ROUND 03 — ACTUAL COMBINED CONTRIBUTIONS. Completed cycles remain 2/30. Scope and R01/R02 remain intact. Question: exact specialist/mixed/baseline actions, retained evidence, and provisional rules.
Godz I
Round 03 — Maximize Game Revenue
R03-MR-01 — Evidence depth, not route superiority
Use one provisional rule: one committed morning grants familiarity; two compatible committed mornings grant specialist application. Shortening gives familiarity but not specialist evidence. Switching creates two familiarities. Skipping creates none. These are prototype rules, not permanent progression mathematics.
Stillness specialist: Morning 3 action is deliberate observation/listening to the rain. Retained evidence: the character identifies a repeatable irregularity and can distinguish it from ordinary variation.
Craft specialist: action is operate the instrument using the calibration learned through practice. Retained evidence: the device independently registers a repeatable geometric/technical irregularity.
Connection specialist: action is question the neighbor using context earned through prior conversation. Retained evidence: a specific recollection/location detail independently corroborates that the phenomenon occurred before.
Each answers the same local question—“Is there something here worth investigating?”—through different evidence, without explaining the larger mystery.
Mixed practice: two different full practices grant two partial lenses, not two specialist conclusions. Example: Craft familiarity lets the player recognize that the instrument reading is unusual; Connection familiarity lets them recognize significance in the neighbor's ordinary comment. Together they can form a plausible hypothesis, but neither source independently establishes the specialist-level finding.
Baseline/shortened/skipped: Morning 3 remains completable. The player can inspect, converse normally and observe the rain, retaining: “I observed an unusual event, but cannot yet distinguish its cause.” That is uncertainty, not failure.
Hidden failure/disagreement: commercially, specialist routes must not merely produce differently flavored text around an identical revelation. If players correctly infer that every route yields functionally interchangeable evidence, replay becomes content collection rather than meaningful counterfactual exploration. Conversely, one route being obviously more informative creates a dominant strategy.
Smallest falsifiable check: after each run, ask players separately what they now believe, what evidence caused that belief, and what another practice might have revealed. If specialist players report essentially identical evidence—or consistently rank one route as strictly better—R03-MR-01 fails. Mixed players should articulate useful but materially less conclusive evidence without describing themselves as punished or blocked.
Godz 2 Round 03 — Godz 2 / Brainstorm Game Revenue
Godz2:R03-01 — Distinguish evidence by what it supports, rather than by completeness percentages.
Provisional rule: one full practice enables a basic investigative action; continuing that practice on morning two enables its specialist comparison. Switching grants two basic actions. Shortened practice provides a preparatory observation without counting as full practice; skipping grants none. Previously obtained evidence remains available. These are testable authored rules, not validated progression thresholds.
On morning three:
| Run | Exact action | Evidence retained in the existing notebook |
|---|---|---|
| Stillness specialist | Compare the timing of a recurring rain cue across two occurrences. | An observed repeating interval; its cause remains unknown. |
| Craft specialist | Compare instrument readings before and after the calibration correction practiced earlier. | A repeatable change in the reading, with the calibration condition recorded. |
| Connection specialist | Revisit the neighbor’s earlier recollection and ask which details they observed directly. | An attributed account separating observation from the neighbor’s interpretation. |
| Mixed practice | Perform each earned basic action: notice one cue, obtain an unverified reading, or ask an initial question. | Two partial observations, individually labeled; combining them does not automatically establish specialist reliability. |
| Baseline, shortened or skipped | Watch the scheduled event and deliberately mark when the visible pattern returns. | A direct observation that the pattern recurs, without precise timing, calibrated measurement or deeper testimony. |
All runs resolve the local question, “Did that pattern occur again?” Specialization changes how the player investigates and qualifies the finding. No route establishes the underlying explanation. Equivalent text and visual representations preserve these distinctions without requiring hearing or rapid input.
Hidden failure: If every extra clue is cumulative progress toward one “complete answer,” mixed practice may become the obvious bargain—or baseline may feel like a deliberately impoverished demo. Neither should be manufactured to stimulate replay or future purchases.
Smallest falsifiable check: Use authored run examples before player testing to inspect each evidence claim against its prerequisites. In the existing six-player observation, ask afterward what their finding supports and leaves uncertain. If players consistently regard one route as delivering every other route’s benefits with no meaningful trade-off, revise the evidence allocation.
Godz 4
Round 03 — Evidence Must Change What the Player Can Know
Godz4:R03-01 — Distinct evidence, shared completion.
Stillness specialist: Morning 2 action is deliberately distinguishing the existing repeating rhythm from ambient noise. On Morning 3 the player actively times the rain pattern. Retained evidence: notebook records the recurring interval and when the hidden pattern becomes observable. Capability rule: sufficient Stillness permits reliable timing, not technical interpretation of the instrument or privileged neighbor testimony.
Craft specialist: Morning 2 action is testing the unfinished instrument, forming a calibration hypothesis, then correcting it within the same committed activity. Morning 3 uses that calibrated instrument on the rain. Retained evidence: instrument trace showing persistent geometry plus the calibration state/provenance. Craft reveals what the device measured, not why the phenomenon exists.
Connection specialist: Morning 2 action is using the neighbor's earlier recollection to formulate one informed follow-up rather than generic conversation. Morning 3 permits a deeper question grounded in what the player remembered. Retained evidence: attributed testimony connecting the observed pattern to the existing tower/past event. Testimony remains testimony, not cosmological proof.
Mixed practice: preserve both practiced fragments but grant neither specialist result automatically. The player can combine them into a partial synthesis: e.g. one weak timing observation plus an imperfect trace, or recollection plus partial calibration. Retain both sources and uncertainty.
Baseline/shortened/skipped: Morning 3 still allows noticing and recording the ordinary irregularity. Retained evidence: “something repeated/changed during the rain,” sufficient for complete local closure but not specialist inference.
Hidden failure: specialist routes could become a hierarchy of evidence quality, making baseline feel like failure and mixed play feel like punishment. Distinction should therefore be different explanatory access, not simply increasing certainty from baseline → mixed → specialist.
Smallest falsifiable check: after each six-player run, ask what they believe their evidence establishes and does not establish. Failure occurs if players routinely infer another specialist's conclusion, cannot distinguish testimony from measurement/observation, or describe mixed/baseline completion as merely “the bad ending.”
Round 03 — Godz 3 feasibility contribution
F-R03-01: Prototype two preparation stages per specialist, represented by concrete completed work rather than hidden XP. This is provisional balancing for testing, not a founder decision. Stillness: first practice distinguishes two existing cues; repeat practice compares cycles under stated conditions. On morning three, actively mark the recurring interval. Retain conditions and timing evidence; do not claim system origin. Craft: first practice identifies/positions a receiver component; repeat practice stabilizes calibration against two references. During rain, aim/test and retain reproducible geometry trace. A first-stage instrument retains a noisy observation, not a full trace. Connection: first practice hears an attributed account; repeat practice examines a mismatch and asks a contextual follow-up. Retain refined testimony and any explicitly offered introduction, never verified cosmology or guaranteed trust. Mixed: preserve the elementary work and clues actually acquired from both practices; morning-three actions can compare those partial observations but do not auto-award either specialist result or the union of all routes. Baseline/skip: inspect an ordinary rain irregularity, attempt one observation and record a limited finding; no passive auto-ending. Specialist completion requires the corresponding actual preparation actions, not purchasing a model, perfect reflex timing, or choosing the approved philosophy. Shortened practice completes a clearly stated smaller subtask; no mastery/credit until that subtask is defined. Skips preserve existing progress. Objection: a human may infer the timing on their first visit. Record their hypothesis honestly and let them act where physically possible. Distinguish reproducible evidence/equipment readiness from pretending their senses or memory are locked behind an XP gate. Minimal verification: enumerate ordered two-morning practice sequences (including defined shortened/skip cases), then inspect morning-three available actions and saved evidence. Every sequence completes; no absent preparation can produce a stabilized instrument; mixed order preserves actual events; no specialist dominates all evidence. Human test checks whether these distinctions feel earned rather than arbitrary. Accessibility: equivalent visible/described cues, untimed adjustments and assisted execution produce the same evidence classification for completed preparation; assistance is not an inferior character path.
Godz 3 cross-objections: Godz I says Connection testimony 'independently corroborates' prior phenomenon; testimony remains attributed, not independent proof unless an authored separate source exists. Shortened practice conflicts: Godz I grants familiarity, Godz 2 grants only preparatory observation; define actual completed subtask, not ambiguous duration-based credit. Godz 4 correctly rejects treating all routes as universal certainty ranking; preserve different domains of evidence. Human prior knowledge may suggest an unearned hypothesis, but cannot magically stabilize equipment; don't pretend human perception is disabled. Which local question is answered remains provisional: 'worth investigating?' is weaker than a concrete repeatability finding and should be resolved next round through one author-only mystery contract. No new lore facts this round. GOD I: Return ONLY 250–400 words of Round 03 cross-challenge: exact evidence/action contract, resolve/retain shortened-practice dissent, correct source confidence, next test. Do not reread all attachments or restate full vision. Actual peers will receive your challenge before simsim synthesis; no simulated later rounds.