Use the Megabonk Holy Trinity as a framework, not a law

Direct answer: XP + Luck + Difficulty is a useful community snowball framework, not a universal law. Use all three when the run can convert growth and pressure into a stable advantage. Skip or delay a part when it weakens immediate control, conflicts with the character plan, or asks a beginner to manage more pressure than the damage curve supports.

Evidence boundary: The official H A T S update is the current 1.0.69 context. The Fox passive and Luck Tome tuning relevant to this discussion came from the earlier official Christmas Patch announcement, so they are not attributed to 1.0.69 here. Neither official announcement makes the community “Holy Trinity” mandatory, and the no-trinity source is community experience rather than proof that omission is always stronger.

What each part contributes to the framework

Part	Community role in the loop	Question before taking it
XP	Seeks faster access to upgrade opportunities and an earlier growth curve	Can current damage stay stable while I invest in growth?
Luck	Seeks more value from chance-driven outcomes in the build plan	Does this character and route have a clear use for that value now?
Difficulty	Trades safety for the upside expected from a harder run	Can the build convert the pressure without losing movement space or ending early?

These are decision roles, not a current formula. Trace historical Fox or Luck tuning to the Christmas Patch announcement, while using H A T S for the separate current 1.0.69 context; a community shorthand should not overwrite either source.

When the loop helps

The full framework makes sense when damage already controls ordinary waves, the character can use the offered growth, and extra pressure has a stated payoff. It is most coherent in a run with a defined late scaling engine and enough movement or crowd control to protect the investment period.

Editorial recommendation: add the parts in response to a stable run state, not because the phrase says they belong together. After each addition, check whether kill pace, movement space, and boss preparation remain intact.

When a beginner should skip it

Skip or delay the framework when you are still learning movement, bosses, or the difference between coverage and focused damage. A beginner who takes three growth-oriented commitments while waves already leak has not created a snowball; they have removed the time needed to learn the run.

Difficulty is a clear part to delay when pressure is the visible failure. XP or Luck can also be omitted when taking one would crowd out immediate damage, control, or a character-specific option. The correct omission is the one that repairs the run you are actually playing.

Why current builds may omit one part

• Character-specific scaling: a character may already have a stronger route for the same choice slot.
• Timing: a part can be useful in theory and arrive after the run needed immediate control.
• Goal mismatch: first clears, kill targets, and score attempts do not value the same risk.
• Patch uncertainty: old community percentages should not be assumed current after official Fox/Luck changes.
• Execution burden: a mathematically ambitious route can be worse for a player who loses damage uptime while managing it.

The community no-trinity discussion is useful because it tests the assumption, not because it establishes a new universal rule. Ask what function the omitted part served, then verify that another choice now serves that function or that the run no longer needs it.

A quick keep-or-skip test

Keep a part when you can state its job, the run is stable enough to pay its cost, and it strengthens the selected goal. Skip or delay it when its payoff is vague, current waves are already failing, or a character-specific choice has clearer value. For goal-specific examples, return to the Megabonk builds hub.