ground-game/workplans/GROUND-WP-0002-rulings-clay-borg-is-blocked-on.md

---
id: GROUND-WP-0002
type: workplan
title: "Rulings the engine is blocked on, and the dataset it never loaded"
domain: consumer
repo: ground-game
status: active
owner: bernd
topic_slug: whynot
created: "2026-08-03"
updated: "2026-08-03"
state_hub_workstream_id: "d8fc3a69-a5ae-4f6e-b4fc-b07d1ff9c783"
---

# Rulings the engine is blocked on

`clay-borg` implements the engine that simulates GROUND. Its INTENT says
game-semantics questions defer to **this** repo. Ten underdetermined rules points, six provisional scenarios and three
questions raised by play have accumulated there, and none has been
answered, because none had a home.
This is their home.

**Nothing here is a clay-borg change.** Every item is a ruling only the
game's owner can make; the engine already carries a provisional default
for each and will flip it when the ruling lands.

## The finding that reframes most of this

**The engine has never loaded this repository's edition data.**

`games/ground/src/lib.rs:1839` builds Problems with `value: priority` and
suits cycled by index — a stand-in it has always labelled as such. Mean-
while `editions/ground-darvo-r0/Problems.csv` has carried the real thing
since 2026-07-31:

| | problems per scenario | values | total available |
|---|---:|---|---:|
| `Problems.csv` (real) | **5** | 2, 2, 2, 3, 3 | **12** |
| the engine's stand-in | 3 | 1, 2, 3 | **6** |

The dataset also defines `required_solution` (Repair / Clarify /
Boundary), `visibility` (Surface / Hidden) and `hidden_priority` (0–4) —
all of which the engine currently invents.

**GR-E01's thresholds are 2p → 5, 3–4p → 7, 5–6p → 9.** Against 12
available points those are ordinary targets. Against a stand-in worth 6
they are unreachable, which is exactly what clay-borg reported as a rules
gap needing a ruling here.

**So the first question is not a rules question at all.** It is whether
this dataset is authoritative — and if it is, several of the items below
dissolve without anyone changing a rule.

## Task: declare the dataset authoritative, and say what the engine may rely on

```task
id: GROUND-WP-0002-T01
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "431cca12-e6d9-4eba-9360-f4f13ed263c1"
```

State whether `editions/ground-darvo-r0/` is the **authoritative** source
for Problem values, required solutions, visibility and priority — and what
the engine may treat as stable.

`SCOPE.md` already promises *"stable IDs suitable for layout templates,
print merges, and later digital import."* This task turns that into a
contract clay-borg can build against:

- which columns are authoritative vs presentational;
- whether `point_value` and `required_solution` may change between `r0`
  and a later revision without a version bump;
- what a version bump looks like, so the engine can pin one.

**Until this is answered the engine cannot import the data, and every
threshold question below stays unanswerable.**

**RULED 2026-08-03, by the maintainer:** *"The edition dataset is
authoritative."*

So `editions/ground-darvo-r0/` is the source of truth for Problem values,
required solutions, visibility and priority, and **the engine must import
it rather than invent them**. That unblocks clay-borg and it very likely
dissolves `gr-e01-threshold-unreachable-2p` — see T03.

### What was ruled, and what was not

The headline is answered. The three sub-questions were not, and rather
than block the import on them, these are the **proposed defaults**; each
is cheap to overturn and none is load-bearing for a first import:

| question | proposed default |
|---|---|
| authoritative vs presentational columns | **authoritative:** `problem_id`, `scenario_id`, `visibility`, `hidden_priority`, `required_solution`, `point_value`. **Presentational:** `title`, `problem_text`, `symbol_id`, `front_rules`, `reveal_effect`, `unresolved_effect`, `back_design_id` |
| may `point_value` / `required_solution` change within `r0`? | **no** — a change to either is a new revision |
| what a version bump looks like | the directory name: `ground-darvo-r0` → `-r1`. The engine pins a directory, so a bump is visible in a diff and never silent |

**The distinction that matters** is the second: the engine will hash game
state, and a Problem's value and required suit are *in* that state. If
they can change under a fixed revision name, every recorded scenario hash
in clay-borg silently rots. That is why "no" is proposed rather than
"probably not".

**Owed:** confirm or overturn the three rows above. Until then the engine
imports under them and says so.

## Task: rule on SOLVE's legality

```task
id: GROUND-WP-0002-T02
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "895573ac-d7b9-4160-a118-5bc8866c28c8"
```

Three related questions, all raised by play, all currently decided by the
engine's default rather than by the rules.

**(a) May SOLVE be selected against a *face-down* Problem?** Measured in
the browser on 2026-08-03: a player selected SOLVE on a face-down Problem
in three consecutive rounds. Nothing happened, three times, because
GR-A02's resolver skips a Problem that is not face up. The engine offered
the move each time.

A face-down commit you cannot fulfil is a plausible **bluff** in a
commit/reveal game with DARVO — which is why this is a ruling and not a
bug. But if it is a bluff it should be *intended*; if it is not, the move
should not be offered.

**(b) May SOLVE be selected when the seat holds no Solution of the
required suit?** Same shape: currently offered, silently does nothing.

**(c) GR-A13 — SOLVE against an already-claimed Problem.** Long-standing
in clay-borg's evidence as *"wasted SOLVE"*. Intended cost of a bad read,
or a gap?

For each: **intended, or not offered.** If intended, say what the player
is meant to learn from the waste.

## Task: answer the ten underdetermined points (U1–U10)

```task
id: GROUND-WP-0002-T05
status: todo
priority: high
```

**This is the oldest item and it has never been read.** `clay-borg`
messaged this repo on **2026-07-30** with ten points the dataset does not
decide, each simulated under a provisional default, asking for *"confirm /
correct (with ruling)"* per item. Four days later the message was still
unopened, because there was nowhere for it to land. Now there is.

| | question | the default clay-borg simulates |
|---|---|---|
| **U1** | Bond-acceptance timing | the target decides during Support resolution, post-reveal |
| **U2** | Stress clamping | clamp on **every** application, not only at End — this changes when DARVO triggers mid-round |
| **U3** | DENY with no legal target | no-op; the sequence still advances |
| **U4** | Solution deck exhaustion | deterministic reshuffle of the discard, else skip the draw |
| **U5** | rejected REVERSE self-effects | owner still gets −2 Stress and the sequence ends; no Blame, no +1, no Protection |
| **U6** | same-round Bond-Support vs DARVO | the Support cancels that round's DARVO stage **before it fires** (step order 2 before 3) |
| **U7** | player elimination | none exists — **confirm** |
| **U8** | GROUND—OU vs Attack | OU cancels the Attack **before** Protection is consumed |
| **U9** | simultaneous double DARVO trigger | needs no extra rule — **confirm** |
| **U10** | hand limit | none |

Full text of each default is in `clay-borg/specs/GroundRules.md`
§Underdetermined. **U2, U6 and U8 are the ones that change play**, because
each decides whether a DARVO stage fires at all; the rest are edge cases
or confirmations.

Answer per item: **confirm**, or **correct with the ruling**.

## Task: confirm or overturn the six provisional defaults

```task
id: GROUND-WP-0002-T03
status: todo
priority: medium
state_hub_task_id: "52cc157f-8fbd-469d-9da7-a96f1c60b654"
```

Six engine scenarios are tagged `provisional: true` with
`provisional_owner: ground-game`. These are the **scenarios** that encode
T05's defaults — answering U1–U10 will settle most of them, so take T05
first and use this list to check nothing was missed. A ruling flips the
scenario; it does not change the kernel.

| scenario | the default currently in force |
|---|---|
| `gr-a04-bond-support` | a Support with no existing relation forms **no** Bond, because GR-L02 requires the target's consent |
| `gr-d01-darvo-trigger` | Stress **clamps** at 5 on every application (GR-F01 under the U2 default) |
| `gr-d05-darvo-reverse` | the REVERSE stage's default resolution |
| `gr-e01-threshold-unreachable-2p` | thresholds measured against the **stand-in** values — see the finding above |
| `gr-e02-shared-ground` | SHARED GROUND scoring default |
| `gr-e04-coalitions` | Bond networks score together; Rivalries do not connect; an unbonded player is a coalition of one |

Confirm each or overturn it. **`gr-e01` should be taken last**, because
T01 may dissolve it.

## Task: GR-E03 and GR-E04 have never been played to the end

```task
id: GROUND-WP-0002-T04
status: todo
priority: medium
state_hub_task_id: "6c55eb56-22dc-4ee2-ac1a-4ced0dedfab9"
```

Both scoring modes are implemented and neither has been played through a
full game — by a person or by the engine. Whatever the rules say, nobody
knows what these modes feel like at the table.

This is a **playtest** task, not an engine task, and it belongs here.