Skip to content

Worthbound Risk Taxonomy

Canonical System File
Version: 0.1
Authority Level: System
Depends On:

  • 05-Economy/01-Economic-Model.md
  • 05-Economy/05-Risk-Return-Framework.md
  • 03-Archetypes/03-Archetype-Balance-Framework.md
  • 09-Production/01-MVP-Scope.md

This file defines the official risk taxonomy of Worthbound.

The risk taxonomy exists to answer:

  • what kinds of risk matter in the game
  • how risk differs from archetype to archetype
  • how risk enters the player loop
  • how protection interacts with risk
  • how risk supports the game’s teaching-through-consequence design

For the mobile-first MVP, the risk system must remain:

  • understandable
  • emotionally legible
  • strategically meaningful
  • compact enough for mobile
  • strong enough to make protection matter

Worthbound must teach this truth:

Financial progress is fragile when risk is ignored, underpriced, or misunderstood.

Risk is not just “bad things happening.” Risk is the set of conditions that can:

  • erase progress
  • delay escape
  • amplify expense pressure
  • expose weak planning
  • punish false confidence

Risk therefore exists to reveal structural truth.


In Worthbound, risk is any factor that can weaken the player’s financial structure.

A risk may affect:

  • income continuity
  • expense pressure
  • assets
  • debt burden
  • liquidity
  • opportunity timing
  • recovery ability

A player with weak protection, low cash, and high obligations experiences the same event differently from a prepared player.

That difference is central to the game.


For MVP, Worthbound should use six major risk families:

  1. Income Risk
  2. Health Risk
  3. Asset Risk
  4. Expense Spike Risk
  5. Opportunity Risk
  6. Lifestyle Risk

These six are enough to create meaningful financial tension without overcomplicating the first release.


The risk that the player’s active income is interrupted, reduced, delayed, or destabilized.

  • layoff
  • reduced hours
  • work interruption
  • client loss
  • poor business cycle
  • performance setback

Income risk is one of the strongest threats to salary-dependent players.

  • Skilled Worker
  • Entrepreneur
  • Corporate Climber

Income Protection should reduce the severity of this risk.


The risk that a health-related issue creates direct financial damage or indirect work disruption.

  • injury
  • illness
  • medical bill
  • temporary reduced capacity

Health risk can strike both income and expenses at once.

  • Skilled Worker
  • Service Worker
  • Entrepreneur

Health Protection should reduce direct cost and preserve structural stability.


The risk that an owned asset is damaged, disrupted, underperforms, or stops producing expected value.

  • repair cost
  • breakdown
  • vacancy
  • business disruption
  • asset loss event

Asset risk threatens the player’s path from income to ownership.

  • Skilled Worker
  • Corporate Climber
  • Entrepreneur
  • Public Servant in later expansion

Asset Protection should reduce downside severity and recovery difficulty.


The risk that a temporary but meaningful extra cost suddenly reduces breathing room.

  • family emergency
  • repair bill
  • urgent payment
  • regulatory or timing-related fee
  • household disruption

Expense spikes test reserves, protection, and structural slack.

All archetypes, but especially:

  • Service Worker
  • Skilled Worker
  • Entrepreneur

Protection does not always remove these spikes, but it may reduce their severity.


The risk that a chosen opportunity underperforms, arrives at the wrong time, or creates more burden than benefit.

  • overpaying for upside
  • weak timing
  • insufficient reserves
  • poor archetype fit
  • bad risk stacking

This is the risk of voluntary strategic action.

  • Corporate Climber
  • Entrepreneur
  • any archetype acting too aggressively

Protection may make some opportunities more survivable, but it never removes judgment risk.


The risk that the player’s own behavior quietly increases fixed drag, weakens surplus, or undermines freedom.

  • status spending
  • comfort spending
  • inflationary habit creep
  • overexpanding obligations
  • mistaking income growth for actual strength

This is one of Worthbound’s signature behavioral risks.

  • Corporate Climber
  • Professional
  • Entrepreneur during temporary success spikes

Protection does not solve lifestyle risk directly. This risk is reduced mainly through discipline and design consequence.


For MVP clarity, risk should be thought of in three broad severity bands:

  • survivable with modest cash
  • limited structural damage
  • recoverable quickly
  • painful
  • may delay progress significantly
  • requires real adaptation or buffer use
  • threatens major collapse
  • may destroy momentum
  • reveals whether the player built reserves and protection

These bands help tune both events and insurance value.


Risk should not feel the same across all archetypes.

  • high income interruption sensitivity
  • high health-linked vulnerability
  • moderate asset vulnerability
  • lower lifestyle risk
  • moderate disruption risk
  • moderate health and expense spike vulnerability
  • moderate lifestyle risk
  • lower chaos but higher stagnation risk
  • moderate interruption risk
  • high lifestyle risk
  • high opportunity risk
  • expensive downside when things go wrong
  • very high income volatility risk
  • high opportunity risk
  • high recovery risk
  • strong reserve and protection dependence

These should follow the same logic later:

  • Service Worker = thin-margin survival risk
  • Public Servant = lower chaos, higher complacency risk

Protection exists because risk exists.

Risk and protection must be connected in visible ways:

  • income risk should make income protection meaningful
  • health risk should make health protection meaningful
  • asset risk should make asset protection meaningful

If the player cannot feel this relationship, the risk model is underdesigned or the protection model is too weak.


Liquidity changes risk.

The same event should feel:

  • manageable with reserves
  • dangerous with thin cash
  • catastrophic with no buffer and no protection

This is why cash is not just money-in-hand. It is a risk absorber.


Risk does not only determine how much damage an event causes. It also determines how hard it is to recover.

This means two players may take the same hit but experience different outcomes because of:

  • cash reserves
  • debt burden
  • protection coverage
  • expense load
  • archetype pressure

This is what makes risk structurally interesting.


The risk taxonomy should help expose these failure patterns:

  • ignoring fragile income
  • treating low-probability downside as irrelevant
  • expanding too fast without buffer
  • staying underprotected to save small amounts now
  • carrying high fixed expenses with no margin
  • assuming that good recent cycles mean low future risk

These should feel like understandable consequences.


The risk taxonomy should reward:

  • preparing before expanding
  • holding cash intentionally
  • buying the right protection at the right time
  • matching opportunity size to current structure
  • controlling lifestyle risk
  • respecting archetype-specific fragility

Good players should feel that they are not avoiding all risk, but managing it intelligently.


The Worthbound risk taxonomy is built around six core families:

  • income risk
  • health risk
  • asset risk
  • expense spike risk
  • opportunity risk
  • lifestyle risk

These risks exist to test whether the player has built:

  • liquidity
  • discipline
  • protection
  • structural resilience

That is how risk should work in the mobile-first MVP.