Forum

This story became controversial because of your stubbornness, when everyone told you that you were adding nonsense, but you still did everything your way. Because of a situation that happens in the game in less than 1% of cases, you deliberately started a conflict. This is the main complaint against you.

You are mistaken about "deliberately" - I assumed that someone might not like the wording of the rule, so I immediately indicated my willingness to discuss the nuances of the wording. As a result, this discussion took place, and the final version of the rule turned out to be significantly different from the initial one.

And the fact that a mudslinging started at the same time is entirely Lucky's merit, who stubbornly insisted on the thesis that "the rules cannot be changed," and did so in an extremely rude and aggressive manner. And at that point, there was no turning back - one of us had to be removed.

I am quite satisfied with the outcome of that discussion, if only because the "non-systemic" players were exposed, with whom we would have argued sooner or later anyway. And if so, why not sooner?

If the second player has such a hero, then it is obvious that he will not be able to appear in the tavern.

The hero pool will be duplicated - there will be two of each.