slaguru666andClaude Opus 5
7ec7efd29b
Ran the east corridor again with fresh dice and every relief attempt routed
through easePanic, fumbles included.
The rule did not fire this time. All three attempts failed cleanly — Psychology
58 against 40, and two POW×5 rolls at 66 and 76 — so nobody was punished for
trying. That is worth reporting as loudly as a hit would have been: two
play-throughs in and a fumbled relief has come up once, which is about right for
something meant to be a memorable disaster rather than a tax.
Braithwaite still broke at 5 on "it said your name" and fled. Marrow went down
in a single round to a special with the entry bar — 19 through armour — against
the 4.5-round average the thirty-run tuning gave, so that was dice, not balance.
Then the question the rule actually raises. Relief rolls are made at your own
panic penalty, so the worse you are the worse your odds AND the wider your fumble
range — and now a fumble adds a point. That is a feedback loop, so I measured it
rather than trusting it, 300 runs per row:
from 2, POW×5 60% 280 calm · 0 broke
from 3, POW×5 60% 227 calm · 2 broke
from 4, POW×5 60% 138 calm · 31 broke
from 4, POW×5 50% 96 calm · 35 broke
from 4, POW×5 85% 267 calm · 5 broke
Recovery dominates everywhere. The worst case — overwhelmed, weak POW, no help —
spirals into breaking about one time in eight, which is a bad night rather than a
trap. No change needed.
Also: panicReliefFor and panicAfter were missing from the API, which I only
noticed because measuring the loop needed them and the alternative was
re-implementing the rule in the test — the exact duplication check-rules exists
to forbid. Both exposed.
Version 1.1.3.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2 lines
16 B
Plaintext
2 lines
16 B
Plaintext
MANIFEST-000002
|