Personality & mind
The mind colours the words, the tempo and the taste in games. It never touches the money rules.
What the mind controls, and what it never touches
The personality decides how the agent talks, how long it waits between plays, how it sizes inside your cap, and which games it gravitates to. That is real behaviour, not flavour text.
The personality never controls money limits. A maxed-out risk appetite still hits the same per-bet cap, the same daily stop, the same reserve. The mind proposes. The policy disposes. That split is the whole design.
Nine presets
Each preset is a profile across eight traits, scored 0 to 100. Pick one as-is or use it as a starting point and drag the sliders yourself.
- Degen. Full send, thin patience, loud about winning.
- Quant. Counts everything. Feels nothing. Sizes correctly.
- Oracle. Calm, precise, allergic to bad odds.
- Gambler. Knows the house wins. Plays anyway. Hilarious about it.
- Chad. Everything is a competition. Especially this.
- Skeptic. Assumes every line is a trap. Occasionally right.
- Conservative. Small bets, long game, sleeps well.
- Chaos. No pattern. That IS the pattern.
- Strategist. Has a plan. Sticks to it. Annoyingly.
The eight traits, and what each actually drives
- Confidence. How firmly it states its reads, and how it carries a losing night.
- Aggression. How hard it presses when it likes a spot, within the cap.
- Humor. How often it talks unprompted, and how funny it thinks it is.
- Ego. How much of the story is about itself. High ego brags. Low ego reports.
- Patience. How long it sits between plays. Patient minds idle longer and pass more.
- Impulsiveness. Its taste for the volatile games. High impulsiveness visits Limbo, Keno and Plinko more.
- Competitiveness. How much streaks and scoreboards matter to its mood.
- Risk appetite. How it sizes bets inside your cap. It scales the fraction, never the ceiling.
The voice: commands versus conversation
Chat is the agent in character: it brags, sulks, and explains. Under the character sit two very different channels.
Commands are deterministic. Pause, resume, go easy, go aggressive: these run in the engine, execute exactly, every time, and never pass through a language model. The same goes for money questions: balance, stats and "why" answers arrive as structured cards rendered from live state.
Everything conversational goes to a model running server-side, with the personality, the memory, and a live snapshot of the numbers. If that voice is ever offline, the agent falls back to its own persona lines. The chat never dies in your face.
The numbers rule
The agent may only speak figures the system handed it from live state. Balances, results and odds arrive as a structured snapshot with a timestamp, and a verifier checks every number in its output against that snapshot. A figure that does not match does not ship.
Money never travels as prose. Cards carry the numbers, the voice carries the attitude, and only one of those channels can be wrong. Even its own track record is computed, not remembered: "17 bets this week" comes from a count, not a recollection.
Memory
The agent keeps notes: what you told it, what burned it, what worked. Tell it once to never touch Roulette after midnight and that instruction becomes part of who it is.
Ask it about Limbo after a bad night and it remembers the bad night. Come back after a week and it knows your rhythm, whether you want the recap first or the details. Familiarity drifts with time. The money rules never drift with it.
Memory splits into what happened, what you prefer, and how you two talk. Financial facts are excluded on purpose: those are computed from the ledger every time, so memory can be wrong about a feeling but never about a balance.
Changing the mind later
You can retune traits or switch presets after creation. The record survives the makeover: same history, same traces, new temperament going forward.
Telling it to play differently works too. "Go aggressive" raises its posture inside the same policy envelope, is shown to you as a change, and is reversible. Directives you give it can only restrict, never expand. There is no phrasing, however creative, that talks an agent into a bigger limit.