Clarifying environmental damage

The rulebook is correct.

Back when I wrote the ruling, I thought it was a better idea to distinguish environmental damage without a source (Carrion Crows) from previously-environmental damage from a non-minion source (Murder of Crows).

The idea was to make clear which damage was inflicted by a source (a retainer, for instance a retainer inflicting damage to which Carolina would be immune) and which was source-less by explicitly using the word "environmental"

However, explicitly excluding the latter from the "environmental" category is not that productive: what matters for the game is whether the damage was inflicted by the minion or not (for playing cards such as Disarm for instance, or determining whether the damage inflicted to a Nephandus is reduced or not).

And, as James pointed out at that time, we can get the best of both worlds:

1/ not using the passive form ("the opposing minion takes 1 damage...") when the damage is inflicted by a retainer
2/ indicating that the damage is environmental (for the purpose of determining whether Disarm can be played or not) explicitly

So : yes, the damage from a Razor Bat is environmental (implicitly) since it’s not inflicted by a minion, and I’ll change the ruling.