RuleSage cited table rulings
← Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion

You asked

my ages are recommende for this game?

Answered counted as answered

The recommended "Normal" scenario level is calculated by taking the average level of all characters, dividing that number by two, and rounding up [1]. For example, if all characters are currently at level 2, the average level divided by two remains 1; therefore, the scenario level should only increase to 2 once a character reaches level 3 [1]. Players may also choose to adjust the difficulty from this recommended level: * **Easy:** Reduce the recommended scenario level by 1 [1]. * **Hard:** Increase the recommended scenario level by 1 [1]. * **Very Hard:** Increase the recommended scenario level by 2 [1]. At a character's current level (where "Normal" is level 1), this means: * Scenario level 0 is Easy. * Scenario level 1 is Normal. * Scenario level 2 is Hard. * Scenario level 3 is Very Hard [1].

[1] RULEBOOK Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion — Rulebook · p.29 · Scenario Level

Strategy guides → — community tips, kept separate from rulings

🔧 debug — where this ruling came from
outcome
ANSWERED — Answered
corpus profile
live
answerer pin (deploy-frozen, attribution only)
unset-dev (corpus lane freezes the deploy value)
timings
search 101 ms · ask 5149 ms · total 5259 ms
single-flight (PR-5)
queued 0 ms · generation 5259 ms
retrieval refs (raw)
[{"page": 3, "score": 0.016393, "snippet": "If you are playing the game by yourself, you will need to control two separate characters. Take note that this is a more complex experience. If there are two to four players, it is highly recommended that each player only controls a single character. To choose which character to play, find the large", "headingPath": "Playing by Yourself?", "sharpsignalDocId": 61}, {"page": 29, "score": 0.016129, "snippet": "Now that you have leveled up, you may be thinking it is time to increase the levels of the monsters. It is not, but now is a good time to talk about scenario level. You played the first five scenarios on scenario level 1 and, thus, with monsters on level 1. The recommended (i.e. \"Normal\") scenario l", "headingPath": "Scenario Level", "sharpsignalDocId": 61}, {"page": 28, "score": 0.015873, "snippet": "Congratulations on killing the boss and completing Scenario 5! Make sure to read the conclusion text and rewards, update the city map board, and record any check marks, gold (2 per money token), and experience gained (including the 6 bonus scenario experience and the scenario reward). You should now", "headingPath": "Scenario 5 Complete", "sharpsignalDocId": 61}, {"page": 1, "score": 0.015625, "snippet": "W eleome to Gloomhaven! This game is fully cooperative, with players working together to navigate their way through a campaign of scenarios. You will not play it all in one sitting, but it can easily be saved at the end of any single scenario. This book is meant to walk you step-by-step through the ", "headingPath": "Learn to Play Guide", "sharpsignalDocId": 61}, {"page": 3, "score": 0.015385, "snippet": "To start, perhaps you noticed this in the Scenario Book: This means to take that first sticker from the sticker sheet, labeled \"Roadside Ambush\", and place it in the \"B1\" square of the city map board, such that the artwork lines up. These stickers are permanent. If you would prefer not to make perma", "headingPath": "Scenario 1 Rules", "sharpsignalDocId": 61}, {"page": 30, "score": 0.015152, "snippet": "There are a few other rules we weren't able to introduce yet that you will need as you go deeper into the campaign. These are outlined below, but also note that the Rules Glossary contains a comprehensive detailing of all the rules in the game. If you ever have a question about anything, you will fi", "headingPath": "Final Rules", "sharpsignalDocId": 61}, {"page": 27, "score": 0.014925, "snippet": "Congratulations on completing Scenario 4! As always, play through to the end of the round, read the conclusion text and rewards, then update the city map board. Make sure to record your gold (2 per money token) and experience gained (including the 6 bonus scenario experience), and also record one ch", "headingPath": "Scenario 4 Complete", "sharpsignalDocId": 61}, {"page": 31, "score": 0.014706, "snippet": "GAME DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT: Isaac Childres conTRIBUTInG DESIGnERS: Zachary Cohn, Joe Homes, Alexander JL Theoharis, & Andrew Penn ADDITIOnAL DEVELOPMENT: Marcel Cwertetschka WORLDBUILDING ARTWORK: Alexandr Elichev SCENARIO BOOK ARTWORK: David Demaret GRAPHIC DESIGn: Josh McDowell, Jason D. Kingsly, C", "headingPath": "Credits", "sharpsignalDocId": 61}]
citations (raw)
[{"page": 29, "quote": null, "headingPath": "Scenario Level", "sharpsignalDocId": 61}]
boost provenance — errata + base rulebook (E2/E3)
gate not evaluated for this ruling (boost, supersedence, and wrench all off at ask time), and the base-rulebook arm went unrecorded for the same reason — the wrench that would have stored it was off; rulesage.errata.boost-enabled=false, rulesage.errata.supersedence-enabled=false
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 9, 2026 00:13

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 Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion — Rulebook (corpus doc 61) Playing by Yourself? p.3 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
#2 RULEBOOK Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion — Rulebook (corpus doc 61) Scenario Level p.29 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
#3 RULEBOOK Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion — Rulebook (corpus doc 61) Scenario 5 Complete p.28 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
#4 RULEBOOK Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion — Rulebook (corpus doc 61) Learn to Play Guide p.1 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
#5 RULEBOOK Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion — Rulebook (corpus doc 61) Scenario 1 Rules p.3 0.015385 (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 Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion — Rulebook (corpus doc 61) Final Rules p.30 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
#7 RULEBOOK Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion — Rulebook (corpus doc 61) Scenario 4 Complete p.27 0.014925 (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
#8 RULEBOOK Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion — Rulebook (corpus doc 61) Credits p.31 0.014706 (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

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 Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion — Rulebook (corpus doc 61) Scenario Level p.29 no quote on the wire
timing split
retrieval 101 ms · first delta n/a · total 5259 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 101 ms · ask 5149 ms · gateway work 5259 ms · total 5259 ms
live seat (read from the running child)
answering — gemma4:26b think:false · num_ctx 32768 (live-verified 42s ago)
stream path
not recorded — this ruling predates the stream-path column (V41)
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 9), 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.