SDT

Core Traits

SDT believes that fun only lasts on top of explainable rules. No matter how flashy an idea is, if judgments wobble, interaction priorities are unclear, or exceptions start popping everywhere, players end up reacting to luck and bugs instead of skill.
So SDT anchors the system not in a designer's intuition but in a team-agreed spec, and sets a baseline that carries through implementation, QA, and live ops. In short, SDT is most energized by making play fair and predictable by carefully organizing rules / numbers / exceptions.

For SDT, control and constraints are not about suppressing fun; they help draw a clearer magic circle where play begins to carry meaning. When rules define what is allowed, players can invest in choices, and that investment returns as readable outcomes.

In practice, SDT asks first: "What does this decision charge to fairness, predictability, and risk? " They aren't against better feel or stronger presentation, but they watch for the moment a change breaks rule consistency or invites exploitation and balance collapse.
Teams with SDT tend to patch often without losing trust in the core loop, and in competitive contexts they have a higher chance of shipping "explainable updates".

Core Values

Team Chemistry

• When working with Rule Conductor (SDT), share the target emotion/presentation first, then define judgment rules and exception bounds that won't break while keeping that goal. That's the fastest path.
• With Feel Artist (CET), managing reproducible cases before/after changes (hit checks, i-frames, cancels, input buffer) together reduces conflict and makes updates safer.
• With Data Pilot (SET), align that metrics do not replace fairness/readability. Data Pilot (SET) finds phenomena via metrics, and Rule Conductor (SDT) locks fixes with a baseline; that division works well.