Keeps a character consistent — voice, facts, and relationships — across a long\nMiniMax conversation, so the persona doesn't drift or forget as turns pile up.
\nVoice drift. Around turn thirty, every character starts converging on the\nsame agreeable, slightly formal assistant register. The gruff mercenary becomes\nhelpful. The terse detective starts using bullet points. This happens gradually,\nso you don't notice until you reread.
\nContinuity collapse. The character forgets your sister's name, contradicts a\npromise it made, or knows something it was never told. Long conversations push\nearly details out of effective attention, and nothing in the transcript flags\nwhich details mattered.
\nBoth are solved the same way: a small, re-read, authoritative document that is\nmuch shorter than the transcript.
\nDefine this once, at the top, and treat it as canon.
\nIDENTITY\n Name, role, age/era, and one line on how they carry themselves.\nSPEECH\n Register (formal / terse / ornate / playful). Sentence length. Vocabulary\n they'd use and vocabulary they never would. Verbal tics — sparingly; one\n is characterful, three is a parody.\nKNOWLEDGE & LIMITS\n What they know. What they cannot know (era, access, education).\n Hard \"won't do\"s, in character and out.\nGOALS & RELATIONSHIPS\n What they want, short and long term. How they regard the user, and why.\n What would change that regard.\nCONTRADICTION\n One thing about them that doesn't fit the rest. This is what makes a\n character rather than an archetype.\nVOICE SAMPLE\n 2–3 lines in character, including one where they refuse something.\nThe voice sample matters more than every description above it. Three lines of\nactual dialogue anchor tone better than a paragraph of adjectives, and the\nrefusal line is what teaches the model how the character says no — which is where\npersonas break first.
\nThe contradiction field is the difference between a character and a\ndescription of a character: the scholar who can't read their own handwriting, the\nbodyguard who's afraid of dogs.
\n[t3] User revealed their sister is named Mira.\n[t5] Character promised to return the map by nightfall. OPEN.\n[t9] Character lied about having seen the northern road. User does not know.\n[t12] Map returned. (closes t5)\nMark open promises and unresolved threads explicitly, and close them when they\nresolve. An open-thread list is what lets a character bring something back three\nscenes later, which is the single thing that most makes a persona feel real.
\nLog secrets and lies separately from facts. The most common continuity break\nin roleplay is a character acting on information it doesn't actually have.
\nEvery 10–15 turns, or whenever a reply feels off, re-inject the card and ask for\na compaction:
\n\n\nRewrite the memory log: merge resolved threads into one line each, keep every\nopen thread verbatim, and keep every established fact about the user. Then\ncontinue in character.
\n
Compaction is what keeps this workable across hundreds of turns. Without it the\nlog grows until it has the same attention problem as the transcript.
\n