Skip to main content

Knowledge Validation

Shared checks​

  • Does each rule constrain more than one creation? Does each particular fact have an authoritative home?
  • Are required participants, places, time order and sources resolved or explicitly provisional?
  • Do motivations and pressures explain the progression? Does each scene contribute to the intended experience?
  • Are truth, testimony, character belief, audience knowledge and game state distinct?
  • Do applicable Core constraints hold? Are deliberate exceptions justified at their owner?
  • Are revelation, continuity and causal consequences coherent across linked records?

Novel checks​

Follow viewpoint, tense, distance, voice and narrator-reliability conventions where chosen. Inspect what each participant can know at each beat and when the reader learns it. A chapter outline requires no gameplay, visual or spatial contract unless the work explicitly needs that treatment. Atmospheric or reflective scenes can be purposeful without containing a fight or twist.

Game checks​

Map promised agency to supported actions and outcomes. Inspect required information under alternate order and missed optional lore. Consider environmental evidence and systemic reactions as story delivery. Review failure, recovery, persistent state and applicable staging. Do not claim playability, balance or visual accessibility was playtested from a paper outline.

Review findings​

For the current slice, record the method, observations, contradictions corrected and remaining unknowns. Keep creative judgment distinct from structural validation. A mechanically consistent story can still need stronger motivation, conflict or payoff. The creator assesses whether the intended experience is compelling.

Check links after moves and revisions. Documentation navigation flows from parent to child; cross-domain links point to owning records, never back to ancestor overview pages.