RuleSage cited table rulings
← So Clover!

You asked

How do I set up the game?

Answered counted as answered
1. Give a Clover board and marker to each player.[1]
2. Shuffle the Keyword cards and make a face-down deck within reach of everyone.[1]
3. Everyone draws 4 Keyword cards and randomly places them on the recessed spots on their Clover board, making sure no one can see your cards.[1]
[1] RULEBOOK So Clover! — Rulebook · p.1 · François Romain · SETUP · CONTENTS
🔧 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 214 ms · ask 2007 ms · total 2233 ms
single-flight (PR-5)
queued 0 ms · generation 2233 ms
retrieval refs (raw) — what the PASSAGE SEARCH returned, not what the answerer read
[{"page": 1, "score": 0.031778, "snippet": "So Clover! is a cooperative word-association game. Play as a team to beat your high score! Draw Keyword cards and secretly write their common features on your Clover board; these are your Clues . Then work together to try to figure out each player's Keywords. At the end of the game, add up your scor", "headingPath": "François Romain · SETUP · CONTENTS", "sharpsignalDocId": 122}, {"page": 6, "score": 0.016393, "snippet": "After every player has been the Spectator one time, the game ends. You can evaluate your team's deduction skills by adding up the points you all gained and writing your score in the Record of Legends. Will you be able to beat your high score? Once you are familiar with the game, you can add a new ch", "headingPath": "END OF THE GAME · ADD A CHALLENGE · CREDITS", "sharpsignalDocId": 122}, {"page": 4, "score": 0.016129, "snippet": "After you write your 4 Clues , remove all of the Keyword cards from your Clover board. Then, without looking at it, draw 1 new card and shuffle it with your other 4 Keyword cards. Put your Clover board down in front of you and put your 5 cards on top of it in a face-down pile. When everyone has fini", "headingPath": "Examples · 2. RESOLUTION", "sharpsignalDocId": 122}, {"page": 5, "score": 0.015873, "snippet": "All Pairs are placed on the Clover board correctly : gain 1 point per card and an extra 2 points for having found all the Keywords on the first try! (total 6 points) . At least one Pair is placed on the Clover board incorrectly : the Spectator removes the incorrect card(s) without saying anything an", "headingPath": "Perfect · Second attempt", "sharpsignalDocId": 122}, {"page": 2, "score": 0.015625, "snippet": "The game plays over two phases : Choosing Clues: individual phase. Resolution: team phase. Simultaneously, all players picks up their Clover board and secretly looks at the 8 Keywords that are on the outside edges of their cards. Notice there are 2 Keywords that form a Pair below each Clue Zone on y", "headingPath": "GAMEPLAY · 1. CHOOSING CLUES", "sharpsignalDocId": 122}, {"page": 3, "score": 0.015152, "snippet": "Neither one of your Keywords or its translation into another language. Example : Amour cannot be used to connect 'Love' and 'France'. A word in the same family as a Keyword. Example : Prince cannot be used to suggest a Pair with 'Princess' and 'Brother'. Made-up words. Example : Cuppajo cannot be us", "headingPath": "Invalid Clues · Examples", "sharpsignalDocId": 122}]
citations (raw) — what the answer cited, chosen from a retrieval this page cannot show
[{"page": 1, "quote": null, "headingPath": "François Romain · SETUP · CONTENTS", "sharpsignalDocId": 122}]
boost provenance — errata + base rulebook (E2/E3)
no registered errata card matched this query; base-rulebook boost: not recorded (this ruling predates it); rulesage.errata.boost-enabled=true, rulesage.errata.supersedence-enabled=true
base-rulebook boost: not recorded (this ruling predates it)
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
Oct 31, 2026 13:57

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. How many arms fused this ruling was NOT RECORDED (it predates the boost trail, ran on the path that stored none, or stored one that could not be read), and the ceiling depends on that count (ceiling = arms/(k+1) at k=60): 2 arms top out at 0.03279; 3 arms top out at 0.04918. So a score above 0.03279 here is not an anomaly: it is arithmetic proof a boost arm voted, and the measured band 0.016–0.033 (taken on two-arm asks) is what does not apply. 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 So Clover! — Rulebook (corpus doc 122) François Romain · SETUP · CONTENTS p.1 0.031778 (inside the measured healthy band 0.016–0.033 (measured on two-arm asks; this ruling's arm count was never recorded)) 300
#2 RULEBOOK So Clover! — Rulebook (corpus doc 122) END OF THE GAME · ADD A CHALLENGE · CREDITS p.6 0.016393 (inside the measured healthy band 0.016–0.033 (measured on two-arm asks; this ruling's arm count was never recorded)) 300
#3 RULEBOOK So Clover! — Rulebook (corpus doc 122) Examples · 2. RESOLUTION p.4 0.016129 (inside the measured healthy band 0.016–0.033 (measured on two-arm asks; this ruling's arm count was never recorded)) 300
#4 RULEBOOK So Clover! — Rulebook (corpus doc 122) Perfect · Second attempt p.5 0.015873 (below the measured healthy band (< 0.016) — a weak fuse on a two-arm ask, and this ruling's arm count was never recorded) 300
#5 RULEBOOK So Clover! — Rulebook (corpus doc 122) GAMEPLAY · 1. CHOOSING CLUES p.2 0.015625 (below the measured healthy band (< 0.016) — a weak fuse on a two-arm ask, and this ruling's arm count was never recorded) 300
#6 RULEBOOK So Clover! — Rulebook (corpus doc 122) Invalid Clues · Examples p.3 0.015152 (below the measured healthy band (< 0.016) — a weak fuse on a two-arm ask, and this ruling's arm count was never recorded) 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 So Clover! — Rulebook (corpus doc 122) François Romain · SETUP · CONTENTS p.1 no quote on the wire
timing split
retrieval 214 ms · first delta 1697 ms · total 2233 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 214 ms · ask 2007 ms · gateway work 2233 ms · total 2233 ms
tokens in (the prompt the answerer read)
1537
tokens out (what the answerer generated)
69
tok/sec
137.7 tok/sec — 69 output tokens in 0.501 s of generation
live seat (read from the running child)
answering — gemma4:26b think:false · num_ctx 32768 (live-verified 51s 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
NO_APPROVED_CHECKLIST — setup-shaped, but no approved setup checklist exists for this game
pattern that matched
SETUP — "setup" / "set up"
matched words (in the normalized question)
set up

this game registers NO errata cards (edition 44), 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.