RuleSage cited table rulings
← Carcassonne

You asked

How do I take my turn?

Answered counted as answered

Asked with: Carcassonne: Inns & Cathedralsbg-4956-en-1e

1. You may place your large meeple instead of a normal meeple.[1]
2. Placement rules for the large meeple are the same as those for normal meeples.[1]
3. The rules for placing meeples are unchanged from those in the base game.[2]
[1] RULEBOOK Carcassonne: Inns & Cathedrals — Rulebook · p.3 · Scoring a city with a cathedral in it · THE LARGE MEEPLES · 1. Placing a tile · 2. Placing a meeple · 3. Scoring a feature
[2] RULEBOOK Carcassonne: Inns & Cathedrals — Rulebook · p.1 · Inns & Cathedrals · COMPONENTS · THE NEW LAND TILES · 1. Placing a tile · 2. Placing a meeple · Scoring a road with an inn on it
🔧 debug — where this ruling came from
outcome
ANSWERED — Answered
corpus profile
live
answerer pin (deploy-frozen, attribution only)
gemma4:26b think:false 5571076f3d70
timings
search 238 ms · ask 2092 ms · total 2336 ms
single-flight (PR-5)
queued 0 ms · generation 2336 ms
retrieval refs (raw) — what the PASSAGE SEARCH returned, not what the answerer read
[{"page": 4, "score": 0.016393, "snippet": "If you use the large meeple as a farmer (as seen in the supplementary rules of the base game), put it lying down in the field, as you would a normal meeple. The large meeple then counts as 2 farmers in that field. You placed your large meeple in this field as a farmer. Blue only has one normal meepl", "headingPath": "3. Scoring a feature · THE POINTS TILES", "sharpsignalDocId": 214}, {"page": 3, "score": 0.016129, "snippet": "This monastery cuts the road in 2 segments. Thieves may not be placed on these two road segments. These segments are only there to cut the field in two. During setup, each player adds the large meeple in her color to her supply of meeples. The large meeple has no impact on placing tiles. Its effects", "headingPath": "Scoring a city with a cathedral in it · THE LARGE MEEPLES · 1. Placing a tile · 2. Placing a meeple · 3. Scoring a feature", "sharpsignalDocId": 214}, {"page": 1, "score": 0.015873, "snippet": "A copy of CARCASSONNE is required to play this expansion. You may integrate it fully or partially. It may also be combined with other CARCASSONNE expansions. 8 Meeples and 1 abbot (pink) This new set of pawns allow you to play with 6 players. 18 Land tiles (marked with to help you separate and sort ", "headingPath": "Inns & Cathedrals · COMPONENTS · THE NEW LAND TILES · 1. Placing a tile · 2. Placing a meeple · Scoring a road with an inn on it", "sharpsignalDocId": 214}, {"page": 2, "score": 0.015625, "snippet": "Here, you also score 10 points, even though there are 2 inns on the road. CAUTION: At game end , an incomplete road with an inn on it does not score any points. Final Scoring: This road is incomplete. You do not score any points because there is an inn on it. When a player completes a city with one ", "headingPath": "Scoring a road with an inn on it · Scoring a city with a cathedral in it", "sharpsignalDocId": 214}]
citations (raw) — what the answer cited, chosen from a retrieval this page cannot show
[{"page": 3, "quote": null, "headingPath": "Scoring a city with a cathedral in it · THE LARGE MEEPLES · 1. Placing a tile · 2. Placing a meeple · 3. Scoring a feature", "sharpsignalDocId": 214}, {"page": 1, "quote": null, "headingPath": "Inns & Cathedrals · COMPONENTS · THE NEW LAND TILES · 1. Placing a tile · 2. Placing a meeple · Scoring a road with an inn on it", "sharpsignalDocId": 214}]
boost provenance — errata + base rulebook (E2/E3)
no registered errata card matched this query; no base-rulebook boost — this ask EXCLUDED the base book, so its rulebook was never resolved and no id for it went on the wire (boosting it would have put that book back into a scope the reader took it out of); rulesage.errata.boost-enabled=true, rulesage.errata.supersedence-enabled=true
no base-rulebook boost — this ask EXCLUDED the base book, so its rulebook was never resolved and no id for it went on the wire (boosting it would have put that book back into a scope the reader took it out of)
layering — route
not layered — one pooled read, because one book was in scope and there is nothing to split
answered-before recall
this ruling was answered, so past rulings were not offered
similarity threshold in force: 0.55 (rulesage.answered-before.similarity-threshold; the exact-question tier is not gated by it)
debug row retained until
Nov 3, 2026 20:56

what this block IS: the PASSAGE SEARCH's own results — the same search that fills this page's closest-passages list — and NOT the passages the answerer read. Answering runs its OWN retrieval: a far wider candidate pool, re-ranked down to a final handful, plus floors this search never applies — the base rulebook, surviving errata corrections, and one slot per book on a multi-book read. Each of those armed only if THIS ask sent what it needs: the boost block names the ids it forwarded, and the scope line names the books it read. A document the answer CITES that no row here names is therefore EXPECTED, not a defect: two searches, two candidate pools, two orders. How much wider that pool was is set gateway-side and is NOT REPORTED for this ruling, and neither are the answerer's final rows — so rulesage has nothing of its own to show beside these.

score = the fused retrieval score (reciprocal-rank fusion over the search arms) — NOT a cosine similarity. This ruling ran the TWO-ARM fuse (full-text + vector), whose arithmetic ceiling is 0.03279 — both arms ranking the same chunk #1 (ceiling = arms/(k+1) at k=60). Measured healthy band on this fuse: 0.016–0.033. A chunk only one arm ranked highly lands near 0.016 (that one arm's #1 vote), so 0.03 here is an excellent hit, not a 3% match.

per-arm ranks (the rank each search arm gave a chunk): NOT DISCLOSED by the gateway. Fusion happens gateway-side and only the FUSED score crosses the wire, so rulesage cannot show them without a gateway change. The rank column below is the FUSED rank (position in the returned list), which is real.

token count per chunk: NOT DISCLOSED — chunk token counts are not reported on the ask path. The character counts below are of the bounded snippet/quote rulesage actually received — a real measurement of what we hold, never an estimate of the chunk.

fused rankdocumentheadingpage fused RRF scoresnippet chars
#1 RULEBOOK Carcassonne: Inns & Cathedrals — Rulebook (corpus doc 214) 3. Scoring a feature · THE POINTS TILES p.4 0.016393 (inside the measured healthy band 0.016–0.033) 300
#2 RULEBOOK Carcassonne: Inns & Cathedrals — Rulebook (corpus doc 214) Scoring a city with a cathedral in it · THE LARGE MEEPLES · 1. Placing a tile · 2. Placing a meeple · 3. Scoring a feature p.3 0.016129 (inside the measured healthy band 0.016–0.033) 300
#3 RULEBOOK Carcassonne: Inns & Cathedrals — Rulebook (corpus doc 214) Inns & Cathedrals · COMPONENTS · THE NEW LAND TILES · 1. Placing a tile · 2. Placing a meeple · Scoring a road with an inn on it p.1 0.015873 (below the measured healthy band (< 0.016) — a weak fuse) 300
#4 RULEBOOK Carcassonne: Inns & Cathedrals — Rulebook (corpus doc 214) Scoring a road with an inn on it · Scoring a city with a cathedral in it p.2 0.015625 (below the measured healthy band (< 0.016) — a weak fuse) 300

what this block IS: the passages the ANSWERING read put in front of the answerer, in the order it read them — the other half of the two reads described above, and the one that decides what the answer could possibly say. Each row names the book it came from and where in that book it sits, what it scored when the search arms were fused, which arm carried it there, and whether the re-ranker chose it or a floor guaranteed it a slot. A row here that no passage-search row names is EXPECTED: a far wider pool, re-ranked, with floors the passage search never applies.

the passages the answerer read: NOT RECORDED for this ruling. Any of three things leaves this empty, and they are all different from the answerer having had nothing to read: this ask may never have reached a gateway at all; a multi-book ask keeps each book's own context on that book's own page rather than here; or the gateway build that answered may simply not report it. What this NEVER means is that the answerer read nothing — an answer was composed from passages either way, and their absence here is a gap in what we were told, not in what it read.

token count per chunk: NOT DISCLOSED — chunk token counts are not reported on the ask path. The character counts below are of the bounded snippet/quote rulesage actually received — a real measurement of what we hold, never an estimate of the chunk.

#documentheadingpagequote chars
[1] RULEBOOK Carcassonne: Inns & Cathedrals — Rulebook (corpus doc 214) Scoring a city with a cathedral in it · THE LARGE MEEPLES · 1. Placing a tile · 2. Placing a meeple · 3. Scoring a feature p.3 no quote on the wire
[2] RULEBOOK Carcassonne: Inns & Cathedrals — Rulebook (corpus doc 214) Inns & Cathedrals · COMPONENTS · THE NEW LAND TILES · 1. Placing a tile · 2. Placing a meeple · Scoring a road with an inn on it p.1 no quote on the wire
timing split
retrieval 238 ms · first delta 1857 ms · total 2336 ms (retrieval and first-delta both measured from the START of gateway work, so first-delta INCLUDES retrieval — do not subtract)
full breakdown
queued 0 ms · retrieval 238 ms · ask 2092 ms · gateway work 2336 ms · total 2336 ms
tokens in (the prompt the answerer read)
1648
tokens out (what the answerer generated)
61
tok/sec
138.0 tok/sec — 61 output tokens in 0.442 s of generation
live seat (read from the running child)
answering — gemma4:26b think:false · num_ctx 32768 (live-verified 5s ago)
stream path
streamed — the gateway pushed at least one accumulated draft
watchdog
first-token watchdog: 30s per arming window (rulesage.table.first-token-watchdog-seconds), re-armed once by the passages frame — so the worst case before a reader falls back to polling is 60s. Whether it actually fired is a BROWSER-side decision that never reaches the server, so it is not recorded here. The stream path above is the server's half of that story: whether a delta was emitted at all.
num_ctx · think posture
both are the CHILD's settings, not rulesage's, and no ask reply carries them — an answer never states which context window or think posture produced it. The live-seat line above reads them from the running child instead, where the gateway can answer for itself; it describes the child NOW, not this ask.
outcome
ANSWERED — Answered
abstain rationale (n/a — this ruling answered)
answered — no abstain rationale applies
decision
NOT_SETUP_SHAPED — no setup-shape pattern matched this question

this game registers NO errata cards (edition 45), so "no registered errata card matched" above could never have matched one

Errata scope: the gate above matched this ruling's own edition only. When an ask also reads an expansion, that expansion's own registered errata cards stay outside the match — a stated phase-1 limitation, not a failed lookup.