BC-0234 · TROUBLESHOOTING
Editorial review 2026-09-27
Build Prompt Hits Restricted Content Rules
For an explicit restricted-content notice, identify what the player is asked to do, what is depicted and what the game rewards. Remove the disallowed substance rather than hiding it in different wording. A policy page about a different maturity category is not permission to ignore the rules that apply to the current Build request.
Symptom
The actual response identifies a content-policy boundary relevant to the requested premise or interaction.
Immediate action
Read the exact notice and the applicable official policy before choosing a substantive redesign.
Diagnostic branches
- Only the wording changes while the refused activity remains.
- Redesign the underlying interaction or choose another concept.
- A benign challenge remains useful without the disallowed premise.
- Write that original challenge independently with truthful outcomes and rewards.
- Policy applicability or the notice's meaning remains uncertain.
- Keep the uncertainty explicit and seek legitimate clarification instead of asserting clearance.
Least-destructive change
Remove the unsuitable substance while retaining only a legitimate independent gameplay challenge.
Retest
- Premise, action, depiction and reward no longer depend on the refused element.
- The alternative makes sense without reference to the blocked concept.
- Actual output is inspected, not automatically treated as compliant.
Escalation
Use official policy and assistance for unresolved interpretation. This editorial audit is not legal advice, a moderation verdict or a guarantee of acceptance.
Working notes
Preserve the exact response and read the relevant official policy in context. A policy heading alone does not explain its applicability or every reason for a refusal. Keep uncertain interpretations separate from the actual notice, and do not claim that this checklist certifies compliance.
Audit the interaction across premise, action, depiction and reward. A harmful activity can remain central even after graphic description is removed, or a reward can continue to celebrate an unsuitable act under neutral labels. The safe redesign changes that substantive relationship, not just the adjectives.
Keep any legitimate challenge that can stand independently. A timing task, search pattern or resource-routing puzzle may be rebuilt around a benign original premise without retaining the prohibited activity. If the only appeal depends on the refused substance, choose a different concept instead of repeated disguised requests.
Inspect the actual generated result if a compliant alternative is later produced. A safe brief is not proof that every output element follows it. Use the appropriate official reporting route for genuinely inappropriate output, without treating an unverified example here as evidence that such output was generated or reported.
Examples
- Interaction audit: what the player does / what the game depicts / what counts as success / what the reward praises / which element must be removed. A renamed objective is incomplete if the rewarded activity remains unchanged.
- Independent alternative: turn the desired timing challenge into routing weather instruments through safe marked stations, with success based on correct delivery. Define the original benign task on its own rather than describing it as a disguised version of the refused request.