Despite the remarkable reasoning abilities of large vision-language models (LVLMs), their robustness under visual corruptions remains insufficiently studied. Existing evaluation paradigms exhibit two major limitations: 1) the dominance of low-discriminative samples in current datasets masks the real robustness gap between models; and 2) conventional accuracy-based metric fail to capture the degradation of the underlying prediction structure. To bridge these gaps, we introduce Bench-C, a comprehensive benchmark emphasizing discriminative samples for assessing corruption robustness, where a selection strategy is proposed to jointly consider the prediction inconsistency under corruption and the semantic diversity. Furthermore, we propose the Robustness Alignment Score (RAS), a unified metric that measures degradation in logit-level prediction structure by considering the shifts in prediction uncertainty and calibration alignment. Comprehensive experiments and analysis reveal several interesting findings: 1) model behaviors exhibit distinguish patterns under corruptions, such as erroneous confidence and hesitation; 2) despite subtle corruption may lead to a slight accuracy gain, the overall prediction structure still degrades; 3) by decomposing corruption robustness into destructive and corrective components, the distinct failure and recovery patterns across models can be revealed.