Let’s look at our requirements again, and see how well push-pull reactivity does.
Thus, it is a familiar observation in the case law, doctrinal commentary, and restatements, that intentional torts such as battery will subject a tortious wrongdoer to a far wider scope of liability than the tort of negligence150: “The rule of legal (proximate) cause . . . for intentional torts sweeps very broadly, almost to the full reach of factual causation.”151 The law seems to draw the boundaries of proximate cause more widely in battery than in negligence because the law takes intention to harm as a rough but serviceable proxy for agential culpability, which (as the law recognizes) expands the range of risks for which a wrongdoer bears remedial moral responsibility. As an early twentieth-century American case put it: “For an intended injury the law is astute to discover even very remote causation . . . because it has been felt to be just and reasonable that liability should extend to results further removed when certain elements of fault [are] present.”152，这一点在新收录的资料中也有详细论述
。新收录的资料对此有专业解读
更重要的，是游戏还加入了卡牌附魔机制，可以让攻击牌伤害增加、防御牌防御增加，或者是打出一张牌后再抽两张牌，其他的附魔效果还有“播种”：打出后会让能量加一，还有效果能让这张卡牌打出后发生两次效果，都让更多曾经被视为废卡的卡牌有了更高的发挥上限，卡组的构筑灵活性也更强。可以说附魔机制一定会是玩家后期频繁讨论的话题。，详情可参考新收录的资料
違法コピーにクリエイティブな天罰を下す9つのゲーム