OPG made Minerva a 10/5 because she can make the 8 powered cards to become 6. making charlie a 7/12 is the most illogical statement. she has the base damage of 8. The reason why -power opponent is added is because you have the advantage over your opponent in power. The reason why charlie should remain having a base damage of 8 is because -4 opponent damage is sent directly to your opponent and not to your card itself. Is this simple enough to be understood?
So shouldn't that mean that Minerva should remain having a base power of 8 because the -2 power is "sent directly to your opponent and not to your card itself?" That my friend, is what illogical means. Calling Charlie a 7/12 is exactly the same as calling Minerva a 10/7, by your terms.
Omg Soiuku how could you so completely misunderstand what I'm saying??!! I'm saying that due to OPG's insistence that Minerva can be described as approximately a 10/5, then that is no better than saying Minerva is approximately a 10/7, which is obviously wrong! Therefore, a card like Robb Cr is a 5/4 with -5 Opp Power and never a 10/4 approximately or otherwise! If I can understand this simple fact after several too many, I'm appalled you could get the wrong end of the stick so badly unless you did it deliberately. I KNOW CALLING A CARD LIKE Charlie A 7/12 WOULD BE LUDICROUS! BUT WHAT OPG IS SAYING (ie MINERVA IS APPROXIMATELY A 10/5) IS NO BETTER THAN SAYING Charlie IS 7/12!
Sorry for caps lock but I'm so crazy and pissed right now, and yet at the same time I seem more competent in understanding simple logic than Soiuku (no offense intended). READ what is said and what you are saying. I may regret this tomorrow
Go on then OPG. Refute the claim that calling Minerva 10/5 is as silly as calling Charlie 7/12. I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd like a comprehensive 10 paragraph essay on reasons for and against. No idea what you're on about re right threads...