Can a creature have negative toughness? I know a creature can technically have negative power, but since a creature would normally die if it reaches 0 toughness, I can't find an official ruling.

The reason I ask is based on +1/+1 counters. Let's say I have a Relic Seeker that has renowned; a base 2/2 with a +1/+1 counter. Now, if my opponent were to cast Cruel Finality, Relic Seeker would be reduced to a 0/0, but he's getting that +1/+1 from the counter, keeping him alive... so do +1/+1 counters bypass the toughness=0 death? Or can toughness go negative?

Another example: My opponent casts Languish. Is Relic Seeker now a -2/-2, and the +1/+1 counter isn't enough to keep it alive? Or does its toughness get reduced to 0 and become unable to go lower since Relic Seeker should die, and the +1/+1 keeps it above 0?

There are two things going on here.
Toughness and base toughness
First, the question you didn't ask, but which I think really underlies your confusion, is on the definition of toughness. When you calculate a creature's toughness, you take into account all toughness-changing effects, including counters. So the toughness of your renowned Relic Seeker is 3. Not 2. Not 0 either. The number marked on the card, 2, is called the "base toughness", and it only gives you a starting point for the toughness calculation. It doesn't have any further significance in the game.
So in your first example, this is (technically) the wrong way to describe it:

Now, if my opponent were to cast Cruel Finality, Relic Seeker would be reduced to a 0/0, but he's getting that +1/+1 from the counter, keeping him alive...

What you should say instead is that, if your opponent were to cast Cruel Finality, Relic Seeker is reduced to a 1/1. Working from a base power and base toughness of 2/2, it gets -2/-2 from Cruel Finality and +1/+1 from the counter, all of which adds up to 1/1.
All this is controlled by rule 613.3, if you're curious.

613.3. Within layer 7, apply effects in a series of sublayers in the order described below. Within each sublayer, apply effects in timestamp order. (See rule 613.6.) Note that dependency may alter the order in which effects are applied within a sublayer. (See rule 613.7.)
613.3a. Layer 7a: Effects from characteristic-defining abilities that define power and/or toughness are applied. See rule 604.3.
613.3b. Layer 7b: Effects that set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value are applied. Effects that refer to the base power and/or toughness of a creature apply in this layer.
613.3c. Layer 7c: Effects that modify power and/or toughness (but don't set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value) are applied.
613.3d. Layer 7d: Power and/or toughness changes from counters are applied. See rule 121, "Counters."
613.3e. Layer 7e: Effects that switch a creature's power and toughness are applied. Such effects take the value of power and apply it to the creature's toughness, and take the value of toughness and apply it to the creature's power.

Negative toughness
Now the question you did ask, whether toughness can be negative: yes, it can. This is controlled by rule 107.1b, where you will see that toughness is one of the exceptions to the rule that Magic mostly uses nonnegative numbers.

107.1b. Most of the time, the Magic game uses only positive numbers and zero. You can't choose a negative number, deal negative damage, gain negative life, and so on. However, it's possible for a game value, such as a creature's power, to be less than zero. If a calculation or comparison needs to use a negative value, it does so. If a calculation that would determine the result of an effect yields a negative number, zero is used instead, unless that effect sets a player's life total to a specific value, doubles a player's life total, sets a creature's power or toughness to a specific value, or otherwise modifies a creature's power or toughness.

So in your second example, you have a renowned Relic Seeker and your opponent casts Languish. It starts with a base power and base toughness of 2/2, gets -4/-4 from Languish, and gets +1/+1 from the counter, all of which adds up to a power and toughness of -1/-1. Since its toughness is 0 or less, it dies (when state-based effects are checked).
It sounds like you may have thought there was a rule like this:

If an effect would reduce a creature's toughness to less than 0, it reduces it to 0 instead.

But there is no such rule.


What's a good counter-strategy to Workshop/Garden? If we play a board that has Workshop and Garden kingdom cards, I almost exclusively play them as my strategy. In the early game, I focus on buying Workshop and by the third round I typically get two "buys", one in the Action phase with Workshop and the other in the Buy phase.

Mid-game, I switch to buying Garden (which gives you one VP for every 10 cards in your deck) and if I have less than 3 coins in the Buy phase, I get an Estate or Copper. This strategy has proved to be almost 100% effective in rushing to deplete three decks and ending the game around turn 16 or 17.  I've only lost once or twice using this strategy and it's usually when I deviate from my plan and forget to pick up an Estate/Copper or pick up another card on a whim.

For this scenario, I'm only playing the base set and the third pile I'm depleting is Estates.

What are effective counter-strategies to a Workshop/Garden strategy?

Workshop/Gardens is usually a dominant strategy. There are a couple of exceptions:

Bishop can counter Gardens by buying Gardens and then trashing them for VP. This prevents the Gardens player from being able to get a favorable Gardens split and means that the Bishop player can focus on getting VP chips or Duchies while the Gardens player is buying out Workshops and whatever other pile.
Cursing attacks can often foil a Gardens strategy. Since Gardens games tend to end fast, a difference of 3 or 4 points can be huge. The threat of pumping up the value of the opponent's Gardens is overrated; even if the Gardens player gets all 8 Gardens, 10 curses would still be a net loss of 2 points.
Discard attacks can significantly slow a Gardens player. Only having 3 cards in hand means that the person can probably keep a Workshop and 2 treasures, which will frequently be Coppers. That's not enough money to keep acquiring Workshops or to get a double Gardens. Ghost Ship is especially brutal because the Gardens player will have lots of bad cards, and so forcing him or her to see those cards multiple times instead of being able to just discard them is really painful.
Embargo can make Gardens unattractive very quickly. Put an Embargo on the Workshop pile, then the Estate pile, then the Copper pile. Embargoing the Gardens themselves is ok, but usually the gardener will be gaining Gardens via Workshop and so the Embargo won't matter. If you Embargo their buy possibilities, however, it quickly slows down their deck.
A quick mega-turn engine may be able to overwhelm a Gardens deck. I'm thinking about Native Village/Bridge, which can be used to end the game in a single turn. This engine might be fast enough to buy a couple of Provinces, drain the Estates, and end the game on piles. It's ridiculously difficult to simulate because of the pile-ending conditions and needing some intuition in order to decide when to pull the mega-turn, but I played a couple of solo games earlier today and it seems viable as a strategy.


How far can a knight travel without visiting the same square twice? How many Knight moves is it possible to execute on an empty chess board before the Knight lands on a square it has already landed on in its previous moves?  The most I've ever been able to land on was 54 squares, usually 50-52.

There is a famous puzzle called the Knight's Tour in which the aim is to visit every square exactly once.  Since this has several solutions, the answer to your question is that it can visit all 64 squares.


Should you reveal who was a spy and who wasn't at the end of a game? I guess this is possibly up to house rules/who is playing.

On one hand, revealing who were the spies also reveals people's play styles, which might make it a bit less fun for future games. It would something akin to revealing one's hole cards after a successful bluff in poker.

On the other hand, it can be quite an intense game, so it's nice to 'clear the air', and not have lingering doubts (especially if someone who wasn't a spy had been accused of being one).

I've never seen a single player (spy or not) being able to avoid cheering, asking "why you did that" or commenting a recently won/lost The Resistance match. This is an important moment of relief, discussion, curiosity satisfaction and laughter. It's like sharing an adventurous or humorous story with those at the table, maybe strengthening or creating friendship bonds between people.

It is true though, if you play this game a lot with the same group, they might find it easier to know if you're telling the truth or lying... but they will never be sure! And if you think they are, you can try to change your behaviour. One way to achieve that is to know what people expect you to do in certain circumstances, and to get to know that, you can talk about a recently played match. You can also try to copy or remix with your own approach another player's strategy, something that he also might tell you when the game ends. Bottom line: reinventing your play style and avoiding being obvious is also viable through conversation and experience exchange.

Keeping things secret allows you to keep your strategy to yourself and not being able to know what others know. Although mystery is also fun (The Resistance is all about mystery), I find it hard to understand how this way of being mysterious could be better then sharing the experiences in typical The Resistance play sessions. I must also add that some players might even end up frustrated, thanks to not being able to talk about what he and others were thinking.


Are +1/+1 counters different from +1/+1 effects? Is a +1/+1 counter I get from, say Unleash or Undying different than +1/+1 from something like Spear of Heliod or Master of Waves?

Yes, effects that grant +1+/1 are very different than +1/+1 counters.

For Spear of Heliod, you have a static ability with a continuous effect that grants +1/+1.

For Undying, you have a triggered ability with a one-shot effect that grants a counter that grants +1/+1.

Notice the difference between what grants the +1/+1. It's the effect granting the +1/+1 in one case, and it's the counter in the other case. This matters because the +1/+1 will only be granted as long as the granter exists.

The +1/+1 from the continuous effect will last as long as the continuous effect exists. In the case of the effects from static abilities, that's as long as the card with the static ability is on the battlefield. In the case of effects created by the resolution of a spell or ability, that's as long as stated (e.g. "until end of turn"), or indefinitely if a duration isn't stated.

The +1/+1 granted by the counter will last as long as the counter exists. These normally go away when the permanent on which they reside ceases to exist, although there are cards that can  manipulate counters (e.g. Clockspinning), and granting a -1/-1 counter will cause both the +1/+1 and the -1/-1 counter to be removed.

Another difference is that counters are represented by physical objects (e.g. glass beads or dice used as counters), but effects aren't represented physically.


wheel of sun and moon and tutors So let's say I have Wheel of Sun and Moon in play and cast a tutor that puts the card I searched for on top of my library. Let's say, Enlightened Tutor. In what order do things happen in then? Do I put the Enlightened Tutor at the bottom of my library and then shuffle (at which point it probably wouldn't be at the bottom anymore) or do I shuffle and then put the Enlightened Tutor at the bottom?

In either case I assume the enchantment I searched for would go on top at the very end?

When casting an instant or sorcery, it goes:

Announce the spell and pay all costs
People can respond
Spell effect happens
Spell goes to graveyard

So in this case, you'd cast Enlightened Tutor, find the enchantment, shuffle your library and put then enchantment on top, and then try to put Enlightened Tutor in your graveyard. So you have your target on top of your library and Enlightened Tutor on the bottom.


Drug Dealer trigger priority When exactly does Drug Dealer trigger?

It says "When the corp's turn begins, draw 1 card."

When does that trigger on the corp's turn?

Does it trigger before the corp gets priority on turn 1.2?

Example:

The runner has 0 cards in hand at the end of the runners turn. The runner has Drug Dealer out. The corp has Bio Ethics Association rezzed. Does the Bio Ethics Association fire first and kill the runner or does the runner get to draw a card before taking net damage with Drug Dealer?

Both trigger at 1.2. Because it’s the corp’s turn, their card will activate first (see page 22, Simultaneous Effects), so the runner gets flatlined.


What's the difference between Pandemic Legacy Red and Blue? So, basically what the title says. Is there any difference at all in the contents of the boxes or anything else? (without spoilers!)

Maybe it'll make a difference in "Season 2"? (it does say "Season 1" on the box after all).

The contents of the two boxes are identical. The Red and Blue boxes are for people who want to run two campaigns at the same time - for example, with two different gaming groups - to help distinguish between the games.


"The Terrible Experiment" Mythos Card - How to deal with it? Yesterday my game was progressing quite smoothly until we got "The Terrible Experiment" Mythos card.

http://www.arkhamhorrorwiki.com/The_Terrible_Experiment

We were playing with two investigators and immediately tried to go to the Miskatonic University and try to fight the monsters off but some were just too powerful to deal with.

One of the investigators ended up in the hospital and after a while we realized it might have just been better to let the monsters pile up on the card and to have the terror level raised to 10 and all those monsters on the board instead of trying to fight them off.

What are some strategies to deal with this card?

The first time we encountered this rumor, we used Flute of the Elder Gods on it.  On reread, I suspect we were cheating but if you don't agree then that might be a strategy...which could be generalized as try and buy stuff to help (you do have a couple turns to prepare right after the rumor appears).
Note, the rumor also says "one or more monsters".  In subsequent runs I've definitely cherry picked the easy ones and let it build up again.  This is somewhat luck based and won't help you if they're all harder than you can defeat.  Similar to the above comments and other answer, if you have no-one who can fight at all, it is probably better to push on, so is dependant on the variables of the game (which make the game replay value skyrocket IMO=)).
I guess along with the above strategy if you have a bunch of easy monsters as trophies might be worth spending them to get them back in the pool.
It may also be noteworthy to newer players that the positioning of this rumor is between Hospital and Asylum so if you have a lot of money isn't a terrible position to recharge in between fights (well one stat anyway).  This is dependant upon how clean your streets are/your sneak, another variable :D
Really this answer and likely any answer could be applied to fighting in general.  The rumor just adds a terrible downside if you fail.


Why isn't Selvala, Explorer Returned's ability restricted from being used as a mana ability? Selvala, Explorer Returned's ability is very similar to the ability of Charmed Pendant, so I don't understand why the latter has an instant speed restriction and Selvala does not. I'm looking for insight into this difference.

In the history of Magic, there are three cards with abilities that have the clause "Activate this ability only at any time you could cast an instant" (more when you include times when it's in reminder text, but I do not). In all three cases, the ability is a mana ability, as that's the only thing with less timing restrictions than an instant (as you can activate it while casting a spell). These three cards are Lion's Eye Diamond, Rhystic Cave and Charmed Pendant. For LED, this is to stop people from dumping their hand after the spell is already on the stack. For Rhystic Cave, one could attempt to cast a spell, then revert game state if an opponent pays to stop the Cave, and try again forever. Both these cases are fine and I include them mostly for completeness.

Charmed Pendant mills a card, then gives you mana based off that card. Selvala makes everyone reveal cards (and draw), then gives you mana based off those cards. These abilities seem very analogous, yet Selvala can be activated mid-cast and Charmed Pendant cannot. Why is this?

The rules about ability speeds were standardized with the 6th edition. No more mention of speed was necessary on the cards after that. Some older cards were rewritten, some weren't. The 10/4/2004 ruling makes it clear that this wasn't an oversight (as the ability, despite being a mana ability, changes the board's state, while Selvala's doesn't - I'm guessing).


Does the "housing shortage" rule suggest that you should often refrain from buying hotels in monopoly? There are 32 houses in Monopoly. That's only enough to cover eight properties with four houses each, or two full (three property) monopolies, plus one two property monopoly, either Boardwalk-Park Place, or Mediterranean-Baltic.

So if I own two full monopolies, and cover them with four houses each, there are only eight houses left, meaning that except for either Boardwalk-Park Place, or Mediterranean-Baltic, no third monopoly can go up to the crtical three house level on all three properties.

Does this mean that I should keep four houses each on my two monopolies and NOT upgrade them to hotels? Or if someone wants houses, maybe I should at least force them to give me another Monopoly (or railroads or cash) in order to agree to free up houses by upgrading to a hotel? (This might come into play if another opponent and I both had four houses each on our respective monopolies.)

I remember playing years ago with two house rules:

if someone could cover all their properties with hotels outright they were allowed to do so without buying houses (if they could afford to do so)
if someone had four houses on a property, you could force them to free up houses by paying for their upgrade to a hotel

What I find puzzling is that  there are 12 hotels, enough to cover all the properties from four full (three-property) monopolies. And taken together, the hotels and houses can cover six full monopolies, plus a seventh, either Boardwalk-Park Place, or Mediterranean-Baltic, with either a hotel or four houses.

So was it the intent of the game designers that the board be covered this way? Or is a housing shortage just another "monopoly" that creates a further shortage over and above the physical building limits?

From the Official Rules of Monopoly (my emphasis):

  The bank has a fixed supply of 32 houses and 12 hotels. If more players decide to build more houses at the same time than there are houses in the bank, the houses are auctioned off one at a time to the highest bidder. This rule favors the owners of expensive properties, for which the houses cost more in the first place, because the auction price of a house is not tied to the value of the property on which it will be placed. It is not possible to buy more houses than there is available in the bank. This could stop people buying hotels in the future!

and here:

  When the Bank has no houses to sell, players wishing to build must wait for some player to return or sell their houses to the Bank before building. If there are a limited number of houses and hotels available and two or more players wish to buy more than the Bank has, the houses or hotels must be sold at auction to the highest bidder.

Update: - Interpretation and application

I see the purchase of hotels in Monopoly as an endgame tactic, not a mid-game tactic. Similar to a running-game double in backgammon by the leader, which is meant not to increase the stakes but to eliminate the opportunity for the opponent to get lucky and squeak out a win. The purchase of hotels is properly done when one is already firmly in the lead, and thus that the housing shortage period of the game (a possible definition of the mid-game period actually) is already past.

One then buys hotels because opponents do not actually have enough money to purchase the released assets. By further increasing one's rents one can increase the pain of each landing on your property, and reduce the opponents' opportunity to rebuild a cash stock.


When do you progress to the next stage in the Lord of the Ring LCG? After you finish a stage in the Lord of the Ring LCG–whether it be by successfully questing or by a card effect–do you finish the current round before progressing to the next stage, or do you immediately travel to the next stage of the quest?

You reveal the next stage of the quest as soon as you complete the previous one.  Depending on the quest, there can be advantages (or disadvantages) to doing this at a non-standard time, such as through Legolas's ability to add progress during combat, but this is intended.


What is this check/checkmate rule in Shogi? I was playing on an Android app and the computer player dropped a Rook next to my King like this (there were other pieces on the board, but they are not relevant):

It was then my turn, and the square I mark here with green was offered as one of the spots where I could safely move my King:

I thought this was strange, since after my move the Rook would be a promoted Rook and it would have access to the green spot. So I moved there to see what would happen:

Faced with the King in an adjacent square, the promoted Rook just moved away:

This was extra strange, because the promoted Rook was actually protected by other pieces and had no reason to move away. In other words, the King could not turn around and kill the promoted Rook because it would put itself in check.

What was that all about? Why was I even allowed to move to the green spot?

You were allowed to move to the green spot because the rook wasn't promoted yet, it would only be after it moves again. Otherwise, dropping would be too powerful. See the drop rules:

  ... nor does dropping within the promotion zone result in immediate promotion. Capture and/or promotion may occur normally, however, on subsequent moves of the piece.

The computer decided it would be best to promote the rook on the next move, but for that it had to move even though it was protected on the square where it was dropped.


In multiplayer, what happens if a player you're attacking dies before combat damage is dealt? I can't work this one out. For example:

I declare a creature attacking one of my opponents (who's on 5 life). Before he/she declares blockers another player casts Beacon of Destruction (or similar), reducing his/her life to 0. They would then leave the game, correct?

What happens to my attacking creature, does it still attack the player who is no longer there,  or is it no longer attacking?

In a similar situation, if my opponent has a planeswalker and I attack it, if that planeswalker is destroyed or exiled before it gets to combat damage what happens with the attacking creatures?

My guess is the damage is still dealt to the player/planeswalker no longer there and therefore doesn't do anything except tap the creature, but I'm not sure about this.

Players leave the game as a state based effect, the next time any player would receive priority if their life total is zero or less.

104.3b If a player’s life total is 0 or less, he or she loses the game the next time a player would receive priority. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)

In the above example, after you declared your creatures as attackers (and made all necessary costs associated with declaring them as attackers...usually this is is just tapping the creatures), there is a chance for all players to cast instants or use activated abilities, and one of the other players cast BoD. Everyone once again has a chance to react to BoD, but if no one does, BoD resolves, and then the active player (you) receive priority. At this point, the opponent leaves the game.
Your attacking creature remains an attacking creature until the end of your combat phase.
In a non MP game, there would be no difference. Attacking creatures remain attacking creatures until the end of the combat phase.

508.1j Each chosen creature still controlled by the active player becomes an attacking creature. It remains an attacking creature until it’s removed from combat or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first. See rule 506.4.

Damage is never dealt to nonexistent players/creatures/planeswalkers.

800.4d If combat damage would be assigned to a player who has left the game, that damage simply isn’t assigned.
510.1b An unblocked creature assigns its combat damage to the player or planeswalker it’s attacking. If it isn’t currently attacking anything (if, for example, it was attacking a planeswalker that has left the battlefield), it assigns no combat damage.
510.1c A blocked creature assigns its combat damage to the creatures blocking it. If no creatures are currently blocking it (if, for example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns no combat damage.


Look at card under Masterplan? Masterplan is a shadows artifact that reads:

Play: Put a card from your hand facedown beneath Masterplan.
Omni: Play the card beneath Masterplan. Sacrifice Masterplan.

Am I allowed to look at the card under Masterplan (assuming it is under my control) at any point later in the game?

I expect they'll need to FAQ it, possibly either making a new Game Area or have the card be in a special Masterplan area.

Technically, since the card under Masterplan did not change Game Area, it is still in your hand. This means you can look at it, play it (if you choose the correct house), discard or Archive it.


Has Candyland always had a lose-a-turn square? I just played a brand new version of Candyland and noticed several squares that cause a player to lose a turn if they land on them. The squares are decorated with licorice to associate them with the nefarious Lord Licorice, who was added as a character in the 1980s.

Has Candyland always had lose-a-turn spaces, and if so, how were they decorated in the pre Lord Licorice era?

No.  The version I played didn't have those; it had three spaces with "sticky" dots (largish, round, and black).

  Before the 2004 version, there were three colored spaces marked with a dot. A player who lands on such a space is stuck (all cards are ignored) until a card is drawn of the same color as the square. In the 2004 version, dot spaces were replaced with licorice spaces that prompt the player landing on it to simply lose his or her next turn. If you land on a piece of gum, you go back to the start.


Does a stalker monsters always stay if there is an investigator in its current area or location? The Dunwich rules don't seem to explicitly say this on page 6. Do these monsters stay when there is an investigator with them, or do they perhaps even opt to pursue one of lower sneak if they are adjacent but there is already one on its area? I figured they stay, but don't see a direct reference to this.

The basic monster movement rules state that monsters don't move when they are in the same space as an investigator.

There isn't any reason to think that the stalker addition in Dunwich changes this in any way.


Do we really need the Urbanist? I just got Quadropolis, and I'm confused by the Urbanist rule.  The rule is that, when you take a tile, you place the Urbanist in the place where the tile used to be, and the player after you can't point an architect at the Urbanist.

This seems unnecessarily complicated.  In practice we regularly forget to move the Urbanist.  Also, people frequently seem to forget that they can't point an architect at the Urbanist -- I've caught a few people doing this, but I'm not sure how many have done it and not been noticed.

Here's the calculation I usually perform.  I have three opponents, and clever placement of the Urbanist will inconvenience at most one of them.  It probably won't inconvenience them very much, since they probably have two or three tiles they want, and multiple ways to get those tiles.  If it does inconvenience them, at best I am kingmaking by hurting one opponent but not the other two.  On the other hand, if I take a suboptimal tile in order to inconvenience one of my opponents, that could hurt me a lot!

Also, it takes me a lot of thinking to figure out which tiles are even good for me.  If I also want to spend time evaluating my opponent's board state, that starts to get into analysis paralysis, and I want to respect the other players' time by not taking forever to evaluate something that's probably inconsequential.

Why was this rule added?  If we ignore the rule, what mechanics in the game will break?

(I suspect the rule might be more important in a two-player game.  I've been playing with four players.)

The rule was added because, as the sides of the board get more and more crowded, the urbanist blocks access to tiles.

It then becomes a question of which is more important -- getting the specific tile you desperately want, or taking a less optimal tile that blocks your opponent from getting the tile he desperately wants?


Is there an unofficial term for an artifact that produces mana? Some terms have an unofficial but widely known meaning in Magic jargon. For example, a "cantrip" is a spell that lets you draw a card, and a "bear" is a vanilla 2/2 (with "vanilla" having its own meaning!)

What about a card that produces mana like Sol Ring, Rakdos Signet, or Talisman of Indulgence? Do they have an unofficial name?

The canonical name for these seems to be 'Mana Rocks', probably so named after one of the very first, Fellwar Stone.


How many points are won/lost during this exchange? $$ six=two
$$ -.a.....
$$ -.......
$$ -...OOOO
$$ -4....XO
$$ -1OOOOOX
$$ -XOXXO.X
$$ -2X5.XX.
$$ -3......
$$ --------

White territory around a is safe.
Move 2 and 4 can be swapped for identical result.

Most moves have a name (at least in Chinese) I believe 2 would be called 破 (pò) = break (not absolutely sure)
Does it have a name in english?

More importantly, in terms of points what is lost or won by both sides?

First of all, moves 2 and 4 absolutely cannot be swapped for the same result. If white plays at 4 first, black would connect at 2. And white has to spend another move protecting the cut. It's a whole world of difference.

Secondly, the name for white 2 is "throw-in". The corresponding Chinese name is "扑", which means "to leap".

Now, let's analyze the situation:

$$ six=two
$$ -.......
$$ -.......
$$ -...OOOO
$$ -4....XO
$$ -1OOOOOX
$$ -XOXXO.X
$$ -2X5.XX.
$$ -3......
$$ --------

versus

$$ Optimal exchange
$$ -.......
$$ -.......
$$ -...OOOO
$$ -c....XO
$$ -2OOOOOX
$$ -XOXXO.X
$$ -1Xa.XX.
$$ -b......
$$ --------

In the actual game, black presumably captures two stones (2 and 6) while white also captures two stones, so that part balances out. Compared to the optimal solution (lower figure), black put 2 more stones in his own territory (at a and b in the lower figure) while white only put one more (c). So that's a -1 point for black right there.

The true loss for black lies in the fact that black could have had sente (lower figure), instead of gote as happened in the actual game. The point value of that is dependent on the rest of the board, but is usually quite high.


Removing the Luck from Stone Age Stone Age is one of my personal favourite games. The game dynamics are excellent and requires plenty of skill and strategy to win, with the only exception of the dice roll when determining resource.

Has anyone modified the rules to make the game less dependant on the luck of the dice? I find it a shame to lose a game due to luck, rather than skill.

Sure, visit the Tool Hut.  Tools are explicitly there to negate the luck factor.

Another option is to get more people.  There will still be luck in the rolls, but if you put two people on a space instead of one, you'll produce more each time.


What are the rules on revokes in bridge game If "Sam" calls a revoke and he is incorrect, does the other side receive any score points for Sam's incorrect call?

In duplicate bridge under ACBL rules, revokes that are established are not corrected until the end of play. As such, an accusation of a revoke that was in error would not lead to any benefit for the accusing side, and so no penalty would be assessed them unless they were acting in an unsportsmanlike manner in the eyes of the director (either the manner in which they made the accusation, or in excessively making baseless accusations, though the latter I've never seen be an issue).

Revokes that are not established are typically resolved simply by asking the player if they have another card of the suit they showed out of; if they assert they do not, then play would continue, and as before the revoke could be ascertained at the end of the match (in which case it is treated as an established revoke).

See ACBL law 61B:

  B. Right to Inquire about a Possible Revoke

    Declarer may ask a defender who has failed to follow suit whether he has a card of the suit led.
    (a) Dummy may ask declarer (but see Law 43B2(b)).

    (b) Dummy may not ask a defender and Law 16B may apply.
    Defenders may ask declarer and, unless prohibited by the Regulating Authority, may ask one another (at the risk of creating unauthorized
    information).

Note 3:; defenders may inquire to declarer or each other whether they are out of a suit (and I commonly do this;  "No spades, partner").  However, unless you are extremely consistent in how and when you do this (meaning, unless you do this every time your partner first shows out of a suit, and do so in the same tone every time), you may be creating unauthorized information.

In that case, a penalty may be assessed by the director if it is determined that UI existed and may have been acted upon.  This will depend on the situation, though, there is no explicitly prescribed penalty for UI other than attempting to rectify the situation.

Thus, if a defender believes a revoke has occurred and calls the attention of the table to it, and is incorrect, that UI may exist; that is where a penalty could come.  Declarer would not be penalized (unless he/she acted in an unsportsmanlike manner) as declarer can never benefit from UI.


Mounting a Hive Crone with Harpy parts I am new in this game and right now mounting my first unit: a Hive Crone.

In the box it contains the pieces for mounting either a Harpy or a Hive Crone.

I already decided I want the Hive Crone, but while mounting it I realized that some parts of the Harpy are coolest - I like the head and the tail more, for example.

I tried to google this but I exactly don't even know how to formulate the question...

So here is my attempt.

Are there any rules regarding mounting a unit with other parts and attempting to play with it?

Would I be able to go to a tournament with my Hive Crone with the Harpy head (that is, without a gun in the tongue, for example)

Thanks everyone.

Yes, you can make the head swap. There are 2 rules of thumb for converting Games Workshop models:

Friendly games

Here most things go. If you say 'this model counts as a Hive Crone' before you start playing, then nobody will object.

Tournament games

The rule is WYSIWIG (what you see is what you get). Nobody is going to complain that they can't see your model's mouth weapon. They know what the model represents. I've not had any problems adding extra legs, spikes etc. to my own Tyranids.

In summary, its your model - you can make & paint it how you like.


What happens when running out of Cherry Trees in Tokaido: Crossroads? In Tokaido, when you play with the Crossroads expansion, you can choose a Panorama or a Cherry Tree card.

What happens when the 6 Cherry Tree cards are gone and someone lands on a pano spot?

You simply don't get one.  The rules for crossroads state :-

  When a Traveler stops at a Panorama (Sea, Mountain, or Rice Paddy)
  space, he must choose between:  • Taking a Panorama card of the
  corresponding type (basic game rules).  • Taking a Cherry Tree card
  (if the card is available)

So if a Cherry card is not available you just don't get one and must take the panorama. Of course remembering the basic game rules :-

  Each traveler can create only a single panorama of each type; a
  traveler who completes a panorama can no longer stop on the spaces
  corresponding to that type (Sea, Mountain, or Paddy).

To clarify If you have completed the panorama corresponding to that space and the cherry tree cards have all gone you may not choose to land on that space.


In MTG, do Werewolves transform due to an out of range turn? Or an out of range player's spells? The werewolves of Innistrad (such as Reckless Waif) transform from the following abilities:

[Human Side]
At the beginning of each upkeep, if no spells were cast last turn, transform [this card].
[Werewolf Side]
At the beginning of each upkeep, if a player cast two or more spells last turn, transform [this card].

I am not sure how these behave in a multiplayer game involving Limited Range. Suppose I am playing a 4 person, attack left, Limited Range of 1 player, so there is one person in my range on my left, one in my range on my right, and one out of my range. In that game...
Are my werewolves affected by the out of range player's spells?
Are my werewolves affected by other player's spells on the out of range player's turn?
Those are the important two questions, but I think this might be easier to understand/answer with examples, so I'm specifically curious what happens in the following situations:

I have a human side werewolf such as Reckless Waif on the battlefield and no one plays any spells during the out of range player's turn, will the Reckless Waif transform? (On the next upkeep, of course)

I have a human side werewolf such as Reckless Waif on the battlefield and the out of range player plays one or more spells on their turn, but no one else does, will the Reckless Waif transform?

I have a human side werewolf such as Reckless Waif on the battlefield and the out of range player plays one or more spells during an in range turn, but no one else does, will the Reckless Waif transform?

I have a werewolf side werewolf such as Merciless Predator on the battlefield and the out of range player plays two or more spells on their turn, but no one else does, will the Merciless Predator transform?

I have a werewolf side werewolf such as Merciless Predator on the battlefield and a player in my range plays two or more spells during the out of range player's turn, will the Merciless Predator transform?

I have a werewolf side werewolf such as Merciless Predator on the battlefield and the out of range player plays two or more spells during an in range turn, but no one else does, will the Merciless Predator transform?

Are there any other common situations I missed?
EDIT: I mistakenly called the range "Spell Range" but I really meant "Limited Range of Influence", referenced by section 801 in the comp rules. I've read the section, and I THINK I know the result, but I am still very interested in another human's interpretation of the rules, because the result seems somewhat counter-intuitive to me.

It would seem that the trigger does not even go off unless both the player currently taking their turn and the previous turn were both inside your range of influence.

  801.7. A triggered ability doesn‘t trigger unless its trigger event happens entirely within the range of  influence of its source‘s
  controller.

On turns that the trigger does go off, one expects out of range spells would be completely ignored.


Fury of Dracula 3rd ed. - Bats Token and Defeated Hunter In Fury of Dracula 3rd edition, if a hunter who has a bats token under him/her gets defeated, does the bats token travel with the hunter to the hospital?

If yes, since hospitals are adjacent only to the attached city, does this mean that Dracula actually helps the hunter by moving him/her to the attached city, thus sparing the hunter from having to spend the action to move to the attached city themselves? Or is the effect of the bats token suspended until it is more useful to Dracula (like in case of hunter already being delayed, or hunter being in a city with a fog token, see Rules Reference)?

The rules say:

  The bats token functions as a reminder that Dracula can move
  that hunter to an adjacent city during that hunter’s next action.

When the hunter is defeated and moved to another city, it isn't of the hunters own volition, but it is a must and doesn't cost the hunter an action.

then:

  For the purposes of game rules and effects, if a hunter is in
  a hospital space, he is adjacent to and not in the location
  attached to that hospital.

  While on a hospital space, the only actions a hunter may
  perform are a modified version of either the supply or move
  action, as follows:
  » Supply: The hunter may perform a supply action to draw
  one item card. He always draws one item card but cannot
  draw an event card.
  » Move: The hunter may move from the hospital to the city
  attached to that hospital.

So when the hunter wants to do any action in the hospital (eg supply or move) Dracula must move him to an adjacent city, which is, in this instance, the city attached to the hospital.


When using Talix's power in a two player game, do you return one or both cards to the turn deck? Talix's, available on Aeon's End: The New Age, power reads:

Destroy two sparks in hand. If you do, shuffle your turn order card into the turn order deck. OR Gravehold gains 5 life.

If you are playing a 2 player game, each player has two turn order cards. Then, if you use his first power on your second turn that round (meaning both your turn order cards are in the discard pile) do you place both your turn order cards into the pile or just one?
While the wording on the power seems to indicate it is a single one, it also reads like you just have one "your turn order card". In a two-player game, you have two, so it might make sense to move both back? Is there an official answer?

As far as I know, there is no official answer on this, nonetheless, it's the last turn order card, as in, the active one. You've got a similar ability with Lash, he only gets one card. If you're playing a 3 player game, and got the wildcard to trigger your turn, I'd say you must put this one in the turn order, with no forced play on draw.


Deathbringer Regent and Phantasmal Image ETB Clause Deathbringer Regent is a dragon that reads

  When Deathbringer Regent enters the battlefield, if you cast it from your hand and there are five or more other creatures on the battlefield, destroy all other creatures.

And Phantasmal Image:

  You may have ~ enter the battlefield as a copy of any  creature on the battlefield, except it’s an Illusion in addition to its  other types and it gains “When this creature becomes the target of a spell or ability, sacrifice it.

My question is if I play Phantasmal Image copying a Deathbringer Regent, it does copy the ETB but does it also count as "cast from your hand" and destroy all other creatures if there are 5 or more other creatures?

Yes, it will count as having been cast from your hand.
It's important to note that a creature spell and the creature it eventually creates are different objects; putting a creature on the battlefield is the effect of a creature spell. If you cast a creature spell from your hand, and if an effect changes the characteristics of that creature as it enters the battlefield, the creature spell was still cast from the hand.

601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect.
608.3. If the object that’s resolving is a permanent spell, its resolution involves a single step (unless it’s an Aura). The spell card becomes a permanent and is put onto the battlefield under the control of the spell’s controller.

Phantasmal Image's effect is a replacement effect.

614.1c Effects that read “[This permanent] enters the battlefield with . . . ,” “As [this permanent] enters the battlefield . . . ,” or “[This permanent] enters the battlefield as . . . “ are replacement effects.

In your case, it replaces the effect "put a Phantasmal Image creature on the battlefield" with "put a copy of a particular Deathbringer Regent creature on the battlefield". All other things remain the same, in particular that the spell was originally cast from the hand.


How does Zndrsplt work with Krark's Thumb? How do cards like Zndrsplt, Eye of Wisdom (and Okaun, Eye of Chaos) work with Krark's Thumb? For example, if I win 2 coin flips, even if I only keep one, does it trigger Zyndrplt's card draw effect twice? Or does "winning" a coin flip only count once I pick one of the two to keep?

Krark's Thumb creates a replacement effect for flipping a coin, saying "flip two coins and ignore one. (then determine whether you won, if required)" parenthetical mine

Note that this is only part of flipping as coin as per:

  705.1. An effect that instructs a player to flip a coin may care whether that player wins or loses the flip. To flip a coin for such an effect, the player flips the coin and calls “heads” or “tails.” If the call matches the result, the player wins the flip. Otherwise, the player loses the flip. Only the player who flips the coin wins or loses the flip; no other players are involved.

From this we can determine that Krark's Thumb does not mean you instead attempt to win 2 different coin flips and pick one result to use, you instead flip two coins, call heads or tails, then ignore one of the coins before determining the result. This means you still have only one coin flip you are winning or losing, despite flipping two coins to determine it.


How to deal with being a 'dungeon master' and the other players finding the missions too hard? My friends and I are playing Star Wars Imperial Assault: Jabba's Realm. My friends play as a team of rebels against me, the Imperial player.

We played the base game campaign and found it to be quite balanced, but the Jabba's Realm campaign is very hard for the rebels. I think about the game afterwards and I can't see a way that the rebels could've played better. It has come to a point where I feel bad for my friends that they're running into a brick wall. These are the problems they come across:

Running out of time
Too many enemies to deal with
Rebel characters not able to pump out enough damage

My question is, how can I make the missions possible, and therefore more enjoyable for all of us to play?

Efficiency and focus is the name of the game in Imperial Assault. Let's look at your specific issues:

  Running out of time

My group ran into a similar issue until we realized that many of the missions in Imperial Assault are not designed to be completed by "clearing the dungeon". Instead, we had to pay careful attention to the specific mission objectives and focus on the most efficient way to do that, often completely ignoring many of the enemies. This may help your players as well, and as the Imperial player (basically the Game Master in classical RPG terms) you can assist them by reminding them of what is important before and during the mission.

  Too many enemies to deal with

Similar to the time issue, the answer to this is to pick-and-choose what is worth fighting and what isn't. Unlike Descent 2E (another FFG tactical miniatures game), you can move through enemy figures in Imperial Assault, meaning it's almost impossible for them to completely block you from reaching an objective. Some figures are truly too dangerous to leave alive, while some are mostly just a nuisance that can be ignored (and potentially left behind if your team moves fast enough across the board).

  Rebel characters not able to pump out enough damage

For those times when you need to pump out damage, coordinated fire can be very important to completely eliminate a target in one round (instead of just damaging several separate targets). It is also important to note that status effects can be more powerful than any amount of damage: an immobilized melee character with no targets within reach is a non-entity, and a 1-hit immobilize can be much easier to achieve than a 1-shot kill. Similarly a stunned ranged character with no targets in line-of-sight is also negated for a full round, since they cannot move-and-shoot that round.

One final note I will offer is that not all heroes are created equal. By comparison to each other, some specific heroes are really great in any situation, other heroes are bottom-of-the-list no matter what situation you set up for them, and a lot are hanging out in the middle. Ranged characters tend to have an advantage in efficiency over melee because they have much more flexibility in where they can position themselves. Your Rebel players may need to accept a compromise to "I want to be a Jedi" in the name of effectiveness.


Why is 20 the starting life total for Magic the Gathering? How would the game be different if this number was changed? To my knowledge, each player starts with 20 life in nearly every MTG game ever played. But why exactly was the number 20 chosen? How would the game be different if we started with more or less life? If my friends and I started playing with a higher or lower starting life total, how would that affect our deck construction decisions? Which colors, types of cards, or general strategies would become more or less powerful?

I like shuuja and thesunneversets' answers very much.

There's a theory of Magic that says every matchup is two roles: "beatdown" and "control". The thinking is that, regardless of your actual deck types, one deck's going to have a stronger endgame (putting it in the "control" role), so the other deck has to hurry up and win the game before it's too late (putting it in the "beatdown" role). Raising the life total would naturally make it harder for any deck in the "beatdown" role that wins on damage, however obliquely.

Any deck can conceivably end up in the beatdown role, so don't think that this lets slow decks off the hook entirely. The most obvious disadvantage is to fast aggro decks, because they're more or less playing the beatdown role in every match, and their win condition is, almost universally, dealing 20 damage to the opponent (a few are poison-based instead). Modern-day sets are often balanced under the assumption that a Red-Deck-Wins-style deck should be reasonably competitive but not dominating; this means that the deck's creatures should be able to reliably kill a "goldfish" in around 4 turns (at which point an opponent can drop Day of Judgment to reset the field).

The ability of archetypes like Zoo, Red Deck Wins, and Tempered Steel to deliver fast beatdown sets the pace for the whole environment: other decks play low-cost disruption because not doing so means you get blown out by aggro before you actually get to do your thing. Remove that pressure and you create room for much slower decks. Commander is a great example. With 40 life, you can safely focus on playing high-cost powerful cards and devote your first few turns to hand-sculpting and mana ramp. Mid-priced cards -- strong three-drops and four-drops -- are still very important, but you're likely to see many decks that don't play anything but ramp cards and cheap removal in their low slots. It's possible to build a successful aggro-style Commander deck, but you have to either heavily disrupt the other players' early build-up (so that your dudes have enough time to finish them off while their decks are still in stage 1) or play combo-style elements (e.g. Heartless Hidetsugu) to seal the deal.

In regular 20-life Magic, Skittles is a control finisher. In 40-life EDH, he's an aggro general. That's how much life totals matter!

Similarly, imagine a 10-life game. You go first, play a Goblin Guide, swing for 2. Before I even play my first land I've lost 20% of my life total and I'm facing a four-turn clock. Do you have two Lightning Bolts in your hand? Goblin Grenade and Gut Shot? Fling and Mutagenic Growth? Practically any two or three fast cards will be enough to make me scoop my one land and go home. I have to have some very strong plays on turn 1 (or on your turn 2) in order to even see my own turn 2. What must my deck look like, then, if I'm playing combo and control?

So, in effect, futzing with starting life not only affects the pacing of the game and the relative strength of different decks but also completely changes the window of what's viable in a competitive deck.


Open source programming toolkits for modeling table top games Are there any open source programming libraries, perhaps in Python or Lua for example, for modeling table top games to help with design and testing work?

If you're interested in testing the aesthetics and flow of the game (rather than fully automated simulation for balance purposes), then I'd look at Tabletop Simulator.

From their site:

  Tabletop Simulator is the only simulator where you can let your aggression out by flipping the table! There are no rules to follow: just you, a physics sandbox, and your friends. Make your own games and play how YOU want! Unlimited gaming possibilities!


Mahjong - declaring another player dead I played the other day with a very experienced player who held the 2(same) of the 1 tile that I needed to go win - she stated based upon where she knew I was playing, she was declaring my hand dead and that I would need to sit out the rest of the game and then pay whoever wins.  Upon reading the info here, am I wrong, but, shouldn't I have been able to continue to play in the event that I would have thrown a tile someone else might me wanting.  If she had thrown the tile I needed, she would have paid $1.60 to me.  If my hand is dead because she didn't want to throw the needed tile, then wouldn't her hand be dead and she unable to play too?  Very confused on this rule.

I'll be assuming you're playing Riichi, that's the only ruleset I know which has "dead hands".

If I understand your question correctly, I don't see why she would declare your hand dead at all in this situation. I take it you declared Riichi in that game. If she called you dead because you could not win, since she kept your winning tiles, that is not a valid action for several reasons:

She would be dead as well (unless she had another wait).
You (or she) could still deal into another players hand.
Not being able to win does not make your hand dead, it is simply "not able to win anymore".
Neither you nor her should even know about which tiles are in possession of which player.

Maybe there was a misunderstanding and she meant to say "you can't win anymore"?


Why do the opposing sides of a D20 generally add up to 21 Most D20s I own (with the exception of poorly made foam ones or MTG spin-down dice) seem to have all opposing sides add up to 21 (20 + 1, 15 + 6, etc).  Why is this?  Who started this?

Opposite sides add up to 21 on a d20 for the same reason that opposite sides add up to 7 on a d6: if there's a manufacturing or design defect, and the die ends up slightly flatter than intended, then the average result of the die will not change.

Consider a d6 that ends up a bit flat: two sides opposite each other will both have an increased chance of being landed on. But since these two sides' numbers are "opposite" to each other, they will not affect the average of the die. For example, a d6 might have a 1/3 chance of landing on a 1, a 1/3 chance of landing on a 6, and, and a 1/12 chance of landing on each of the other faces. The average of this seriously-deformed die is: 1 * 1/3 + 2 * 1/12 + 3 * 1/12 + 4 * 1/12 + 5 * 1/12 + 6 * 1/3 = 3.5, the same as a normal die.

Of course, various other deformities (malformed corner, air bubble in the plastic, some enterprising fellow put a little lead in the die, etc.) will still play merry hob with the probabilities in an unfair way, but a flattened die will be somewhat fair in that its biases favor both high and low numbers equally. The layout for d8, d10, d12, and d20 dice were probably created from this same idea to make the dice somewhat fair if they're flattened.


What impact will Kickstarter have on how Designer Board Games are released? There have been some notable releases through Kickstarter.

Eminent Domain - one of the earlier big successes.
Eaten By Zombies
D-Day Dice - most successful board game kickstarter to date.

How do you expect Kickstarter to effect the Designer Board Game ecosystem? Will Kickstarter flood the market with too many bad games from people trying to get rich. Will it kill the industry like Napster did to the music industry? Will it be more like Youtube, lowering the entry field for exciting new designers, like Youtube brought us many new entertainers.

Many kickstarter games (at least on the RPG side) have either demo modules or playtest rules, which you can read BEFORE committing. I've seen a couple on the boardgame side as well, where the rules PDF was posted; the kickstarter was for a nice set.

I can see boardgames relying upon components to move stuff via kickstarter.

Given the typical mode for Kickstarter, you have to get people trusting that you (1) have a clue and (2) made at least a passable game, and then get them to promise money.

If you can't convince them, then you don't get your cash, and they don't get charged.

If you convince them, but they dislike the game and/or components, they can leave bad feedback... so after two or three tries, you're not going to get any but the most clueless.

So no, it's not going to bring a rash of get-rich-quick scammers. It's self-limiting.


Where can I find a list of cooperative "beat the game" games? I know of Pandemic and I remember having played a game about mountain climbing where the goal was to as a team climb the mountain and get back down safely but there must be more of these games where one play as a team rather than against each other. Where can I find a good list of such games?

BoardGameGeek's advanced search can be used to find a large list of co-op games. You can then sort or filter this list in several helpful ways. This form is a little bit daunting, but powerful. From the "Board Game Mechanic" list, select "Co-operative play". You will probably also want to check the "Filter Expansions" box and, if you are interested in widely available games, a minimum rating and minimum number of user ratings such as 200. (Here is a direct link which will perform that query for you.) You might want to sort the results by Geek Rating, which penalizes games that have fewer ratings, or by Average Rating, which does not.


Is Vivien of the Wilds + Wilderness Reclamation a competitive combo? Vivien, Champion of the Wilds is a new planeswalker which allows casting creatures with instant speed. I want to combine it with Wilderness Reclamation to be able to double my mana during my end step and cast a giant Hydroid Krasis.  The best case scenario for the deck is:

turn 1 - Llanowar Elves
turn 2 - Incubation Druid
turn 3 - Vivien, Champion of the Wilds
turn 4 - Wilderness Reclamation + adapt the Incubation Druid
turn 5 - Cast a 12/12 Hydroid Krasis during the endstep

Will it be competitive in Standard?

Also adding a biogenic ooze and simic ascendancy may win you a game. Maybe also add hadanas climb?

Let me start by saying this is a really cool idea, and it may be a very fun deck to play in casual format.  Alternatively, you could add this combo to an existing competitive deck that is already leveraging pieces of this combo in other ways (there is at least one suggestion in the comments).

However, this combo on its own is very unlikely to be competitive in standard given how many pieces you need for it to go off.  It's a three card combo at it's heart (Vivien + Wilderness Reclimation + Krasis) that also requires mana acceleration to go off on a reasonable timeframe.  The best-case you present is a turn 7 win, and your whole first 5 turns were spent setting it up, leaving you little buffer to react to your opponent or handle disruption.  On top of that, your plan is very brittle; most combos are vulnerable to control, but yours is also vulnerable to burn and aggro due to many of your key mana sources being creatures and one of your key cards being a planeswalker.

Compare your combo to Carnage Tyrant + Blanchwood Armor, which requires a similar mana base.  This creates a similar sized beater on a similar timeframe.  However, it has several advantages:

Carnage Tyrant is resistant to both control and burn
You can still win with Carnage Tyrant even if you don't draw Blanchwood Armor
It's mono-green, meaning you don't need a complex mana base and can't get color-screwed
You can do other things in your early turns, like Commune With Dinosaurs to help set you up or Vine Mare to defend you from an aggro deck or start an early offense against a control deck.

That is not to say Hydroid Krasis is worse than Carnage Tyrant.  In fact, Krasis is a competitive card in the current standard, but it tends to find its home in control decks rather than combo, especially since card advantage is a big focus of control and Krasis doubles as card advantage and a finisher.

Another thing to notice about decks that use Krasis in the current meta is that (aside from Llanowar Elves) they tend to focus on creatures with the "Explore" ability rather than creatures that tap directly for mana.  While Explore is slower in terms of mana ramp, it is more resilient as it is still relying on land-based mana, and it lets you do a bit of deck filtering/thinning as well.  In your case in particular, you want land mana rather than creature mana because Wilderness Reclamation only untaps lands.


Blinds & Antes confusion I'm new to Texas Hold Em.  I know the difference between a blind and an ante but I'm confused as to how they are played. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

An ante is put up by each player. Then two players also put a small and big blind?  So now if someone who didn't put up a blind wants to play do they now give an additional amount equal to the big blind to play, or do they subtract what they've already anted from the big blind and just put up the difference?

Also how is the ante amount determined in regards to blinds?

Using Roberts Rules an ante is defined as

  A prescribed amount posted before the start of a hand by all players.

So the ante has no effect on the amount paid by blinds.  Each player posts there ante before the hand starts.  These chips are then moved to the pot and its in effect 'dead money'  it has no bearing on how much players play in blinds.

I'm not aware of a hard and fast formula for calculating an ante in live tournaments its roughly the size of the big blind divided by number of players max at a table.

so in live games I've played is Big blind in 200 the ante is usually 25.  This will probably vary from game to game and casino to casino.

In recent games I've played the rules have changed to the Big Blind or button posting the ante for all players.

So if the rules are "button antes" and the blinds are 100-200 the button also posts 200 before the hand begins.  The advantage of doing this is speeding up the time takes to take the antes in rather than every player all posting the same amount each time, invariably one player always having to be reminded and change sorted if needed.


Do I need to buy data packs to be competitive? I've seen that there are tournaments of Android: Netrunner.

Regarding data packs, is it necessary to buy all the data packs to have a chance to win those tournaments?

I guess the cards allowed to be played in tournaments are described to players before the tournaments and the constructed decks have to stick to the tournaments rules...

If I stick to the core set of cards, do I have a chance of winning a game against someone who has all the expansions?

In theory, all Android: Netrunner cards are fairly well balanced, and the core set provides a good broad base for building decks, but in practice I think buying data packs is necessary to remain competitive.

You will probably find that you will struggle against a player of similar ability even in a casual environment if they have all data packs and you have none. Competitive tournament players will have two (or commonly three) core sets and every data pack.

Having said that, you don't need to buy every data pack. A little research into what kind of deck you'd like to build (possibly using proxies) will allow you to pinpoint data packs containing cards that will help your deck in particular.

One final comment worthy of note: how you play with your deck is often more important than how you build your deck. A good player with a bad deck will often overcome a bad player with a good deck.


Maximum number of coins from a tech? On page 26 of the rulebook it says

  Coin tokens placed on a tech card as a reward for accomplishing a
  certain task are treated just like coins on the map, except that there
  is a maximum number of times a given task will provide a coin token.
  Coin tokens advance the economy dial when gained and cannot be lost

Since there are ways to remove a coin token from a tech, how is the maximum number on the tech card interpreted?

a) The maximum number on the card means the maximum number of times that you may use this ability.

b) The maximum number on the card means the maximum number of coins that can be placed on the card using this ability.

Example

The pottery tech card reads max 4. Player A uses this four times (on four different rounds) and gets four coin tokens on it. Player B plays a culture card which enables him to discard a coin token on a technology card, and discards one of the coin tokens from the player A's Pottery card.

Can player A use the ability on the Pottery card fifth time to get a fourth coin token on the tech card?

From the Official FAQ v2:

Q: What exactly does “(max 4)” mean on techs such as Democracy, Code
of Laws, or Pottery?
A: It means that a player can only have four coin
tokens on the Tech card at one time. If a coin token is removed from
the card, the player can fulfill the condition on the card to add
another coin token to it.


Do bonus coin powers include territories controlled by races in decline? Some of the special powers give bonus coins based on regions you "occupy at turn end." Does this include regions controlled by your previous race that has gone into decline?

For example, if you have a race in decline that occupies two forest regions and your current active race has the Forest power, do you get two additional coins for the forest regions?

No,

Each race is separate.  In this case you would not get the additional coins for forests controlled by the race in decline.

From the rules, page 5

  The Regions these In Decline tokens occupy also each contribute
  1 Victory coin to the player; Though the Race banner and Special
  Power benefits no longer contribute any bonus coins, unless
  explicitly stated otherwise in said Race or Special Power benefit.


When will a summon/monster step on a trap? Follow-up question to Which monster does the summon focus on? Long way around, avoiding traps, or get stuck behind a player?.

If I replace the first player on Path 3 with a trap... would the summon then focus on Bones 9 and take Path 2? My assumption is yes.

If I replace the first player on Path 3 with a trap AND put a trap on Path 2... would the summon then focus on Bones 6 and take Path 1? (getting stuck behind that player?)

Or would the summon focus on Bones 9 and take Path 3 stepping on the trap because all of the paths that could actually reach a hex from which to attack go through traps and so it has no other choice and takes the shortest path through a trap? If it does decide to walk through the trap and that trap would do enough damage to kill the summon, would it kill itself or would it go for Asimov's 3rd law and preserve itself?

Following https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/a/47856/20168.

For the first scenario:

Focus: Living Bones 9
Target Hex: The hex between the door and Living Bones 9.
Path: Path 2

The reason for this is that monsters/summons will treat traps/hazardous terrain as obstacles unless there is no other path. See the answer in https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/a/47856/20168 for more details.

If there was a trap on path 2, then the summon would take path 4 and step on the trap (assuming it had enough movement to do so). This happens regardless of whether the trap would kill the summon or not. I.E.

Focus: Living Bones 6
Target Hex: The empty hex adjacent to Living Bones 6 and Living Corpse 8.
Path: Path 4


What is the reason for investigators not being eliminated when Yig awakens? When Yig awakens, one of the rule items says:

  When an investigator is defeated or devoured, that player is not eliminated

What is the significance of this rule?  What is the non-eliminated player doing for the rest of the game?

The player chooses a new investigator and keeps playing, which isn't the case for most ancient ones.


Does a card like Languish count as a damage-dealing sorcery? I was thinking of using Mark of Asylum to protect my creatures from cards like Languish, but does giving all creatures -4/-4 count as damage dealt in the same way, for instance, Swirling Sandstorm does?

No, only spells and abilities that actually say damage deal damage. (Creatures can also deal damage in combat or when fighting, of course.) Languish just changes power and toughness.


Fiend Binder's triggered ability I have a question about Fiend Binder's triggered ability regarding the stack. I just want to make sure I'm understanding it correctly.

It states:

  Whenever Fiend Binder attacks, tap target creature defending player controls.

It triggers whenever she attacks, but it also says to tap defending player's creature. At first glance I interpret this as when I attack with her I can just tap away any creature I want, but I a have suspicion this is wrong and it only qualifies when the player defends, which would result in what? Me tapping any other creature that is not defending?

I'm certain my question is straight forward, but just to make sure I understand let me run a scenario: If I control just Fiend Binder, and my opponent happens to just only control one creature also, am I permitted to tap my opponent's creature leaving him or her open for damage, or would nothing happen in this case as there is no other creature to tap?

Appreciate any clarification, I couldn't seem to really find straight forward answer as I've only been playing magic for almost a year and reading from the rule book is sometimes cryptic to me.

You would get to tap the only creature defending player controls before they can block.  When you actually declare attacks, what happens is that the Fiend Binder becomes tapped and is attacking a specific player.
That player is the defending player, so at that point the ability goes on the stack and you can tap one of their creatures. Defending player is defined before the defender blocks.

  508.4. If an ability of an attacking creature refers to a defending player, or a spell or ability refers to both an attacking creature and a defending player, then unless otherwise specified, the defending player it's referring to is the player that creature was attacking at the time it became an attacking creature that combat, or the controller of the planeswalker that creature was attacking at the time it became an attacking creature that combat.

In a multiplayer game, even though all opponents are generally considered defending players, the ability can only target a creature that the player this specific creature had attacked controls:

  508.4a. In a multiplayer game, any rule, object, or effect that refers to a "defending player" refers to one specific defending player, not to all of the defending players. (...)


Haunt #43 The Star Sickness very confused We were playing this haunt tonight and it was really confusing so hopefully someone can clear up some questions for me I don't really get how this scenario works.

Why after each round are we rolling for damage? I can understand the infected people are rolling, but why everyone? The way I see it, if you aren't infected (yet) than why are you rolling for what appears to be random damage? If you have been infected I can see why you would roll for this.

What is the point of the traitor trying to infect people? This I can't wrap my head around. It doesn't really feel like a traitor at all, just the carrier who is trying to infect everyone but for what purpose? I know that the tokens are chosen randomly. For example, the person infecting is player A and player B takes the infect token. OK...now what? Player B is now a 'traitor' but this doesn't really seem to matter. Is Player B now trying to infect player C and player D? But again...what for? Everyone rolls for damage every turn and its only a matter of time before everyone dies or becomes an alien anyway.

I just really don't get how the traitor(s) work in this game. If player B gives it to player C and then on to player D, now everyone has become a traitor and the game is over? Because now we are all traitors and are on the same team? I just don't get this at all. I understand that if you are infected and you die, you become an alien. But what is the point of the alien? To slow down the last remaining non-infected person?

Hopefully someone out there can help me better understand this.

Rolling damage each round

The opening flavour text describes three stages of infection, the first of which states:

  it feels like a particularly virulent fever, as your immune system fights against it...

And then in the section under The Haunt Revealer Must Do This...:

  the alien disease battles everyone's immune system.

This means that every one of the investigators is already at stage one of the infection. You are not becoming infected by receiving the number 1 monster token, you are just progressing to stage two.

The traitor and infection

Don't think of the infection spread mechanic as a part of the traitors abilities/effects or a traitorous thing to do - this mechanic is not really related to the traitor at all since everyone has to do this - it is just the way the status of being a traitor spreads.

As you say this mechanic is just reflecting that they are a carrier spreading the development of stage two infection. There is no real malicious intent in this since it is meant to be a 50% random chance of passing on the infection.

However the introduction does also say that

  In the second stage, the spores take over the host's mind.

The traitors are more than welcome to subtly sabotage the game for the survivors, since the development of the Serum is a bad thing for them.

They may be able to slow down or prevent the other survivors from getting the Serum with subtle actions: redirecting or planting suspicion on other players, taking longer to get somewhere, using/not using an item that would hinder/help the cause, ensuring they do/don't offer strategic tips or reminders that would hinder/help the search for a cure etc.

The point of the aliens

The aliens are indicators that a survivor has progressed to the third stage, and is a visible display of their infection. Generally speaking they will likely be tougher than your investigator, especially since they are immune to the ongoing damage from stage one and have fairly good stats - the only real downside is that they can't spread the infection since they are no longer explorers.

This stage could potentially be considered the next logical step towards a win when you are a traitor after having swapped your infection tokens a couple of times, since it lets you be more open about your actions against the other players, and lets you more freely either kill survivors or force other traitors to transform.

It becomes even more important to be an alien if one or more survivors have been injected with the Serum.

After being treated with the Serum survivors are immune to the per round damage and can no longer trade infection tokens. Being at stage three means you can actively pursue and attack cured survivors, leaving other potential traitors to stay hidden and affect things more subtly, and even if all you do is sacrifice yourself in doing so, you can also prevent or at least delay someone with the Serum from injecting other traitors.


How long before I can move on to a different phase? I was on one health and had two creatures in play. One of those was useless due to a card my opponent played to stop it doing anything. The other had an inspired ability that might have helped me catch back up. He had a buffed up creature and on 19 health (it was a 1v1v1 just us 2 left). Now I decided to play a card I had already said I was playing, but hadn't decided whether to bestow or not. I decided after a minute or so to play as creature so I had one to block. I then said shortly after probably 3-5 seconds "I will attack with my inspired creature".

Now as I understand it, when I move on to attacking phase he can't then play an instant to counter me casting my creature spell as that phase has passed (correct me if I am wrong). He then decided to do this but did admit that the phase had passed so technically he couldn't counter it but that I hadn't waited long enough for him to decide whether to counter my creature spell. So my creature spell was cancelled and I then attacked. He did allow me to take my attack back though.

How long do I have to wait before I can move phases, at which point the creature counterspell would have been impossible to play?

How long you wait doesn't matter[1].

  I decided after a minute or so to play as creature so i had one to block. I then said shortly after probably 3-5 seconds i will attack with my inspired creature.

Let's assume you retained priority after casting your creature[2].

At this point, you're still in your main phase -- the stack isn't even empty -- but you can still say "I attack with my inspired creature" as you did.

What you are doing is proposing a shortcut consist of: Both remaining players passing priority until the Declare Attackers Step, then declaring your inspired creature as an attacker.

He can accept your shortcut in whole, or he can interrupt it at any point. In this case, he let you pass priority, then he cast a Counter spell. What he did is perfectly legitimate.

  Now as i understand when i move on to attacking phase he can't then play an instant to counter me casting my creature spell as that phase has passed (correct me if i am wrong).

Once the creature spell resolved, it's too late to counter it. But nothing in what you said indicates this has happened. You can ask "Resolve?" to make this happen[3].

Exception: Playing unduly slow can result in penalties.
By the rules, you regain priority after casting a spell if you cast it when you had priority. However, in tournaments, this rule is modified. You are assumed to have passed priority after casting a spell unless you have explicitly retained it.

If you hadn't retained priority, you wouldn't be able to do anything, including proposing a shortcut. Your statement that you were attacking would have been completely meaningless.
If you are in a tournament and you didn't explicitly retain priority, he has priority and he must do something. Usually, saying "pass" or "ok". This moves the game forward, allowing the spell to resolve. Asking "resolve?" would remind him of this.

If you are outside of a tournament or if you explicitly retained priority, saying "Resolve?" proposes the following shortcut: All players pass priority until the spell resolves.


Identify: time travelling game The game was played with a whole bunch of cards with historical events on them. Each event had two versions, one on each side of the card, and you could travel through time turning cards over to representing altering the past, in order to achieve some goal given to you at the beginning. Certain events contradicted each other, however, and when they both existed this created a paradox. If enough paradoxes occurred the timeline would explode and everyone lost.

Can anyone identify this game for me?

This sounds like Chrononauts.

From the official description:

  What would YOU do with a Time Machine? Would you stop the sinking of the Titanic? Prevent the assassination of JFK? Kill Hitler before WWII? These are just a few of the possibilities in Chrononauts, the award-winning card game of time travel. To win, you must change history at key points called Linchpins, so that history transforms into the Alternate Reality your character calls home. You can also win by collecting a specific set of Artifacts, such as a live dinosaur, the Mona Lisa, and an unpublished Shakespearean play. But be careful - if you create too many paradoxes, you could destroy the entire universe!


How do Gatherer Rulings interact with existing rules? Many cards on gatherer have some amount of Gatherer Rulings (for example, Wild Evocation has quite a few).

Are these rulings just a shorthand and reminders of the relevant bits of the rules (i.e. if you knew the complete rules of MTG off-by-heart and how to apply them perfectly, then you would be able to derive everything in the Gatherer Ruling)? Or do these rulings fundamentally change the rules of MTG (i.e. the card would function differently if the rulings were not there)?

The rulings on Gatherer are simply applications of the Comprehensive Rules, taking what the card actually says and applying the rules. They don't change how cards work.

You could indeed deduce all rulings, but it's still incredibly helpful to provide them because the Comprehensive Rules are quite long and detailed and often abstract, so to most players it won't even be clear where to look for things, and of course if you're in the middle of a game you want a quick answer.

The rulings do also often clarify or explain the actual words on the card, that is, some of the deduction does also involve understanding English. For example, one of Wild Evocation's rulings is:

  If a player reveals a nonland card, that player must cast that card if it's possible to do so, even if he or she doesn't want to. ...

and that's because Wild Evocation says "the player casts it" not "the player may cast it." There's nothing in the comprehensive rules that's really going to explain that, it's just understanding what the words mean.


40K: No Retreat! combat assault results loophole? This is a follow on question to Orks Mob Rule in Warhammer 40k. This situation is "No Retreat!" when a fearless unit is defeated in an assault, the fearless unit takes wounds equal to the number their side has lost in combat. I understand so far.

But on p.44 of the WH40K 5th ed rules the last paragraph under "No Retreat!" states:

  If none of the enemies involved in the combat against a fearless unit can actually hurt it, the unit does not suffer any wounds if its side is defeated in combat, and simply continues to fight.

If the fearless unit's enemies can't actually hurt the fearless unit, then how did the fearless unit manage to lose the assault in the first place? Are the rules saying any of the fearless unit's enemies still left standing after the assault?

I can imagine a few situations that would trigger this rule.

There are a few special rules that give a unit a +1 to combat resolution.  So if the fearless unit whiffs and gets no kills, they can still "loose".

Another situation is if there are two units involved in an assault with a fearless unit, and the one that can hurt the fearless unit is wiped out.

Finally, if the unit that assaulted was able to hurt the fearless unit only by means of Furious Charge's +1 to ST.

There are probably a few other situations.  It's defiantly an edge case and I've never seen it come up, and I've been involved in running numerous large(30-60 person) 40K tournaments.


When can you start using the Pirate in Catan Cities and Knights / Seafarers? In C&K rules, the robber cannot be moved at all until the first Barbarian Attack. When playing C&K combined with Seafarers, does this also apply to the pirate?

It would make a lot of sense to me, but I can't find anywhere that specifically spells it out either way.

From the rules to Sefarers, page 6:

  If you roll a "7" during your turn, you may elect to move the pirate
  INSTEAD of the robber.

From the Cities and Knights rules, page 5:

  The robber cannot be moved until after the barbarians reach the island
  of Catan for the first time.

Since the robber can't be moved until the barbarians attack, neither can the pirate, as there is no robber movement to replace.


Do enchantments attached to Bruna, Light of Alabaster trigger on the same attack/block instance? Question 1:

I have Bruna on the field, and I attack, triggering her effect.
I attach Ordeal of Thassa using her effect.

I am inclined to conclude that Ordeal's effect doesn't trigger during this combat phase, because the attack has already taken place before it was on the battlefield. Is this correct?

Question 2:

I have Bruna on the field, and I block one of multiple attacking creatures, triggering her effect.
I attach Iona's Blessing using her effect.

I am also tempted to conclude that Iona's effect doesn't allow me to block an additional creature during this combat phase, because the block has already taken place before Iona's Blessing was on the battlefield. Is this correct?

Thank you.

You are correct on both accounts. Of course, if you have multiple combat phases, you could leverage it in the same turn but the "hey I just attacked" trigger only happens once, regardless of what the incoming card is capable of doing.


What happens to Auras and/or Counters on a creature that is targeted by a Cloudshift? If I cast Cloudshift on a creature with  counters, does it retain its counters or does it loose its counters? What about Auras? Would a creature that was Cloudshifted keep its auras?

If an object changes zones, counters and auras on it fall off.
A creature is a permanent, and a permanent is an object:

110.1. A permanent is a card or token on the battlefield. [..]
109.1. An object is an ability on the stack, a card, a copy of a card, a token, a spell, a permanent, or an emblem.

When an object changes zones, it becomes a new object:

400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence.

Auras fall off the next time state-based actions are checked:

303.4c If an Aura is enchanting an illegal object or player as defined by its enchant ability and other applicable effects, the object it was attached to no longer exists, or the player it was attached to has left the game, the Aura is put into its owner’s graveyard. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)

Counters cease to exist:

121.2. Counters on an object are not retained if that object moves from one zone to another. The counters are not “removed”; they simply cease to exist. See rule 400.7.


Why does Pinochle utilize ultra-high point values for melds? In Pinochle, according to the Bicycle insert in my decks, at least, aces around (one ace of each suit) is worth 100 points. The 9 of trump is worth 10. Other meld values all are multiples of ten.

Likewise, a double aces around (two aces of each suit) is worth 1000 points.

What is the reason for using multiples of ten for point values even at the entry level instead of a simpler form (which I always play with) of 10 points for aces around, 4 for the pinochle, 1 for the 9 of trump, etc?

The current 10 points for every Ace, 10 and King in the trick pile is a new way of scoring.  The original scoring had different values for different cards so although the multiples of 10 aren't needed now they were before.

According to http://www.playingcardsandmore.com/pinochleanoverview.aspx

Original Card Values: Each Ace 11, Each Ten 10, Each King 4, Each Queen 3, Each Jack 2, Each Nine 0.
The Simplified Card Values: Each Ace 10, Each Ten 10, each King 5, Each Queen 5, Each Jack 0, each Nine 0.

And now it is even more simple than that - we only do things with multiples of 10.


What does "play this ability only if you could play a sorcery" mean? This is a stretch and in no way am I trying to dull the game. However, I recently ran across this potential issue. Many cards have an ability that may read, '...Play this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.' and some that say '...Play this ability only if you could play a sorcery. Now bear with me. Since the second example included the word 'if', would this mean that IF I do not have a sorcery in my hand, I cannot play a sorcery, hence, I would not be able to play the ability. As opposed to the first example which states I can use the ability any time a sorcery could be cast instead of 'if' I can play one, which I cannot if I don't possess one in hand. This is flimsy as I know the intended purpose is for the ability to only be cast during your turn as a sorcery. Any thoughts?

There are currently no cards with either the first or the second text.
From the Comprehensive Rules:
The Oracle card reference contains the official wording for all Magic cards.

108.1. Use the Oracle™ card reference when determining a card’s wording. A card’s Oracle text can be found using the Gatherer card database at Gatherer.Wizards.com.

Oracle has an advanced search tab with powerful filter options that allows you to search for cards with an exact wording. The wordings of cards get updates (errata) all the time, for example for cases like yours where a wording might be ambiguous, or when comprehensive rules changes affect a card's wording.
Additionally, many cards have rulings at the bottom of their Oracle page that answer specific questions that might arise from that card. Those rulings are not official rules, but they are derived by official judges by application of the rules.
In your case, the currently correct wording is "Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.".
The term "play" is still used, but no longer for casting spells or activating abilities:

Play

To play a land is to put a land onto the battlefield as a special action. See rule 115, “Special Actions,” and rule 305, “Lands.”

To play a card is to play that card as a land or cast that card as a spell, whichever is appropriate. See rule 601, “Casting Spells.”

(Obsolete) Casting a spell used to be known as playing a spell. Cards with that text have received errata in the Oracle card reference. See Cast.

(Obsolete) Activating an activated ability used to be known as playing an activated ability. Cards with that text have received errata in the Oracle card reference. See Activate.

(Obsolete) The battlefield used to be known as the in-play zone. Cards that were printed with text that contains the phrases “in play,” “from play,” “into play,” or the like are referring to the battlefield and have received errata in the Oracle card reference. See Battlefield.


In Small World, with berserk, do you roll reinforcement die before you nominate how many troops you're attacking with? I.e., Do you:

Roll reinforcement die, and add troops to make the short fall?
Declare the number of troops you're using, and use the reinforcement die in an attempt to bolster your numbers?

The rules say:

  Roll the die first; select the Region you wish to conquer; then place the required number of Race tokens (minus the die results) there.

Since you roll the die even before you decide what to attack, it would seem very unlikely that you'd need to determine the number of attackers beforehand. This is further bolstered by a thread at the BoardGameGeek forums where a lot of Small World rules clarifications posted by the game developers are gathered. This is what it says about Berserk:

  You may roll the die once per attack. First, you roll the die. Then you choose an adjacent territory. Then, you deploy your tokens. (emphasis added - ErikP)

  About the final roll, there is a very important sentence in the rulebook, in the "Berserk" section: "If you do not have enough tokens left, this is your final conquest attempt for the turn." This sentence means that there is no "end-turn" die. For each conquest you roll the die and select your region: if you do not have enough tokens left, then your turn is over. You are not allowed to re-roll the die.


Online Platforms where simulate board/card game With my mates I would like to design a new card-game. However due to lockdown and pandemic limitations, we cannot meet each other for playing sessions.
Does exists an online website/platform where I can replicate our game and make some test-sessions with colleagues?
I want to replicate:

Only-text cards: right now I do not care about good graphycs and images.
Table with game play
Dice

Try Tabletop Simulator on Steam: https://store.steampowered.com/app/286160/Tabletop_Simulator/
It has the both the ability to upload custom components and to play multiplayer board games virtually.  I've used it for remote prototype testing myself.


Interaction between Nivmagus Elemental and Rune Snag Recently the following situation popped up in a casual game and it was a bit confusing. I was wondering if someone here could help out.

Player T has 4 mana open and plays a 2 mana spell in his main phase
Player G has a Nivmagus Elemental out and plays a Rune Snag to counter T's 2 mana spell; Player G has no Rune Snags in his graveyard
T decides to pay the 2 mana required to not have his spell countered.
At this point G exiles his rune snag using Nivmagus Elemental to obtain two +1/+1 counters

It seemed to me that this cannot happen, since either Rune Snag resolves and T pays two mana, or Nivmagus Elemental eats Rune Snag and T does not need to pay 2 mana since it never resolves.

Does player T need to pay two additional mana to play his spell even if Nivmagus Elemental eats it?

You are correct, Player T should not have had to pay 2 mana.

The decision of whether or not to pay 2 mana happens as part of Rune Snag resolving. Player G has 2 options:

1) Let Rune Snag resolve, in which case Player T needs to pay 2 mana (or have their spell countered), but Nivmagus Elemental won't do anything, as Rune Snag will no longer be a valid target for the ability.

2) Activate Nivmagus Elemental's ability while Rune Snag is on the stack, exiling Rune Snag. Player T will not have to pay 2 mana, because Rune Snag will never resolve.

Note that option 1 will happen by default if player G does not specify otherwise. Player G has the right to respond to their own spell:

  116.3c If a player has priority when they cast a spell, activate an ability, or take a special action, that player receives priority afterward.

However, they must specifically state that they wish to retain priority:

(From the tournament rules):

  Whenever a player adds an object to the stack, they are assumed to be passing priority unless they explicitly announce that they intend to retain it.

So if player G casts Rune Snag without saying anything, player T can simply say "ok" or "resolves" or "I'll pay the mana", and it will be too late for player G to use Ninmagus.

This rule matters especially for Ninmagus in general; the player will always need to declare that they wish to retain priority if they want to ensure that they can use it.


Rummikub - Picking up a played tile before your turn is over I was playing 3-way Rummikub for the first time in a few years with friends. During player 1's turn late in the game, he mixed tiles back and forth trying to play as many as he could. During this same turn he used a joker and put it in a combination on the board (it was a red 12 in a 11, 12, 13 run). Before this same turn was over he realized he didn't need to use the joker, finding a way to use a different red 12 in order to use the joker on another turn. He then picked the joker up from the table and tried to put it back in his tray, but player 2 said this not allowed because "if it was laid, it was played". Player 1 thinks picking up a joker (or any tile) should be legal as long as it is removed from an error-free board before time expires. Player 2 thinks if a joker was placed on the board in a legal combination during a turn, I should not be allowed to put it back in my hand regardless of circumstances.  Appreciate your feedback.

It seems to depend on your version of the rules, but if you take this version's Rules: (emphasis added)

  The Joker:
  ... A joker can be retrieved from a set on the table by a player who can replace it during his turn with a tile of the same numerical value and color it represents. The tile used to replace the Joker must come from a player's rack and not from the table. In the case of a group of 3, the joker can be replaced by the tile of either of the missing colors. A joker that has been replaced must be used in the player's same turn with 2 or more tiles from his rack to make a new set. Players cannot retrieve a joker before they have laid their initial set(s). A set containing a joker can have tiles added to it and can be split apart or have tiles removed from it. The joker has a penalty value of 30 points if it remains on a player's rack at the end of a game.

So a replaced Joker must be used in the same turn, but that only applies to Jokers that were already on the table.

In your case, the Joker was not already on the table and was added during the player's turn.

In this version the only rule for building sets during a turn is: (emphasis added)

  Building on Sets:
  A player may build onto a set in any of the following ways (or in any combination of these ways) as long as there are only legitimate sets on the table and there are no loose tiles left at the end of his turn.

So by placing the Joker down, but rearranging the sets so that the Joker (or any tile) is left without a set, then it triggers the Incomplete Runs rule:

  Incomplete Runs:
  A player who unsuccessfully builds on or manipulates other sets on the table must replace the tiles in their original positions, take back the tiles he played and draw three tiles from the pouch.

So, the player who tried to reclaim their Joker must either:
1) make sure the Joker is used to make proper sets without loose tiles or
2) reset the table, take back any tiles they played that turn to their rack and draw three more tiles from the pouch as penalty. Ouch!