Skip to content

Round table

User Avatar
#1348
Auto-translated
loi
And there will be no need to define direct damage magic, as in Valentin's version. Again, we'll have to explain to every new player which spells are direct damage magic, and, most importantly, why exactly they are... Yes, the very discussion about defining direct damage (why, for example, the opponent resurrecting 5 angels doesn't damage me at all, but an arrow dealing 120 damage does, just because it's supposedly direct damage??).
Valer, I've said it many times, I'm not suggesting separating magic damage into direct and indirect. I cast a spell, and as a result, the opponent has fewer troops than they would have without the spell – that's it, they can't retreat. I think that's clear and simple enough. In fact, that's what this rule was originally intended for, I'm sure, and not out of some consideration for higher justice.
Всем удачи ! И Морали !