dominant has chosen, has not yet arrived at this pattern. The one who holds the dominant's choice as their own — who carries it forward with the same conviction the dominant would — is living it.
Douglas Thomas's Jungian perspective is instructive here: what the submissive is internalising is an archetypal orientation — a way of being in the world that has been consciously modelled and consciously chosen. The submissive who carries this well is enlarged by it, because they have access to a worldview larger than their own ego, one they have chosen to inhabit.
Possible Pathways
As dominant: make your values, preferences, and ways of thinking visible — as who you are, in how you live and decide. Share why you make the choices you make. Let the submissive see how you reason, what matters to you, how you would approach situations they might encounter. The submissive cannot carry what they have not been given access to.
As submissive: study your dominant. Go beyond their preferences toward their worldview. Ask yourself, in situations where guidance is absent: what would they value here? How would they want me to present, to speak, to hold myself? Let that question be a genuine enquiry.
Use the Periodic Review to assess this: in the moments when the dominant was absent, how did the submissive represent the dynamic? Was there anything that, on reflection, did not align with what the dominant would have wanted? The review is a moment of calibration — the ongoing refinement of the submissive as a faithful extension of the dominant in the world.
Discussion
This pattern forms a natural trilogy with Yes Sir and Asking for Clarity. Yes Sir is the direct response to a present instruction. Asking for Clarity is what happens when the instruction is unclear. What Would Master Do is what happens when there is no instruction at all — and the submissive acts from their own understanding of the dominant's values. Together these three cover the full range of protocol in daily life.
Carrying the house into the world
This pattern is about gracefully carrying the values and standards of the house into the world. The follower is a representative of that house and of the Master who rules it — in every interaction, every situation, every choice made while the dominant is not present. What they say, how they hold themselves, how they respond when something unexpected arises: all of it either reflects the dynamic faithfully or it does not. The question "what would Master do?" is the compass. Things that Matter are known well enough that the answer comes from a grounded place rather than from guessing.
Posture as expression
This pattern connects directly to Posture and Positioning in the Body and Presence layer. The submissive who carries the dominant's values in word and deed carries them in body too — in how they stand, how they move, how they present themselves in public. The person who represents their dominant well is embodying those values. Posture is one of the most immediate and visible expressions of this pattern in the world.
The threshold of this pattern
This is not a pattern for the beginning of a dynamic. It requires time, depth, and a genuine relationship with the dominant's actual values. The submissive who performs this pattern without having built the foundation it requires is not carrying the dominant's worldview. They are performing their idea of it — a different thing and often a limiting one. The foundation is built through the patterns that precede this one: the contract, the agreements, the negotiations, the standing orders, the asking for clarity, the years of Yes Sir spoken from the right place. What Would Master Do arrives at the end of that process.
The Nameless Quality in this pattern
The Nameless Quality shows itself here in the radiant clarity and certainty that can be enjoyed in being and moving through the world in this way. Sprezzatura and Wu Wei show up here — the internalisation so complete it has become effortless, the action arising without friction because the question has already been answered at a deeper level. At its core this is a tantric pattern — it asks one to be with what is, as it occurs, resting assured in knowing what Master would do. It promotes Sacredness and Living as a Ceremony. The patterns of the next layer concerning language and communication are all of importance here, especially Honesty and Consistency.
Douglas Thomas, The Deep Psychology of BDSM and Kink (Tantor Audio, 2024). Dan & Dawn Williams, Living M/s. Michelle Fegatofi, The BDSM Contract Book (2015). Dr. Bob Rubel, ed., Protocols: A Variety of Views (Nazca Plains, 2008). Jim Henson & Frank Oz, The Dark Crystal (1982). © The Jim Henson Company.
Connected Patterns
This pattern completes the Protocol layer and forms a trilogy with Yes Sir and Asking for Clarity. It is informed by Why Would You and The Nature of your Relationship, builds on The Contract, Structured Agreements and Standing Orders, and infuses both Surrender and Dominance. It connects to Vanilla and Extraordinary Protection — this is how the follower moves through the vanilla world as a representative of the house. It speaks to Things that Matter, Sacredness and Life as a Ceremony. It connects to Posture and Positioning, Honesty and Consistency. It is expressed through Sprezzatura, Wu Wei and Tantra. It loops back to The Periodic Review — where the quality of this representation is assessed and refined.
* Master is an example, not a prescription. The title used in any given dynamic is whatever has been agreed upon — Mistress, Sir, Ma'am, Dom, or something entirely specific to this relationship. For more on language, gender, and inclusivity in this work, see On Inclusivity.