Black Dragon spell immunity

[Naki]

In one of the (mouse right-click) Black Dragon info screens, it says they are "completely" immune to magic. Yet, when I cast Armageddon, they die from it. Also, IIRC, Implosion also affects them. Bug or expected?

[Jolly Joker]

Read the description of the Warlocks' racial skill Irresistable Magic.

[Naki]

Thanks... Hmm, this sucks, I can attack other dragons this way, but mine suffer too.

[Elvin]

This basically means no dragogeddon strategies or attacking with the dragons and casting aoe to hit those who surround it. At least only the warlocks can hurt the black dragon with magic!
(If we exclude fist of wrath of course! )

[AngelEyes]

This basically means no dragogeddon strategies or attacking with the dragons and casting aoe to hit those who surround it.

I really wish they'd change this. I think the Warlock's racial ability is kinda 'meh' to begin with, but taking away the black dragon/Armageddon tactic just doesn't sit well with me. That was one of the time-honored tactics of previous games!

[darkpriest]

come on it is stupid. black dragon the most powerfull creature not able to resist magic of any kind what next pixes with 200 hit points come on. Black Dragon completly immune to magic of any kind no matter what artifacts or skills you have

[Alabaster]

The original poster is talking about his own Armageddon and his own black dragon.

Your own special ability should only be an advantage.

Of course warlocks vs. black dragons should work, but you shouldn't gain extra ability to affect your own units.

[Jolly Joker]

How would an ability like that which makes magic irresistable would make a difference between "your own" BDs and "the others"?

[Gaidal Cain]

It's magic. Duh.

[Jolly Joker]

Right, it's magic. If you cast a Fireball and of your regular units is within the Fireball does NOT stop and think, wait, those are friendly, spare them. Now, if you have a skill that makes said Fireball "Irresistable" - giving it the extra power necessary to get through part of its force even against resistant creatures - the Fireball STILL doesn't stop to think, wait.

[Qurqirish Dragon]

I think that if you want to appeal to logic, then the warlock needs the ability to cast either a normal or an irresistable form of each AoE spell (single-target spels obviously will be used as irresistable, since they only have one target anyway.

A fireball cast on my black dragon surrounded by peasants should not effect my dragon. However, if there are several stacks of peasants and one stack of enemy black dragons, then I should be allowed to choose to spare the enemy BDs, or to damage my own by casting the appropriate form. If enough power is put in the spell to break the enemy magic resistance, than it will also break my own, but I could choose to use the "weaker" version that can be resisted.

Since there are 5 AoE direct-damage spells, those would need the option. The other spells do not effect both the enemy and allies the same, so they would always be irresistible anyway. (I forget: does irresistable magic apply to non-damage spells at all?)

[darkpriest]

i'm saying warlock or not BD are immune to all magic no matter what

[Jolly Joker]

They are not, obviously. Warlocks' RACIAL overrides them, which is correct: The game is called HEROES of M&M, not CREATURES of M&M.

[Gaidal Cain]

They are not, obviously. Warlocks' RACIAL overrides them, which is correct: The game is called HEROES of M&M, not CREATURES of M&M.

Indeed. It isn't as if it's been totally impossible to cast spells on BD:s earlier either.

[King Imp]

I can understand both sides of the argument here, but the one thing that bothers me about this is the fact that if another type hero (say the Demon Lord) had Black Dragons and casted Armagedddon, then the spell wouldn't affect them. Why should the natural hero (Warlock) of these creatures cause them to lose that ability? If I were the BD and could speak, I would say "Get me the hell out of this faction! They are killing me here!"

Oh, and please don't say if the BD was in another army that they would suffer a morale penalty. The morale penalty in this game for mixing and matching units is a joke. I have fought armies with 4 different types of faction units in it and more often than not see no morale penalty.

[darkpriest]

i think that the morale penalty should and must exsist mainly because u must fight only with the creatures in your faction and\or creatures that are alliaed to your faction (haven, rampart and academy, inferno necropolis )
it is very unsettling knowing that you fight againts undead for example and yet you have vampires in your army

[Jolly Joker]

I agree with that. Completely.
I think, a non-native troop (for the hero) should have a chance to desert when fifgting troops of the same race and an even higher chance to desert when facing the same troops.
So when you'd fight as Haven with a stack of Vampires and you'd face Necropolis' units there should be a chance of, for example, 10% each time when it's the turn of the Vampires to switch sides and fight against the owner. That chance should be doubled when the Necro troops would involve Vampires.
It should be even worse when a hero of another faction leads an army (as in the campaign). If you had a Demon Lord leading a Sylvan army, for example, technically the same rule should apply as before, so in this case there'd be a chance to desert each time you'd fight Sylvan troops for ALL units.

[godlyatheist]

The morale penalty works like this: Either you don't suffer from it, or you get bad morale 3 turns in a row. It is really frustrating that my army of 3 races can't move at all for 3 turns.