diff --git a/Doc/TestPlan/TestPlan.pdf b/Doc/TestPlan/TestPlan.pdf
index b859df1a05029791b96093f430d5edbf4eae938b..5b32b611247bae0116b5b41b76c35cb7c71112be 100644
Binary files a/Doc/TestPlan/TestPlan.pdf and b/Doc/TestPlan/TestPlan.pdf differ
diff --git a/Doc/TestPlan/TestPlan.tex b/Doc/TestPlan/TestPlan.tex
index 00b7c57e25e4f5aabaedfc3f2f7a3be725362024..bad8637f349a0bb21958cfc2463745395776614c 100644
--- a/Doc/TestPlan/TestPlan.tex
+++ b/Doc/TestPlan/TestPlan.tex
@@ -463,6 +463,8 @@
 
 	Another aspect of the game that was replicated as the source-code describes is dungeon generation. Of course, today we are using a more advanced data structure, with several capabilities that were not available for the C of 1980, but the idea behind the data structure is the same. The process followed for dungeon generation in 1980 was somewhat ill-conceived and convoluted. Despite this its discernible aspects were used as inspiration for the algorithm used in Rogue++. So while at the end of the day the two do not follow the same algorithm, the end result is close enough, and test cases are included to make sure that all properties of the old \textit{Rogue} are satisfied in Rogue++.\\
 
+	Another way Rogue++ can be compared to the original \textit{Rogue} is by its controls. This is something that can be algorithmically tested, and guaranteed to function exactly as intended. Every key in \textit{Rogue} is mapped to a specific action, which can be replicated one-for-one in Rogue++. WIP
+
 	
 	
 \newpage