Reliability of source

[FrancoK]

If I tell you MoM has bugs, you're not going to be surprised.

How to determine if a spell is correct of if behavior is expected, according to game creators?

Let's find the sources we have:
1. The manuals (pdf) we found with the program (if we have the original CD or the GOG version)
2. The help online
3. The strategy guide
4. the reademe.txt file we found with the program

We can also have to deal with different version of the software.

At least were released:
v 1.00
v 1.01
v 1.1
v 1.2
v 1.3
v 1.31

Of course the latest version should be the preferred one, when available, because it overrules the previous ones.

Any other source I've forgotten?

[Tiltowait]

That is the entire canon of Master of Magic. Unless you want to include the Playstation port.

[FrancoK]

That is the entire canon of Master of Magic. Unless you want to include the Playstation port.

Yes. No Playstation, the game has the same name, but the rules where trimmed a lot.

There are other sources, MOM FAQ, wikia and more, but they are made by players for players, to make an easier playing, they are not a reliable source.

[Rakir]

Yes. No Playstation, the game has the same name, but the rules where trimmed a lot.

How do you know this? I don't think the game came with a changelog text file.

[FrancoK]

Yes. No Playstation, the game has the same name, but the rules where trimmed a lot.

How do you know this? I don't think the game came with a changelog text file.

There was a presentation of the game and a section called (more or less) Thing you could do in MoM, but you cannot do with Playstation. And it had a lot of entries.

[Tiltowait]

Where is that? I'd like to see it.

[FrancoK]

Where is that? I'd like to see it.

Unfortunately my friend is no more available, but you can check online if you find a store. It was for Playstation 1 or 2 IIRC.

[spottedshroom]

Dude! There was a Playstation port?! Some of the graphics actually look better than the original. I wonder if we could backport any of them...