Axis and Allies - Is there a best country? I've been told by several people that different countries are statistically better choices for Axis and Allies?

Is there any evidence that one or more countries have a significant advantage?

Answering the question with AAMC bid statistics

Others have explained why the Axis have a significant disadvantage in the 2nd Edition rules. I'll attempt to provide hard evidence and quantify this advantage. The popular play-by-email (PBEM) site Axis and Allies Members Club (which I have no affiliation with and which I hadn't logged onto in years until I did some research for this post) keeps statistics on the games played by its members.

There's such a strong belief that the game is unbalanced in favor of the allies that the club has introduced a concept known as bidding to even out the game. Before the game starts, each player bids for how many extra IPCs they would need to be given to play the Axis. Then are then allowed to use this money to purchase and place additional units on the board prior to the start of the game.

Bidding can either be hidden (both bids placed in secret and low bid plays the Axis) or open, where players bid each other down over multiple rounds until someone calls uncle (like the old game show Name that Tune).

I haven't played in years and looked up my old game logs. I had about a 0.500 win percentage with an average bid of about 12. There is a (fairly vapid) thread on the AAMC message boards asking what bids are running now, the consensus seems to be the low 20s. Lastly, I logged on and checked the game logs for the club's top ranked player. The average bid over his last 20 games was something like 22. The difference in the bids is explained because I always played no first turn Russian attack, which is evidently worth about 10 IPCs to the Axis (because they can save the units in Finland, or at least the fighter).

So, among the very seasoned 2nd edition players over at AAMC, the consensus is that it's not fair to take the Axis unless the Allies spot them the equivalent of more than 7 infantry on the first turn to be placed anywhere on the game board.

That's a fairly insane unbalance in the game. I believe the only reason it didn't tank the game completely is because although the Allied advantage is large it is also hard to capitalize on if you're inexperienced: the Allies require more finesse to play (flawless execution of strategies like shuck-shuck), often much more than the novice A&A player has.


Mirrodin Besieged: do I win despite failing to draw a card? Suppose I control Mirrodin Besieged, having selected Phyrexian:

Phyrexian — At the beginning of your end step, draw a card, then discard a card. Then if there are fifteen or more artifact cards in your graveyard, target opponent loses the game.

As I enter my end step, my library is empty, and I have fifteen artifact cards in my graveyard.
Who wins?

In a game where you have only one opponent remaining, you would win the game before you can lose it. With more than one opponent remaining, both you and the targeted opponent would lose.
Losing due to trying to draw from an empty library is a state-based action:

704.5. The state-based actions are as follows:

704.5b If a player attempted to draw a card from a library with no cards in it since the last time state-based actions were checked, that player loses the game.

However, state-based actions are not checked during the resolution of spells or abilities:

704.4. Unlike triggered abilities, state-based actions pay no attention to what happens during the resolution of a spell or ability.

So if you try to draw from an empty library during Mirrodin Besieged ability's resolution, you won't lose the game until it has actually finished resolving and the active player would gain priority, because that's when state-based actions are checked:

704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 117, “Timing and Priority”), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. [..]

117.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.

As soon as a player loses, they leave the game, and if you have no opponents remaining, you immediately win.

104.1. A game ends immediately when a player wins, when the game is a draw, or when the game is restarted.

104.2a A player still in the game wins the game if that player’s opponents have all left the game. This happens immediately and overrides all effects that would preclude that player from winning the game.

So in essence, Mirroding Besieged starts resolving. You carry out as many instructions as you can, and the last instruction is that a target opponent loses the game. In a game where the targeted opponent is the only opponent remaining (or in a 2-Headed Giant game), that opponent losing would be the immediate end of the game, and you would be the winner. In game with more than one opponent remaining (except 2HG), the targeted opponent would lose, you would lose immediately afterwards when SBAs are checked, and the game would continue for the other players.


Contaminated Ground vs. Blink of an Eye I have a tough ruling I need some help with: On my opponent's turn he played Contaminated Ground on my Island. I tapped that Island for blue mana in response. I then wanted to let the stack resolve and cast Blink of an Eye on Contaminated Ground before the end of the step. Rule 500.2 is what makes me believe this is possible. His sense is that after we both pass priority, the step ends and I won't have the mana to cast the spell. What's the actual ruling here?

Yes, you will be able to cast Blink of an Eye in that sequence. The current step/phase does end when both players pass in succession, but whenever a spell or ability resolves, both players again receive priority, starting with the active player.
The stack resolves one object at a time. After each resolution, there is a new round of priority that each player has to pass before the next object resolves or, when the stack is empty, the step/phase ends. Rule 500.2 also mentions this.

116.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.
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.
500.2. A phase or step in which players receive priority ends when the stack is empty and all players pass in succession. Simply having the stack become empty doesn’t cause such a phase or step to end; all players have to pass in succession with the stack empty. Because of this, each player gets a chance to add new things to the stack before that phase or step ends.

So the sequence of play is:

Your opponent casts Contaminated Ground and retains priority because of 116.3c.
Opponent passes, and you tap the island for mana; this action doesn't use stack because it's a mana ability. Then you pass.
Contaminated Ground resolves and turns your tapped Island into a Swamp. You have {U} in your mana pool. Your opponent receives priority because of 116.3b
Your opponent passes priority to you. You play Blink of an Eye targeting Contaminated Ground. You retain priority because of 116.3c
Both players pass, Blink resolves, and your opponent gains priority.
Your opponent could for example cast Contaminated Ground again, or pass priority.
When both players pass with the stack empty, the game advances to the next step/phase.


After lethal first strike damage to an indestructible creature, will it still do damage? If I were to attack with a 4/4 indestructible creature and it's blocked by a 4/2 creature with first strike, would my indestructible creature still attack during the second combat damage step, or would it just tap, not assigning any damage?

Indestructible, as with most abilities, doesn't modify how combat works - it only does this:

  702.12b. A permanent with indestructible can’t be destroyed. Such permanents aren’t destroyed by lethal damage, and they ignore the state-based action that checks for lethal damage (...).

The respective state-based action that 702.12b renders unaffecting:

  704.5g. If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. (...)

This results in the following chain of events:

In the first combat damage step, the 4/2 will deal 4 damage to the indestructible 4/4 creature.
State-Based Actions are checked, but even though the creature has lethal damage marked on it, it won't be put into the graveyard and therefore not removed from combat.
In the second combat damage step, the 4/4 will deal 4 damage to the 4/2.
State-Based Actions are checked, see lethal damage marked on the 4/2, and put into the graveyard.


Is spellbook building with only a single core set possible? Let‘s say a friend of mine and me buy a single core set of Mage Wars, play some games with pre-defined spellbooks and then want to start building our own ones.

Although building a deck can be quiet fun, it also takes a lot of time (as we know from “Star Wars X-Wing”). Do we just simultaneously build our spellbooks and find a somewhat fair draw-method in case both of us want to have the same card? That could take a lot of time before „actually playing“, especially if we have to do the maths manually.

In X-Wing we use one of the online builders, build our fleets and if a card is taken by both players, we simply use a sheet of paper as a replacement. Then we meet and can directly dive into the game. In Mage Wars cards a way more important and using a sheet of paper seems silly here. Furthermore I was not able to find a (finished) online builder project. (Edit: Found one: http://forum.arcanewonders.com/sbb/#)

Question: Is spellbook building with only a single core set possible? What are alternatives to the idea outlined above? Getting two core sets seems rather expensive, if each player is only allowed to use cards of “his” set.

My wife and i play with the Mage-War Academy core set.
We each have a custom deck. Since the wizard and the beast master have no common type of spell, it's rather easy.
However, should we both want the same spell in 3 copies when the said spell is only available in 1-3 copy, you should photocopy it so that both player has acces to the number they chose. i'd recommend sleeving them, cause... y'know... paper. Since the cards are not drawn, it is of no matter if it's different from others.

Take special notice of the enchantment cards. They are used as "hidden" information. You should play a completely unrelated card (i recommend using Equipment cards of the OPPOSING wizard) in its stead so that it looks and feel like a normal card. And switching the card with your paper one when it is revealed. Take care to have different "replacement" card for each of your enchants. And write on a sheet of paper the corresponding pair so your opponent cannot accuse you of lying.

Be warned that most gaming groups and tournaments will not let you play with fake cards.


Do Attacking Creatures Deal Damage Simultaneously or Sequentially? When I declare multiple attackers, do they deal damage at the same time, or do they attack sequentially?

For an example, I attack with Aethergeode Miner and Ninth Bridge Patrol. If they attack simultaneously, I've got a 3/1 and a 1/1. If they attack sequentially, I could use the Miner first, flicker it, and then I'd have a 3/1 and a 2/2, since the Patrol gains +1/+1 for each creature that flickers.

Do attacking creatures work simultaneously?

From the Comprehensive Rules:

  510.1. First, the active player announces how each attacking creature assigns its combat damage, then
  the defending player announces how each blocking creature assigns its combat damage.

  510.2. Second, all combat damage that’s been assigned is dealt simultaneously.

Note that it is possible to get the sequential effect you want if you have a way of giving your Miner the ability First Strike (or Double Strike). All creatures with First Strike deal damage first, and then there is time to flicker your Miner before other creatures deal damage.


Can I use the effects of Kaiju cards my opponent gave to me? For example; if my opponent special summon a "Gameciel, the Sea Turtle Kaiju" to my side of the field, then he summon "Dogoran, The Mad Flame Kaiju" and he activates it's effect... Am I able to activate the effect of the Gameciel on my field in response to?

You sure can! If you control a game object, be it a monster, spell or trap, then you can do with it everything you can do with a monster you summoned yourself.

Note that this includes paying any costs that an effect requires - in your particular case, you'll need to remove kaiju counters from the field to activate Gameciel's effect. Note also that even though you're the controller of Gameciel, your opponent is still the owner, meaning that when it gets destroyed or otherwise sent to the graveyard, it'll go to their graveyard, not yours, or if an effect tells you to return Gameciel to the hand, it'll go to their hand as well.


How can I find out when a specific comprehensive rule was introduced? I wrote this answer, and I feel like it would benefit (slightly - it's not exactly a crucial part of the answer) from knowing when rule 706.4 was introduced. I feel that if I can find out when a rule was introduced, I can more easily research why it was introduced, and then I can write a better answer.

In general, how can I determine when a comprehensive rule was introduced?

Rule 706.4 was originally created as rule 503.4, and seems to have appeared between 1999 and 2001 - I haven't found any copies of rules between those two. (The renumbering happened in the July 11, 2009 rules update, which renumbered basically all the rules.)

If you have a really good idea when the rule you're looking for was introduced, Yawgatog's rules changes page (linked in murgatroid's answer) is great - for example, if you're looking for Bestow, just click on Theros and you'll see it among all the cleanly-presented diffs.

If you have a good keyword to search for, you can try this rules history forum thread, which summarizes past rule changes. For example, you can quickly find infect under Scars of Mirrodin. Unfortunately this page only goes up to 2012.

Failing those easy solutions, you can just binary search over past versions of the comprehensive rules, linked below.  Note that you can also do some smarter things - for example, you can download them all (and clean them up), and look for the pair where the diff matches what you're looking for. (I did this by making a git repository with a commit for each version of the rules, then using pickaxe search.)

Past comprehensive rules

While Wizards only links to the most recent version of the rules, all the old rules are still being served. I managed to find what looks like most of them since 1999.

These links currently all work, and given how old they are, it seems likely that they'll keep working - but should they ever break, archive.org should have crawled all of them.

These are all plaintext, except some in 2014, because Wizards only linked to docx and pdf versions then.

1999-04-23
2001-07-23 2001-09-24
2002-02-20 2002-10-07
2003-03-15 2003-07-01 2003-10-01  2003-12-01
2004-02-01 2004-06-01 2004-10-01
2005-02-01 2005-08-01 2005-10-01
2006-02-01 2006-05-01 2006-07-15 2006-10-01
2007-02-01 2007-05-01 2007-07-13 2007-09-07 2007-10-01
2008-02-01 2008-05-01 2008-07-15 2008-10-01
2009-02-01 2009-05-01 2009-07-11 2009-09-04 2009-10-01
2010-02-01 2010-04-23 2010-06-18 2010-07-16 2010-10-01
2011-02-04 2011-04-01 2011-05-01 2011-06-17 2011-07-15 2011-09-30
2012-02-01 2012-05-01 2012-06-01 2012-07-01 2012-10-01
2013-02-01 2013-05-01 2013-07-13 2013-09-27 2013-11-01
2014-02-01 2014-05-01 (pdf docx) 2014-06-01 (pdf docx) 2014-07-18 (pdf docx) 2014-09-26
2015-01-23 2015-03-27 2015-07-17 2015-09-26
2016-01-16 2016-04-08

For rules older than this, I couldn't find anything in a similar format. It looks like 1999 was the first time Wizards actually published clean plaintext rules like this.

However, archive.org has a copy of the rules page as of April 1999. There are several links there, including the base Fifth Edition rules, in a frame-based view (kind of tough to use, but it works), as well as the updates for Mirage, Tempest, Urza's Saga, and Sixth Edition. With all of those taken together, you'd end up with the same rules as in the text-format rules from April 1999 linked above, but since they're split, you can see what was added in each step.


Does Fusion Summoning trigger Maiden With Eyes of Blue's effect? This may be a dumb question as I am not particularly experienced in Yu-Gi-Oh, I'm more of a Magic player.

If Maiden With Eyes of Blue is selected as a fusion material, for example with Odd Eyes Fusion, will this trigger its effect and special summon Blue Eyes White Dragon? My thought is no; I can't seem to find evidence of fusion materials being targeted during fusion, and using them as fusion materials is part of paying the cost. However, others seem to disagree, and suggest that the act of selecting fusion materials counts as targeting them.

Would choosing Maiden With Eyes of Blue as a fusion material cause her effect to be activated and the Blue Eyes White Dragon to be summoned?

In general, Fusion Summoning does not target the Fusion Materials. The selection of Fusion Materials and the Fusion Summon itself happen during the resolution of an effect, which is beyond the point where targeting can happen.

However, there is one effect I found that targets a card and performs a Fusion Summon based on the target, but it cannot be directly applied to this scenario:

  The Eye of Timaeus (Normal Spell Card)

  (This card is also always treated as "Legendary Dragon Timaeus".)
  Target 1 "Dark Magician" monster you control; Fusion Summon 1 Fusion Monster from your Extra Deck that lists that monster on the field as a Fusion Material, using it as the Fusion Material. You can only activate 1 "The Eye of Timaeus" per turn.

In this case, it is not the Fusion Summon that targets, but the Spell Card itself that does. If you were to find a way to change the name of Maiden with Eyes of Blue to a "Dark Magician" card (Dark Magician Girl, etc.) with a card effect**, then the use of The Eye of Timaeus to perform a Fusion Summon with it, that would cause Maiden with Eyes of Blue to chain with it and apply her effect.

However, after reviewing every other card that is able to perform a Fusion Summon, none of them use the "Targeting" language that The Eye of Timaeus uses with respect to their Fusion Summoning effect. As a result, none of them would trigger Maiden with Eyes of Blue's effect.

**I do not see any cards with an effect that would accomplish this, and it seems likely that whatever effect would accomplish this would probably Target Maiden with Eyes of Blue anyways and set off the effect that way.


What is this deception-based party game? At some point in time I found the rules for a many player party game online and now I'm looking for it again. It involved two teams of players where each player is assigned two English words. Players of the same team would have words in common. The goal was to make contact with the other members of your team by finding other players with words in common with you. I think I discovered this game on the website of some indie designer. Any help finding the title or website of this game would be appreciated.


If the blue Taoist kills a ghost that blocks his ability to seek help and fight in the same turn, can he then seek help from a villager? The blue Taoist has the ability to request help from a villager and fight a ghost in the same turn.  If this ability is blocked by a ghost, but then that ghost is killed by him, can he follow up in the same turn and request help immediately since his power is now unblocked?

Yes, you can do this.

Under Taoist Powers on page 8 of the rulebook:

  It may happen that a Taoist loses his power because of a ghost
  ability. He can recover it as soon as the responsible ghost is removed
  from his board.

And the blue Taoist's Heavenly Gust Ability on the next page reads:

  The blue Taoist can act in a heartbeat.
  He may request villager’s help AND attempt an exorcism in the same turn, in any order.

So you can definitely exorcise a ghost, unlocking your power, and then get a Villager's help in the same turn.


Recommendation for good Asynchronous Board Games a la Diplomacy? Background

Looking to setup board game(s) in a 24/7 office environment. Players could end up working any time of day, or have any 2 days off - so the wait-time between turns has to be at-minimum 3 days (think play-by-mail style). As such, I'd imagine the following criteria will need to be met for this to work:

Simultaneous turns (players pre-plan their action, and all players actions are executed at the same instant)
Modest turn count for a full game

Question

  What board games play asynchronous, that can comfortably accommodate a 3-day-wait between turns?

Examples: Diplomacy, A Game of Thrones

Diplomacy is unusual in that it was designed to be played by mail.  Importantly, the thing that makes diplomacy able to do this is not that the turns are simultaneous, but rather that it has a very low degree of what I will term "mechanical interactivity".  Mechanical interactivity is a part of a game that requires input from multiple players for the game to be able to progress.  This is distinct from strategic interactivity, which is that what players are doing is impacted by what other players are doing.

Diplomacy has one of the highest levels of strategic interactivity of board games I have played.  However, the overwhelming majority of that occurs in abstract strategic and tactical reasoning and inter-player negotiation, none of which touch the actual mechanics of the game.  To play a full year of diplomacy, players need submit at most 5 sets of orders (2 moves, 2 retreats, and 1 build/disband), and the game (either run by a moderator or digital platform) can handle all the rest since orders are resolved algorithmically and require no further player choices to determine the result.

Meanwhile, Game of Thrones is actually a very bad match for what you're looking for.  While players do place orders in secret, orders are resolved one at a time with players making many choices throughout.  It has a very high degree of mechanical interactivity.

Risk is potentially a very good game for this.  As long as you have a fair platform for managing dice rolls (this likely requires a digital platform to run the entire game), Risk can be played quite well asynchronously, as there is nothing anyone can do during other players turns.

Carcassone could work, although there are a lot of turns to finish a game, so it may go fairly long.

I've also heard Through the Ages plays well asynchronously via an app, but I have not tried it myself.

Ultimately, the thing to look for is "good asynchronous games" rather than "games with simultaneous turns".

Note: I feel obliged to warn you about playing Diplomacy with co-workers.  Diplomacy is an incredible game from a strategic and negotiating perspective.  Done well, it can be really fun and potentially even forge life-long friendships.  Done poorly, it can lead to long standing resentment and ruin friendships.  It all depends on the personalities at play.  The risk with co-workers is probably too high.


Splice Onto Arcane - Rulings I was wondering what happens to the cards once they are revealed using the Splice Onto Arcane ability?

Do they go to the graveyard once spliced?

Or do they stay in your hand?

With this said and considering the spells are all cast at instant speed, if they stay in your hand, what mechanic stops them from being spliced yet again onto another spell? or is this just a ruling so that people can't place infinite copies of the spells effects onto the initial spell (say with an infinite manna combo)?

  You reveal all cards you intend to splice at the same time. Each individual card can be spliced only once onto any one spell.

The above ruling does not give me much context... is this during any one turn?
If so does this mean I can reveal it next turn and splice again?

Do they go to the graveyard once spliced?

They don't, as nothing says they do.

Or do they stay in your hand?

Yes, as nothing says they leave it.

what mechanic stops them from being spliced yet again onto another spell?

Nothing stops them, but the splice cost limits them.

You reveal all cards you intend to splice at the same time. Each individual card can be spliced only once onto any one spell.

The above ruling does not give me much context... is this during any one turn? If so does this mean I can reveal it next turn and splice again?

It's a limit per spell. You can only cast a spell once and you only get one opportunity to apply any "as you play a spell" effects. This includes splicing.
If you would retrieve the card that represented that spell and cast it again, it will be a different spell with the same name and you could again apply any "as you play a spell" effects to it.
You can splice a given card onto something any number of times per turn, as long as you provide a new spell for each splicing and as long as you're able to pay the splice cost.


Can players at other locations play multiple cards to help you in combat? A player using Kyra didn't have a weapon or spell in his hand to help defeat the Hill Giant that came up during his Explore action. Valeros, in a separate location, played a Shortbow and a Heavy Crossbow to add two dice to the combat check.

Is this allowed? The rules state you can't play more than one card of the same type during a check; Kyra's player's argument was that it should be allowed, because it technically wasn't Valeros' combat check.

After thoroughly searching, I think I found the answer in the FAQ's about encountering cards:

  Each player may play no more than 1 card of each type during each step; for example, no one player may play more than 1 blessing while attempting a check, though multiple players could each play 1 blessing during that check.

So in other words, no. Valeros could play 1 weapon to help, but not two. The rule is regardless of who is having the encounter.


Does a discarded then cast card with madness count as discarded? Play goes like this:

I have Faith of the Devoted and Anje Falkenrath on the field.

I discard an Anje's Ravager via Anje Falkenrath's tap ability.
For this creature I pay its madness cost and place it on the field.

Does Faith of the Devoted's ability trigger?

What confuses me is what this page on the Discard keyword says:

  Discard is an evergreen keyword action which takes cards from a player's hand and puts them in their graveyard.

But the fact is that a creature with madness never hits the graveyard! Instead, it goes to exile, then to the battlefield.

So I'm not completely sure whether the discard ability on Faith of the Devoted should trigger on that.

Yes, that still counts as discarding a card. The Madness ability is defined in 702.34a:

  Madness is a keyword that represents two abilities. The first is a static ability that functions while the card with madness is in a player’s hand. The second is a triggered ability that functions when the first ability is applied. “Madness [cost]” means “If a player would discard this card, that player discards it, but exiles it instead of putting it into their graveyard” and “When this card is exiled this way, its owner may cast it by paying [cost] rather than paying its mana cost. If that player doesn’t, they put this card into their graveyard.”

The card is still discarded, and the Madness ability changes where it goes.


What triggers/resolves first, an effect from a creature dying or an effect from a creature going into the graveyard? I'm trying to use Verdant Succession with only one copy of Worldspine Wurm in my deck.

Worldspine Wurm automatically goes back in the library when it is put into the graveyard. Verdant Succession lets me look for a copy of a creature in my library and put it into play when a creature dies. So, does Worldspine Wurm end up back in my library in time for me to search for it, or no?

Also, how would this be different with a creature that says if it would be put into a graveyard, it gets put back into my library instead, like Darksteel Colossus, instead of just saying when like Worldspine Wurm?

You choose the order in which the abilities resolve, so you will be able to search for the Worldspine Wurm with Verdant Succession.

Rule 700.4 defines "dies":

  The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.”

This means that Worlspine Wurm's ability triggers "when Worldspine Wurm is put into a graveyard from anywhere" and Verdant Succession's ability triggers "whenever a green nontoken creature [is put into a graveyard from the battlefield]". So, of course, if a Worldspine Wurm is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, both of those conditions are met, so both aiblities trigger simultaneously. Then rule 603.3b says

  If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses. (See rule 101.4.) Then the game once again checks for and resolves state-based actions until none are performed, then abilities that triggered during this process go on the stack. This process repeats until no new state-based actions are performed and no abilities trigger. Then the appropriate player gets priority.

So, if you choose to put the Worldspine Wurm's ability on the stack on top of the Verdant Succession's ability, the Wurm's ability will resolve first and it will move to the library, then the Verdant Succession's ability will resolve and you will be able to search for it.

If the Worldspine Wurm's ability was instead worded like the ability on Darksteel Colossus, then it would be a replacement effect (the key word indicating that is "instead"). In that case, it would go to the library instead of the graveyard, so, as the definition above implies, it never "dies" and Verdant Succession's ability never triggers.

I would like to note that if the Verdant Succession and Worldspine Wurm are controlled by different players, the outcome of the Worldspine Wurm dying will depend on whose turn it is instead of any choices a player might make. Rule 603.3b says that triggered abilities controlled by different players are put on the stack in APNAP order, which is defined in rule 101.4:

  If multiple players would make choices and/or take actions at the same time, the active player (the player whose turn it is) makes any choices required, then the next player in turn order (usually the player seated to the active player’s left) makes any choices required, followed by the remaining nonactive players in turn order. Then the actions happen simultaneously. This rule is often referred to as the “Active Player, Nonactive Player (APNAP) order” rule.

This means that the abilities are put on the stack in turn order starting with the active player, so they resolve in reverse turn order. If that resolution order happens to make the Worldspine Wurm's ability resolve first, you can find it when searching.


Handling multiple "timers" on the board and player mat The game I'm working on might feature a number of "timed" events, such as:

a big ability requiring a cooldown before it can be used again
a summoned or undead unit decaying over time
a bomb timing down until explosion
mines and factories generating resources over time (presumably up to a cap)

For ease of use, one's timers only tick at the beginning of one's turn, which is also when they get action points.

What could be some intuitive mechanisms to model these, preferrably in a unified way, that's not easy to forget or tedious? Bonus points if it blends in with an action point pool of varying size.

Edit:

I plan on using timers around the 1-10 range, but they could be found in all sorts of areas, as I've said.

There are several ways to implement timers in board games

Tokens. Games like Paper Tales or Pixel Tactics (starting from 2nd set) use addition/removal of tokens from game components to track passage of time. Like this:

this option works well for cards (or other components you can easily store tokens upon) with relatively small number of simultaneous timers per player (up to 3 in Pixel Tactics and up to 4 in Paper Tales) and small number of ticks.
Dice. Pretty much anywhere you would use token counters, you can substitute them with dice.Example:

In this case instead of
adding/removing tokens you just increment/decrement a die.
Difference here is mostly personal preference, but if you operate
big number of ticks, managing d20 or couple of d6 is much easier and
clearer than pile of tokens.
Time track. Your purposed solution falls into this category, but usually games like Bestiary of Sigillum move track itself rather than items on it. In game it looks like this (on the right):

and this video(russian language) shows how it operates. Basically, each ability has its own token. When ability is used, that token is placed on appropriate number on time track, say, 4. Time track moves one tick each turn and cooldown number for that token changes. When it passes 1, token is returned back and it means that ability is ready for next use.

Another game Tavarua uses similar mechanic, but with segmented
linear track: video example. Both this systems are best for tracking a
lot of timers simultaneously, since they update all of them  with single operation.

I remember an example of time track on which objects are moved rather than track itself. Star Wars: Rebellion uses it as production queue


What happens when The Paranormal Investigator discovers a Werewolf? I played One Night Ultimate Werewolf last night and the following happened:

The Paranormal Investigator looked at a Werewolf card.
The Troublemaker swapped the Paranormal Investigator with the Insomniac.
At the end of the round a Werewolf was lynched.

There was some confusion as to who was on Team Werewolf and who was on Team Villager. The rules for the Paranormal Investigator say "if you look at a Werewolf or a Tanner you become a Werewolf or a Tanner". We weren't clear if "you" meant the player becomes a Werewolf or the Paranormal Investigator becomes a Werewolf.

Allegiance moves with the card, so it's always the person with the PI card who will be a Werewolf. This isn't really spelled out with the PI card, but it follows the same process as the Doppelganger from the base game of ONUW (the PI being from the Daybreak expansion).

  If a player receives the Doppelganger card during the night, she is the role the Doppleganger originally viewed.


Can we fake-advance any card? Some Assets can be advanced (e.g. Project Junebug) and some can't (e.g. Snare!).  Is it OK to advance any asset cards to make them look like Agenda?

For example, with the ambush assets the Runner would be lured, but the advance token(s) would have no other effects.

No, you cannot fake advance cards that do not specifically say they can be advanced.

Page 14 in the rule book:

  Cards other than agendas can only be advanced if their text box allows it.

Related: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/892149/can-you-advance-snare


Resolving spell terminology I've seen a lot of cards use the key phrase "When you cast a spell..." but are there any cards or abilities that rely on spells being successfully cast and Resolve?

For instance the creature ability Prowess; triggers whether or not a non-creature is cast successfully or countered.

What would the wording on modern cards look like to reflect that?

Buyback and Rebound depend on the card resolving in order for their effects to occur.

Anoint

  Buyback 3 (You may pay an additional 3 as you cast this spell. If you do, put this card into your hand as it resolves.)

Artful Maneuver

  Rebound (If you cast this spell from your hand, exile it as it resolves. At the beginning of your next upkeep, you may cast this card from exile without paying its mana cost.)

Feather, the Redeemed has a trigger that fires when you cast a spell, and then checks to see if the spell resolved.

  Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell that targets a creature you control, exile that card instead of putting it into your graveyard as it resolves. If you do, return it to your hand at the beginning of the next end step.

There is also a very similar phrasing to what you're describing used on some cards.  These are ETB triggers that fire only if the permanent entered the battlefield as a result of being cast.  It is, functionally, no different than the spell resolving.

  (...)When (X) enters the battlefield, if you cast if from your hand, (Y).

This is a list of cards that have that phrasing on it.  As a specific example, Angel of the Dire Hour.

  When Angel of the Dire Hour enters the battlefield, if you cast it from your hand, exile all attacking creatures.


Is there an equivalent of gatherer for Duels of the Planeswalkers? Gatherer is a fantastic resource for finding cards in paper magic, but does not seem to me to contain any way of getting only Duels of the Planeswalkers cards. Neither the Expansion, Format or Block filters contain anything like Duels 2015 (although the expansion filter contains several Duels of planeswalker1 vs planeswalker2). Does some other searchable database exist that contains the Duels 2015 cards only?

Edit/clarification:
There is a Duels of the Planeswalkers theme set. To clarify: I am not interested in those cards, but instead the Duels of the Planeswalkers video game and specifically the 2015 version.

I don't think there is a searchable database like Gatherer that lists DotP cards, because most places that allow you to search for cards either get their info from Gatherer or MagicCards.info (or a thrid party that gets their info from one of those sources like MtGJSON) and neither of those sites allow you to search for DotP cards. There are however places that list all, or most of the cards from each expansion.

DotP 2015 + Expansion
DotP 2014
DotP 2013 + Expansion
DotP 2012
DotP (2009)


Cluedo optimal suggestion asking I am writing an algorithm to ask for the most optimal suggestion (murderer, weapon, place). I would like to hear your opinions about this method, possible improvements, or limitations.

In order of importance:

Never use a card that you already know another player has: You won't gain any information.
Never use a card that another player knows I have: That player could potentially gain as much information from my suggestion as myself.

For example I own the dagger, and player B knows that. Additionally he has the kitchen, and I don't know that. I then suggest it was Plum, with the dagger, in the kitchen; when somebody disproves my accusation player B would know that the other player had to show me Plum.

Use my own cards a maximum of one time throughout the entire game: The entire point of using one of your own cards is to suggest that somebody else has it, or that it is one of the cards in the envelope. If I repeat one of my cards then this would happen:

I use my card no.1: The person that disproves me now possibly has no.1 (according to all the other players). But then I use no.1 again and this same player is now not able to disprove my suggestion. (All the other players now know he didn't have it; this gives them extra information that either I have it or it is in the envelope)

Never use a card that you know is in the envelope: This only gives the other players information about other people not having that card.
If you have used all your cards once, make suggestions about 3 unknown cards.

You are trying to write a set of human understandable rules for a problem that a machine can do much better at.  What you have designed is a set of heuristics for what is fundamentally a statistics problem.  If you want to achieve true optimality, I recommend you start over entirely.

There are 9 rooms, 6 players, and 6 weapons.  This means that there are only 324 different valid guesses (9 * 6 * 6) in general, and if you restrict this algorithm to a guess given the room you are in, you only have 36 options.  While these are is too big for a human to evaluate in real-time, they are negligible to a computer.  What you want to write is a set of scoring criteria for each of these card combinations, and then to pick the card combination that has the highest score as your guess (breaking ties at random).

In order to talk further about optimal, we need to get rigorous about this scoring mechanism.  It sounds from your starting attempt like there are two things you care about:

Gaining as much information that you don't already know
Revealing as little information that you do already know to other players.

It's going to be quite complicated to handle both of these, so let's focus on just point 1 at first (as it's the more important of the two).

In order to gain information, you algorithm needs to have as input everything that you already know about where cards are.  This is:

How many cards each player has
Which cards you know the locations of (including your own cards)
Which cards you know certain players do not hold

You then build a probability model of the location of each card (including the middle).  Cards that you know the location of will have probability 100% associated with that location.  Then, for an arbitrary guess, you model what the players will do with that guess, namely show you a card or pass to the next player.  For this purpose, you probably want to assume the worst case, namely that if a player holds a card matching your guess that you already know the location of, that's the card you will be shown.  With all of this, you can determine the probability that you will be shown a new card versus it will get back to you with no one showing you anything.  You need to add in a bit of logic for figuring out what you learn if it gets back to you without anyone showing you anything.

But at the end of this, you have a probability of learning new information with a given guess.  At this point you could throw in some weighting for different types of cards (I believe rooms to be more valuable pieces of information because you have to get to the room to guess it), but you don't have to.  Compare this probability across each guess and take the one with the highest chance of telling you something new.

With such an algorithm, you could even run it on all 324 card combinations, look at the top 10 most valuable guesses, and from that determine the most valuable room to go to next (or maybe even add in some weighting for room distance).

At this point, you could now try to tackle part 2: giving away as little information as possible.  What you probably want to do is subtract some amount from the score of each guess for how much information it gives away, but this gets complicated quite fast as to do it optimally requires modeling everything the other players know.  You could just add a negative weight to any guess that would reveal a card you know to be in the envelope, but this would be a delicate thing to calibrate, and at this point we're back in the realm of heuristics rather than being able to talk about an "optimal" guess.  My recommendation is to not include this in your first attempt at this algorithm.


Does the new specialist after a crew change retain saved unspent AP from the previous turn? The rules say "The player's Firefighter has the AP (less the 2AP required for a crew change)...." If I effect a crew change and had Action Markers from unspent AP on my previous turn, do I get to keep those for the new character I am using? The strict literal reading of the rules implies no, and the story aspect reasonably would argue no, but it would certainly help me save victims!

To me, the strict literal reading of the rules says yes (keep them).  Everything in the general section (p4) says the AP saved applies to "the player" not the Firefighter.  Nothing I read in the crew change rules negates this.


When must one communicate denial of a shortcut? Anthony begins his turn by drawing a card. He then immediately turns his creatures sideways and declares "I attack with Runeclaw Bear and Alpine Grizzly."

Anthony's opponent, Nathan, has 6 life. Nathan has Crippling Chill and Kill Shot in hand, and the mana available to cast either but not both. He has not yet acknowledged Anthony's shortcut to move to combat, nor has he denied it.

Which of the following is true?

Nathan must immediately deny Anthony's shortcut.
Nathan may deny the shortcut after pausing to think about what he wants to do.

I am specifically interested in two cases: Regular REL and Competitive REL. If the answer depends on which one is in effect, please cover both. I am not interested in casual play, but you can certainly cover that if you want to.

Regarding shortcuts, the relevant rules for this scenario are:

  716.1a The rules for taking shortcuts are largely unformalized. As long as each player in the game understands the intent of each other player, any shortcut system they use is acceptable.

as well as

  716.2a At any point in the game, the player with priority may suggest a shortcut by describing a sequence of game choices, for all players, that may be legally taken based on the current game state and the predictable results of the sequence of choices. This sequence may be a non- repetitive series of choices, a loop that repeats a specified number of times, multiple loops, or nested loops, and may even cross multiple turns. It can’t include conditional actions, where the outcome of a game event determines the next action a player takes. The ending point of this sequence must be a place where a player has priority, though it need not be the player proposing the shortcut.

  716.2b Each other player, in turn order starting after the player who suggested the shortcut, may either accept the proposed sequence, or shorten it by naming a place where he or she will make a game choice that’s different than what’s been proposed. (The player doesn’t need to specify at this time what the new choice will be.) This place becomes the new ending point of the proposed sequence.

  716.2c Once the last player has either accepted or shortened the shortcut proposal, the shortcut is taken. The game advances to the last proposed ending point, with all game choices contained in the shortcut proposal having been taken. If the shortcut was shortened from the original proposal, the player who now has priority must make a different game choice than what was originally proposed for that player.

Regarding this specific question, when a player is proposing to do an action that can only be taken in a certain step that would occur after the player's last known step, it is a well-known shortcut that the player is going to change phases until the first phase where they can take that action. In this case, after drawing for Draw Phase, Anthony is proposing a shortcut to get to Combat phase, ending Draw phase and ending First Main phase without doing anything in either. This is a perfectly valid shortcut.

Once Nathan proposes this shortcut, Nathan is then allowed to propose a shortened shortcut, where he will make a game choice that's different than what Anthony proposed. In this particular case, the most likely proposal from Nathan would be to go until the 'Beginning of Combat Step'. This is a normal decision in the course of a game, and thus Nathan can take his time to decide on this proposal, within reason of course. This is the same at both Regular REL and Competitive REL. If Nathan takes an action before proposing a shortened shortcut, such as casting a spell or activating an ability, it is assumed that he is accepting the shortcut that Anthony proposed.

Note: Once Nathan proposes a shortened shortcut, Anthony is not then allowed to instead do something in his First Main phase; he has to go with the shortened shortcut. In this case, that would be advancing to end of his First Main phase and passing priority.


Are there 5/5 Beast Token cards? There are at least two cards that I know of that make 5/5 Beast tokens (Spawning Ground and One Dozen Eyes).

Yet I can't seem to find an actual token card that is a 5/5 Beast.

Does such a card exist? I know I could use a die that has a 5 on it, or take a 3/3 and write 5s over them.  But this question is for someone who is into the real token cards.

If they do exist, how would I find some?

Here's a pretty comprehensive list of official MTG tokens and similar cards. I can't find a 5/5 Beast on that list.

As a rule of thumb:

Putting tokens in packs only really started around Tenth Edition, and has been done consistently since. The cards from before that are special promos.
In the modern day, sets sold in booster packs have tokens and emblems as some of the inserts (typically mixed with ad and rules tip cards). Pre-built sets like Commander products and Duel Decks may or may not come with token cards.
Wizards of the Coast does not make "copy" tokens (how would you?), but they do print specific tokens with abilities listed on the cards, as well as tokens with variable P/T.

In this case, the cards that produce 5/5 Beasts are from Mirrodin and Commander 2013. Mirrodin came before Tenth Edition, while Commander 2013 is a non-randomized set that didn't include tokens.


Is a noble permanently yours once he's visited you in Splendor? Splendor is a great game, but the rules were written sub-optimally.

  At the end of their turn, each player checks the noble tiles in order to determine if they’re receiving a visit from one of them.

Do you check the nobles currently "visiting" another player, or is a noble permanently yours once he's visited you?

Two people from Splendor-distributor Asmodee have confirmed[1][2] that you retain any noble that has visited you.


Can a Beer protect me from Dynamite overkill? In Bang!, if I have 1 bullet left and the Dynamite blows up on me for 3 damage, can I use Beer and wind up at 1 life at the end?

You would have to play 3 beers to wind up with 1 bullet if the dynamite blew up on you with 1 bullet left. Here's an example in the rule book for the beer card that explains it...

  Example. You have 2 life points left, and suffer 3 damages from a Dynamite. If you play 2 Beers you will stay alive with 1 life point left (2-3+2), while you would be eliminated playing only one Beer that would allow you to regain just 1 life point. You would still be at zero!


The effect of wither If Olivia Voldaren is enchanted with Fists of the Demigod and you activate the ability to deal damage to a target creature, does this damage come in the form of -1/-1 counters? If it does, and the target is a Spirit en-Kor, can the Spirit en-Kor redirect the -1/-1 counter?

Yes, Wither applies to all damage, not only combat damage.

  702.79a Wither is a static ability. Damage dealt to a creature by a source with wither isn’t marked on that creature. Rather, it causes that source’s controller to put that many -1/-1 counters on that creature. See rule 119.3.

Yes, Spirit en-Kor can still use its ability to redirect the damage. Olivia Voldaren is still dealing damage, it's just that the effects of that damage are different than normal, so the Spirit's ability can be used. And when the damage is redirected, the source of the damage is still Olivia, so Wither still applies.


Whenever someone casts an enchant on one of my creatures, do I control that enchantment? Say I control Genesis Hydra, then an opponent casts Claustrophobia onto Genesis Hydra, do I control Claustrophobia?

You don't control Claustrophobia. Permanents enter the battlefield under the control of the controller of the spell, unless something else is explicitly stated.

For permanent spells:

  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.

For other spells or abilities:

  110.2a If an effect instructs a player to put an object onto the battlefield, that object enters the battlefield under that player’s
  control unless the effect states otherwise.


In Arkham Horror, should the newly placed monsters or the final count of monsters be evenly distributed? The rules state:

  When placing monsters, they should be divided as evenly as possible among the open gates, with no gate having more monsters placed on it than the gate where the monster surge occurred this turn.

Does this mean that if I am place 6 monsters across 3 gates, the first of which has 5 monsters, then I should end up with 7, 2, and 2 monsters in those locations when I am done?

It's the newly placed monsters you're distributing evenly. The "they" in that sentence refers to the monsters you're placing.

So you're mostly right about your example: to place six monsters on three gates, you add two to each, no matter what was already there.

But remember, the monster limit is the number of players in the game plus three. Presumably if a monster surge makes you place six monsters on three gates, you have six players, so the monster limit is 9. If there are already 5 monsters on the board, you can only add four more, and the last two will go to the outskirts.

The Arkham Horror FAQ clarify that situation a bit:

  When placing monsters, they must be divided as evenly as possible among the open gates, with no gate having more monsters placed on it than the gate where the monster surge occurred this turn.

So in that example, you'd place two on the gate that caused the surge, one on each of the others, and two in the outskirts.


Clarifying combat damage to player with abilities like Bloodthirst and Cipher For cards like Vampire Outcasts or Shadow Slice, does Bloodthirst/Cipher only activate when combat damage is dealt directly to a player? For example, if an opponent blocks my attacking creature then the combat damage is dealt to the creature and not the "player", correct?

Should I be thinking in terms of since the player and the creature are separate then any combat damage dealt to a creature is not the same as a combat damage dealt to the player?

A player and his or her creatures are separate things. Dealing combat damage to a creature does not count as dealing combat damage to that creature's controller, and vice versa. Also, regarding your last sentence, a player never deals damage to anything, only sources controlled by that player, such as spells and creatures.


What are some alternatives to using dice in Settlers of Catan? In Settlers of Catan, there's a variant where instead of rolling the dice, you use a stack of 36 cards with each combination. This reduces the luck component, but has as disadvantage that you can predict future rolls to some extent.

The iPhone Catan game also allows this rule variant.

Have you tried this and do you think it's an improvement?

EDIT: Have you tried other methods of reducing the importance of luck?

The card system that you describe is not just a variant, it is an official expansion, Catan: Event Cards, which includes not only the rolls (in the form of the totals with the appropriate distribution) but also red dice for Cities and Knights and a selection of minor game events.


When does a token have the same name as another token? I'm playing a Selesnya tokens deck, and my opponent casts Detention Sphere, which exiles all creatures with the "same name", on one of my tokens. Does he get to exile

All of my tokens?
All of the tokens of the same creature type/power/toughness? (E.g. all 1/1 Birds.)
Just that one token?

None of the above. It will exile all permanents with the same name as targeted permanent. This may or may not be all your tokens. This may or may not be all your only token. Type, power and toughness are irrelevant.

Some abilities explicitly give names to the tokens they create. For example, Tolsimir Wolfblood creates a token of creature type "Wolf" named "Voja".

If you use Detention Sphere to exile a permanent named "Voja", it will exile all permanents named "Voja", and only those. (It doesn't matter if they are tokens or not. It will not exile permanents named "Wolf". It will not exile permanents of creature type "Wolf" unless their name is "Voja". It will not exile tokens unless their name is "Voja".)

Some don't. If the ability did not explicitly give a name to the token, its name is the same as its type. For example, Eyes in the Skies creates a token of creature type "Bird" named "Bird".

If you use Detention Sphere to exile a permanent named "Bird", it will exile all permanents named "Bird", and only those. (It doesn't matter if they are tokens or not. It will not exile permanents named "Saproling". It will not exile permanents of creature type "Bird" unless their name is "Bird". It will not exile tokens unless their name is "Bird".)

Relevant rules:

  110.5c A spell or ability that creates a creature token sets both its name and its creature type. If the spell or ability doesn’t specify the name of the creature token, its name is the same as its creature type(s). A “Goblin Scout creature token,” for example, is named “Goblin Scout” and has the creature subtypes Goblin and Scout. Once a token is on the battlefield, changing its name doesn’t change its creature type, and vice versa.


Board Game Mechanics I find myself always purchasing games that have similar game mechanics. I prefer worker-placement games, and railroad tycoon type games. All of these games borrow from each other in terms of how the game plays. I find this type of game suits my strategic style of play.

I now want to introduce something new to my gaming group, and want to know what type of game mechanics I am really missing out on, and why they add to the overall experience of the game.

What I want to know is what other type of game mechanics make a game more interesting to play, increase the strategic element and really make the game what it is. The type of thing I am after is similar comments to a conversation at my last gaming meeting, which was

  I much prefer Age of Steam to Railroad Tycoon, because of the way the resources are replenished. Where as Railroad Tycoon can dry up a city's resource quite quickly.

The resource track in Power Grid leads to some interesting decisions.  If you haven't played it, the resource track has costs increasing left-to-right while the resources are replenished from right-to-left.  This has a few interesting effects:

Resources in demand tend to cost more.
You can get resources on the cheap if you have a power plant type no one else is using.
You can hoard resources (up to a point) to make them more costly for everyone else.

Players have to make tough choices, especially since turn order is so important in Power Grid.  The player in the lead goes last when buying resources.  So a player can forego easy victory points in the short term to set up better prices for himself.  It adds another dimension to the decision-making process, and those decisions matter.


Why Valki returns stolen card even after the transformation? Why Valki returns stolen cards even after the transformation? It is obvious, why Valki returns the stolen cards without the usage of its activated ability. But after becoming a copy of one of the stolen cards Valki loses its text with "... until Valki leaves the battlefield"?

Whenever a card references itself by name, it means "this object".

201.4. Text that refers to the object it’s on by name means just that particular object and not any other objects with that name, regardless of any name changes caused by game effects.

This means that Valki's first ability refers to the card presently represented by Valki, God of Lies, not one named that. It'll still be the same object even if it changes its name or characteristics somehow, such as with its activated ability.


Categories of Board Gaming skill How would you categorize gaming skill, based on your own talents, or those of people you know?  And what makes certain people good at those categories?

For one example, I've noticed I tend to win most games that involve a long series of calculations or tactical decisions, like Carcassonne and Bohnanza, but get beaten much more often at strategic games that require having firm goals in mind and lots of planning, like Puerto Rico and Race for the Galaxy - and I know people who are phenomenal at those games, and often, the same people are great at both.

Perhaps that qualifies me as a Tactician but not a Strategist?

Trading, psychology, and speed are other possible categories I can think of off the top of my head.

A list of categories of board game skills isn't something I've ever seen.  To actually come up with one, I think you have to first start by looking at research from the psychology field in relation to the different forms of IQ.  The theory of multiple intelligences that was created in 1983 by Howard Gardner breaks out different types of intelligence.  Gardner lists 8 different types of intelligence.

Depending on the type of game, I would say some of those intelligences come into play.  Certainly if you have bodily-kinesthetic intelligence and interpersonal intelligence, you would be more likely to be a shrewd trader in games like Settlers of Catan.  If you can read people's body language to tell they're bluffing, this is a huge leg in games like Poker.  On the other end of the spectrum, spatial intelligence would be incredibly important for games where board position is important.

There is also how much planning people do to consider.  Good chess players, look ahead at more possible moves then weaker chess players, and a similar ability to analyze future events would be a good thing to look at.  This gets into game theory and prefect play.  A players ability to practice this would be another big skill.

Speed would be another topic to consider.  Players who arrive at decisions faster would also be better at games where timing matters.  This could also affect games where timing may not immediately be apparent.  Being able to realize any deal another player is offering before the others players accept, would usually be beneficial.

Since research on psychology and artificial intelligence should also be considered, I personally don't feel qualified to give you an exhaustive list.  There is a book, Moves in Mind: The Psychology of Board Games you might be interested in if you really want to delve deeply into this topic.  There is current active research by psychologist and programmers for using games to develop different skills in participants that looks at this question from a different angle.

Promoting Broad and Stable Improvements in Low-Income Children’s Numerical Knowledge Through Playing Number Board Games
SIDES: a cooperative tabletop computer game for social skills development


what is a storage counter on a land card and how do you use it? I have a card called Calciform Pools. It uses something called a storage counter. What is it and how do you use it?

Card Text:

  Tap: Add {1} to your mana pool.

  {1}, Tap: Put a storage counter on Calciform Pools.

  {1}, Remove X storage counters from Calciform Pools: Add X mana in any combination of {w} and/or {B} to your mana pool.

Most counters in MTG don't do anything by themselves. Their function is defined by the text of various cards which use them or place them. The names of the counters are a bit like creature types — they don't have any stand-alone rules significance but cards interact with them.

The exceptions are:

"+X/+Y" counters (normally +1/+1 and -1/-1, but some really old cards have other kinds), which modify a creature's power and toughness.
Poison counters: a player who has ten or more poison counters loses the game.

In the case of Calciform Pools, the  "storage counters" are there to be used for its second and third ability.

  {1}, Tap: Put a storage counter on Calciform Pools.

This lets you slowly "charge up" the land. If you have untapped mana on your opponents end step, you can spend some of it to put a storage counter on the Pools.

  {1}, Remove X storage counters from Calciform Pools: Add X mana in any combination of {w} and/or {B} to your mana pool.

This lets you "release" all of the mana you've stored up. The extra cost of 1 colorless is there to encourage you to take out a bunch of mana all at once. Note that you don't have to tap pools to activate this ability, so you can use Pools' first mana ability to pay the 1 colorless if you want to. You can also activate this ability multiple times per turn if you have 1 mana floating around to pay for it.


What happens if a slapped player plays a card before playing a Slap Say Alice plays a Double Slap targeting Bob.

Say Bob plays a card, which accepts the Double Slap. Then, Bob plays a Double Slap targeting Chuck, ending their first turn. Bob then plays a Skip for their second turn.

Would Chuck be able to play a Double Slap to pass on the slaps to Darlene x4, or do they have to take the double turn since the Double Slap was not the last card played?

Double Slap reads:

  End your turn and make a player take any other turn you have plus two more.

When you play a Slap card, your turn ends and all your remaining turns are transferred to the slapped player. That means the second player illegally played Skip when it wasn't their turn in your example.

What should have happened:

Alice plays a Double Slap targeting Bob. Play transfers to Bob, which must play 2 turns (as per the text on the card).
Bob plays a card (thus taking a turn instead of responding to the Slap with a Nope or another Slap).
Bob plays a Double Slap targeting Chuck. Play transfers to Chuck, which must play Bob's remaining turn plus two more, for a total of 3 (as per the text on the card).
Chuck responds with a Double Slap targeting Darlene. Just like playing Nope, this is played out of turn. Play transfers to Darlene, which must play the 3 turns Chuck would have had to play plus two more, for a total of 5 (as per the example in the rules).


Is there a tier list of all precon Commander decks? C19 is currently being spoiled and I am thinking about buying it. The idea is to buy a group of deck to play with friends.
Here is the idea. Lets consider that we are 5 people sitting at a table. This is casual kitchen table magic.
We all know how to play mtg and commander. Our global level is homogeneous and mostly amateur.
I would like to buy 5 decks from different commander set, but I fear to buy one deck which will be seen has much more powerful than the others.

What would be a tier list of all precon Commander deck?

A tier list would help because I could choose a group of deck in the same category. Commander being a 100 cards singleton format, it offers a much higher entropy that classical construct. So a tier list may not be relevant.

As far as I'm aware there are no official rankings for Commander preconstructed decks. However, each deck in a given set it made with the others in mind to be balanced against. Thus, Mirror Mastery is more likely to be balanced against Counterpunch than it is against Open Hostility.

Here is a list of sets, which each contain the decks that were in that set (and thus what they're balanced around). However, as you said yourself, Commander is a more volatile format and balance is not going to be a consistent thing. This is especially true when you consider that Commander is less competitive than traditional magic and more political/social. Consider Political Puppets. It certainly has win conditions, but the commander is based around giving your permanents away in order to play diplomatically with your opponents.

If you definitely want decks from different sets, in lieu of a formal ranking and because they aren't necessarily balanced around each other, I would look at the price of each of those decks. While certainly not a perfect way of telling, very powerful decks with highly sought after cards tend to be more expensive.


How quickly does a player have to say "Uno" to avoid drawing extra cards? I was playing with my fiancée and some friends, and she's adamant that if you can yell Uno before someone who has just played their second to last card, they are required to pick up the penalty amount of cards.

Is this kosher?

She's basically right, but timing matters here. Your correct play is to say "UNO" as you play the card, which can't be interrupted. The player about to go down to one card may not be caught until his second to last card hits the discard pile. After that though, he's fair game! From the rules:

  When you have one card left, you must yell "UNO" (meaning one).
  Failure to do this results in you having to pick two cards from the
  DRAW pile. That is, of course if you get caught by the other players...

  A player who forgets to say UNO before his card touches the discard
  pile, but "catches" himself before any other player catches him, is
  safe and is not subject to the penalty. You may not catch a player for
  failure to say UNO until his second to last card touches the DISCARD
  pile. Also, you may not catch a player for failure to say UNO after
  the next player begins his turn. "Beginning a turn is defines as
  either drawing a card from the DRAW pile or drawing a card from your
  hand to play.

Newer rules on Mattel's web site have a FOUR card penalty:


In Magic: The Gathering, can I include a card in my deck that I can't play based on my land setup? I have a plan to build a deck that can get Progenitus on to the battlefield on turn 3 (it's an ongoing joke between my friends and I on who could get Progenitus out quickest with the cards we currently have), but I'm unsure about whether or not I would be allowed Progenitus in my deck at all.

My plan is based on a red/green deck, but obviously Progenitus needs all 5 colours to cast. Within the rules, can I include him anyway? I assume I can, as there are ways of getting him out without casting him, and including cards you don't have the colours for seems more like a stupid move rather than a rule breaking one, but I'm unable to find anything specific about whether or not you have the right colours to include a card in your deck or not.

If you are playing a typical constructed game, there is nothing that stops you from putting Progenitus in your deck even if you don't have anything that will give you the mana required to cast it. The Magic Tournament Rules for constructed tournaments don't have such restrictions: Deck Construction Restrictions.

On the other hand, there are formats which won't allow you to put Progenitus in your deck, unless specific conditions are met. One example is Commander, where you would need a Commander of all colors (or make Progenitus your Commander).


When I buy expansions, should I take out duplicate bases? The title says it all,

I recently bought the base set + expansion awesome level 9000. I now have duplicate bases. Should I play with duplicates or take them out?

Each expansion contains functionally unique bases, which makes sense, as every expansion adds a number of new factions, each of which have their designated bases.

Some expansions may also contain reprints of existing bases - in case of Awesome Level 9000, as mentioned on the back of the package (see the image below), there are reprints of the original bases included - likely as replacements of the original cards due to design changes, not to double the chances of those bases appearing in games.

Some ways I could see you otherwise obtaining exact duplicates of original bases is if you bought the same expansion more than once, got a mispackaged edition of the game, bought it used and unordered by the previous owner, or something along those lines.


Advice for an experienced gamer who'd like to play nomic games? I am an experienced board gamer (and card too), with a particular affinity for collaborative games (Shadows over Camelot, Pandemic, etc.). I would like to take this a step further by studying self-government games in the style of Nomic. However, the learning step appears to be a bit steep. Given that I'd have to find a few friends to play with, I'd like to find a good game for our collective first time, so as not to be too easily discouraged.

So, what choice of nomic games would you recommend, and what general advice would you give me to organize this.

For having played so many Nomic, I must recommend you to play with friends around a table in a place where there are a few games.

The reasons for that are hard to explain, but playing Nomic online implies one of the two followings:

The game is abstract and requires every player to keep his own trace of the current situation, like two chess players that only send each other the coordinates of their moves.
Many players are programmers that can change the website you're playing on, to add new kinds of elements. Let's say you play with "points" and suddenly you decide to add "coins" and "blue turtles", and there is an hexagonal board, ... You can't just add a comment in a blog to edit the players status and adding fields to the database.

But if you play around a table, you can add "Carcassonne pawns" and "Catane cards" in your game quite simply.

Also, you start with very basic rules. Forget about mutable/immutable rules, for example.

Here is an example of starting rules:

1) No rules can be added or changed if it is in contradiction with an already valid rule.

2) The players play their turn clockwise, each finishing his or her turn before the next player begins. The players decide who plays first in the way they prefer.

3) At a player's turn he or she can propose a new rule, a change in a rule or a removal of a rule, by writing it on a piece of paper in the exact form it is supposed to be added or changed. Such an action is called a motion.

4) When a motion is made, all the players vote by raising hands if they accept or reject the motion, each one having one voice.

5) If more than half the voices accept a motion, it is put in the ruleset, at the end with a new number if it is a new rule; at the same place with the same number if the rule is changed; and crossed out if it is removed.

6) The winner is the one who sells the princess.

(Of course, to achieve such a goal, you must either change the rule 6) or introduce a princess and a way to sell her.)


Once the last mythos card is flipped, is there no point to continuing the game? Since most (or all) mysteries require waiting until the end of the mythos phase to officially complete them, is there no point to continuing the game once you flip the final mythos card and still haven't solved the first 3 mysteries? The exception to giving up the moment the final mythos is flipped seems to be when the ancient one awakens and you stand a chance to defeat him in that final round after the last mythos is flipped (since defeating the ancient one appears to end the game immediately in the investigators' favor).
Do I have this all correct?
Edit: from the Eldritch faq under Ancient Ones & Mysteries

Q. Do effects that “advance the active Mystery” or “solve the active Mystery” affect the Final Mystery?
A. No. The Final Mystery is not a Mystery card nor is it considered the active Mystery. As such, effects that advance or solve the active Mystery do not affect the Final Mystery.

This seems to support the treatment of Final Mysteries as a different entity as normal Mysteries.

Since most (or all) mysteries require waiting until the end of the mythos phase to officially complete them, is there no point to continuing the game once you flip the final mythos card and still haven't solved the first 3 mysteries?

In theory this is covered by the Reference Guide under Winning/Losing.

In practice, the official errata explains this:

  If a Mythos card cannot be drawn during the Mythos Phase, the Mythos Phase ends. Then, if investigators have not won the game, investigators lose the game.

So what happens is:

The mythos phase skips right to the end.
At this moment a Mystery card may say "At the end of the Mythos Phase, if [something], solve this Mystery". If this was the last mystery, the Ancient One sheet will usually say that you win.
Anyway, the rules say that you lose, because you had no Mythos Card to draw.
BUT the rules also say that if you win and lose at the same time, you win. (again Winning/Losing in the Reference Guide)

So if that was your last mystery, and you solved it, then you win.

As for beating the Ancient One: Yes, if a game component says you win, then you win. That's the actual rule (Winning/Losing).

Waiting until the end of Mythos Phase to win, is not a rule - it's written separately on each Ancient One's sheet.


When is Darksteel Juggernaut's power and toughness determined? Can they change? The relevant part of Darksteel Juggernaut's rules text states:

  Darksteel Juggernaut's power and toughness are each equal to the number of artifacts you control.

When is Darksteel Juggernaut's power and toughness determined? Can they change?

I am not a judge, but I believe the following sections from the comprehensive rules cover everything:

  207.2a The card may have a characteristic-defining ability that sets its power and/or toughness according to some stated condition. (See rule 604.3.) Such an ability is worded “[This creature’s] [power or toughness] is equal to . . .” or “[This creature’s] power and toughness are each equal to . . .” This ability functions everywhere, even outside the game. If the ability needs to use a number that can’t be determined, including inside a calculation, use 0 instead of that number.

and

  604.3. Some static abilities are characteristic-defining abilities. A characteristic-defining ability conveys information about an object’s characteristics that would normally be found elsewhere on that object (such as in its mana cost, type line, or power/toughness box). Characteristic-defining abilities function in all zones. They also function outside the game.

And if you check the card rulings for Serra Avatar (with the same ability), it has the following ruling:

  10/4/2004: Its power and toughness are continuously calculated.

So, its power and toughness are always defined, in all zones, and always updated.  If anything needs to reference its power and toughness, determine what that is.  If a new artifact comes into play, it automatically goes up in power and toughness.


How can I reduce the planar die "whiff factor" with house rules? I like to play Planechase sometimes. Mostly this variant, which gives players some additional choices when planswalking.

However, the most annoying part of Planechase is that the planar die has such a high "whiff factor" (incidence of null results). A particular thing I dislike is the handling time when a player has nothing else to do or desperately wants to planeswalk — rolling the die, tapping some mana, rolling the die again, &c.

Criteria for a house rule that meets my needs:

reduced incidence of totally null results
reduced handling time (compared to multiple rerolls)
whatever you change, the vast majority of the existing planes should still be playable as-is
it's okay to replace the planar die with some other game piece (including a custom die)

This is inspired by the action-choosing mechanism from Speculation.

Start of game setup:

Get six objects that can represent planeswalk/chaos/nothing: colored marbles, Scrabble tiles, popsicle sticks with symbols drawn on them, etc.
Place the objects in an opaque bag.

When the player wants to "roll":

The player pays the cost for rolling and chooses an item from the bag without looking.
If a Nothing item is removed, set it aside on the table.
If a Planeswalk or Chaos item is removed, perform that action and return all the items to the bag.

This reduces the likelihood of whiffing over time.

Normal 4/6 chance on the first roll.
3/5 chance after the first whiff.
2/4 chance after the second whiff.
1/3 chance after the third whiff.
No chance of whiffing after four whiffs.

This seems to well satisfy criteria 1, 3, and 4. Admittedly, it's not much faster than regular rolling, if you discount the fact that on average you'll get a favorable result faster than if you had used a die.


Can you have more than one companion? In Betrayal at the house on the hill, can you have more than one companion with you such as dog, girl, madman. Or do you have to discard one of the companions once you draw a second one?

Yes, you can have more than one companion.

Nothing in the rules says you can't, also the Dog, Girl and Madman cards say on them that they cannot be dropped, traded or stolen.


In Catan Jr, what happens when a resource is gone and players should receive more of it? When playing Catan Junior, if all the resources from a stockpile get handed out but more are needed, what happens?

For example, if a player rolls to receive a wood resource but none are left, or multiple players should receive the same resource but there are not enough available for everybody.

There appears to be no mention of this in the rulebook. The original, vanilla Catan game rulebook states this:

  If there are not enough of a given resource in the supply to fulfill everyone's production, then no one receives any of that resource during that turn.

So that's an option. Another option might be a house-rule along these lines: A player should receive Wood, but there's no more Wood in the stockpile. If that player gives a Wood from his own cache to the bank, he gets to choose another resource. This is basically a 2:1 trade, giving two Wood (one from their hand and one owed them by the bank) for one other resource. This keeps the player happy for he gets resources, and puts some of this resource back in the bank.


Is Klak's Infernal Artifact affected by powers that move monsters? Adventure 3 in the Castle Ravenloft Adventure book has this special rule for dealing with Klak's Artifact:

  Attacking Klak's Artifact will destroy it.  When attacking the artifact, treat the artifact as a Monster.

How does this work with powers that move monsters?  For example, Tide of Iron?

The artifact is represented by a 2x2 marker.  Markers don't typically move, but I didn't see any rule explicitly stating this.

I found the following entry at the D&D Adventure Systems Wiki:

Attack one adjacent Monster.
If you hit, place that Monster (if it isn't destroyed) on a tile within 1 tile of you, and you can move to any square on your tile.

So you could use Tide of Iron to attack it (since its treated as a monster), but Klak's Artifact states:

Attacking Klak's Artifact will destroy it.

So what happens when something is destroyed?  Page 10 of the rules, under Destroying Objects (empahsis mine at the end):

An Adventure might specify that an object needs to be destroyed to win a particular scenario. If the object has an Armor Class and Hit Points, your Hero can target it just like a Monster.  If your Hero has a power that attacks all Monsters on a specific
tile, it can also attack an object on that tile. Once you deal damage equal to its number of Hit Points, you destroy the object and remove its marker from the tile.

So you can attack Klak's Infernal Artifact with Tide of Iron, but then there's nothing to move afterwards, since attacking the Infernal Artifact destroys it, and destroyed objects are removed from the tile.
Phew.


What is “Pot Odds” in Poker Texas Hold'em? What is "Pot Odds" in Poker Texas Hold'em?

Pot Odds is a term that describes the ratio of the current bet to the pot.

For example, consider if the pot is $100 and you need to make a $10 bet to stay in.  Your hand is a dog, and you estimate only a 20% chance for you to win.  Pot odds would say that you should make the bet as you are getting 10-1 on your $10.

You can get more information from the Wikipedia entry on Pot Odds.


Does guiltfeeder still cause loss of life if it's killed by an instant after attacking? If an opponent attacks me with Guiltfeeder, and I destroy it with an Instant after it has been declared an Attacker, what happens?

  Fear

  Whenever Guiltfeeder attacks and isn't blocked, defending player loses 1 life for each card in his or her graveyard.

Since it has been destroyed, it's impossible to declare blockers against it, but the ability is still on the stack (I think?), so I'm not sure what the outcome is.

The ruling on Guiltfeeder makes this pretty clear:

  An ability that triggers when something "attacks and isn't blocked" triggers in the declare blockers step after blockers are declared if (1) that creature is attacking and (2) no creatures are declared to block it. It will trigger even if that creature was put onto the battlefield attacking rather than having been declared as an attacker in the declare attackers step.

If it's destroyed after declaring attackers but before declaring blockers (or lack thereof), there won't be any loss of life.

The ability doesn't go onto the stack until the declare blockers step (and then only if it's still attacking and unblocked). So if it's already dead by then, the ability never goes on the stack.

If for some reason someone wants it dead before combat damage, but wants the loss of life to happen, they could kill it during the declare blockers phase, after the ability triggered. At that point the ability would still resolve as normal, even with the Guiltfeeder gone.

In any case, either the ability has triggered and will cause loss of life, or it hasn't triggered at all. There's no odd in between state where it triggers then changes its mind, as your question suggests.


Is The Resistance conclusively easier for the Resistance in a six player game? Last night I played a few games of The Resistance with five others, and the Resistance won every single game.

I think I've found this before, it simply seems too easy for the Resistance to form safe teams.

In the six player game, there are just two spies.

The mission player requirements are 2,3,4,3,4.

Is the six player game objectively easier for the Resistance? What strategy can the spies use to maximise their chance of success?

I have found that the number of players does not matter but rather the players themselves. In a six player game, well in all games below 7 players, resistance members have to make perfect choices on missions 3 and 5. What that means is that the players with the spy role are doing something to tip off to everyone that they are spies which makes them easy to not put on a team.

If you look at the simple math for missions 3 and 5 you will find that the resistance has gathered a lot of information if they can keep picking perfect teams. With a resistance member as the team leader on the first pick they have a 60% chance of picking right (assuming they pick themselves first), 3 resistance 2 spies. Each pick they make lowers the odds pick 2 takes it to 50%, 2 resistance and 2 spies. Pick 3 takes it to 33%, 1 resistance and 2 spies.

How often each side wins will boil down to the play style of the group playing and how much unintended information they give out. Truth be said from my experience playing this at all player levels the spies should have the edge and win more often because they have perfect knowledge in the game and the resistance has flawed information.

Also are you playing with any of the expansions?


Does software for optimizing the train route in 18xx systems exist? While playing the 18xx games (create routes for trains and try to get the most money with your trains), it sometimes takes a lot of time to find the optimal route for the trains.

Does anybody know if there is any software available to help with this problem?

Not to my knowledge.

One thing I've done to assist with this problem is to use a pile of D6's of a couple different colors.

Place a D6 on each city of one color to represent your smallest train and work your way up to your largest.

When you are finished, pick up the D6's generating your total run profit as you go.

Towards the end of the game, we usually help each other, as the diesel runs can become quite dramatic as I'm sure you're aware!  It just speeds the game along as we don't want one person obsessing over his run for twenty minutes to gain an extra $10.


Magic: The Gathering - Why is it possible to activate some cards abilities from graveyard and some others not? There are some cards, that have activated abilities, that a player can activate when the card is in the graveyard. For example, the ability of Stitchwing Skaab to return it from the graveyard to the battlefield.

However, most of the other card abilities, a player can't activate from the graveyard. For example, Drogskol Cavalry's ability to put a spirit token to the battlefield can not be activated when it's in the graveyard.

So my question is, which rule of the game allowing a player to activate some abilities from the graveyard?

This is Comprehensive Rule 113.6:

113.6. Abilities of an instant or sorcery spell usually function only while that object is on the stack. Abilities of all other objects usually function only while that object is on the battlefield. The exceptions are as follows:
[ ... ]
113.6k An ability whose cost or effect specifies that it moves the object it’s on out of a particular zone functions only in that zone, unless its trigger condition or a previous part of its cost or effect specifies that the object is put into that zone or, if the object is an Aura, that the object it enchants leaves the battlefield. The same is true if the effect of that ability creates a delayed triggered ability whose effect moves the object out of a particular zone
Example: Reassembling Skeleton says “{1}{B}: Return Reassembling Skeleton from your graveyard to the battlefield tapped.” A player may activate this ability only if Reassembling Skeleton is in their graveyard.


In what order should I present the basics of Magic? I am working on a multimedia presentation (a series of images with an audio of explanation; video can be used too but should be less than the images) about Magic The Gathering. The scope is to explain to an audience of new players, who don't know anything about the game, the basis about how to play a game; it should be a replacement for the MtG Basic Rulebook that shops giveaway during the Magic Celebration event.

I found that the Rulebook is structured in a way some concepts have to be explained more than once and in different parts of it (e.g. the stack is introduced under the "sorcery" section, partially explained under "the stack" section and further information can be found under "casting a spell"). I would love to be more clear and consistent in my work.

This is the structure I'm thinking about:

1.  The basics
    a.  What is MtG
    b.  Parts of a card
    c.  Tapping
    d.  Making mana
2.  Card types
    a.  Land
    b.  Creature
    c.  Sorcery
    d.  Instant
    e.  Enchantment
        i.  Aura
    f.  Artifact
        i.  Equipment
    g.  Planeswalker
3.  Game zones
    a.  Library
    b.  Hand
    c.  Battlefield
    d.  Graveyard
    e.  Exile
4.  Basic playing
    a.  The stack
    b.  How to cast a spell
    c.  Attacking and blocking

But I'm still not convinced: the stack is one of the most important concepts of the game, yet one of the most difficult to understand. It's required to understand how cards interact, thus it should be explained before the card types, but if done this way people learn about the stack without knowing what a card is. The same problem happens with the concept of tapping, which requires knowing what a card is but is one of the first things to say when taking about the mana, lands and attacking.

Is this a reasonable order, or is there possibly a better structure for the presentation? When should I present tapping, and the stack? And why? Please remember that the audience has never heard of MtG and thus knows nothing about it.

Start simple, build their knowledge step by step and only introduce new concepts when they're comfortable with what's gone before.  When I introduce a new player, I always start with the basics:

MtG is a card game using a deck of shuffled cards
The colours of magic and their themes (Red - destruction, blue - subversion, green - power etc)
The types of cards - creatures, instants, sorceries, artifacts
Life totals
How to win the game
Creature and spell damage
Phases of a round
The stack

With that information, a person can watch a game and more or less understand what's going on, without having to understand all the complexities.  After watching a few games, most players can start to step through games at which point, they learn by making mistakes. :)


When is it a good idea to pick the Craftsman in Puerto Rico? At first, Craftsman seems like a great pick because it's what actually lets you actually produce goods, and if you're the one to pick it you can often produce more than everyone else. However, producing goods isn't the goal of the game, and what matters is what you can do with them. If you pick craftsman, you are nearly guaranteed to be the last player to USE your goods, even if you have more.

That said, when would picking craftsman actually be the best choice if you're just letting your left hand opponent ship/trade his goods first? Obviously if there's a nice stack of money on it you'd probably want to grab it, and if you have the right combination of goods that you are still guaranteed to trade or ship what you want to then it'd probably be fine.

When is it okay to pick Craftsman? How can I explain to beginners when they should and shouldn't do so?

I do not agree with the other answers that say Craftsman should be rarely taken.  By carefully consider seat order implications, if a player can answer the below questions in the affirmative then Craftsman should be the choice if no better options present themselves.  First a review of what Craftsman does.
Why take Craftsman?

Craftsman generate barrels which turn into victory points.  As this is the obvious way to generate victory points many players deemphasize this after playing a few games, leaving this route to the newbies. I feel this is a mistake and leaves an opportunity that can be exploited.
You get an extra barrel.  Note that this barrel comes last so you cannot use this to deny others.  However early game, an extra Corn will get you a quick extra VP.  Mid game an extra Coffee or Tobacco may allow you to trade multiple times off of one Craftsman for extra $$.

When to take Craftsman
There are two primary things to consider in the general case when deciding whether to take Craftsman.
Has Captain been taken in this round yet?
This is the big issue with Craftsman.  It is much better to take it in a round when Captain has already been chosen.  This limits the number of opportunities other folks will have to take Captain and deny you any benefit of your extra barrels.
Will you benefit the next time Captain is taken?
You need to put some thought into your seat order.  For example, in a 5 player game, you are seated second.  Player 1 goes first and takes Captain.  You can now craft freely knowing that you will have the first shot at taking Captain next round.  If you are seated third and take Craftsman you will get the second shot at Captain.  If player 2 takes Captain you are probably still going to get preferential loading of your barrels onto the ships.
As you get farther away from the current starting player, Craftsman becomes less attractive.
If you badly need money, you can consider the same two steps but in regard to Trader instead of Captain.  Sometimes you really need the money that trading a Coffee or Tobacco will give you.  A well chosen Trader can net you $5+ while potentially denying everyone else any benefit (if 3 spots are already filled for example).  While doing this you also need to give some though to the Captain.  You don't want to be forced to load your potential $7 barrel of Coffee on a ship right before you would get to pick Trader!
Other reasons to take Craftsman?

You are producing corn early in the game.  Get an extra barrel, it will likely turn into an extra VP
To make sure you produce the maximum possible.  If there are only 3 Tobacco left in stock, then Craft to make sure you get them.
Because you have a wharf.  With a wharf you don't have to worry about being denied the opportunity to ship your goods.
Because you have a warehouse.  A warehouse will enable you to store your goods through the next Captain phase (assuming it will be chosen at a bad time for you).  Then you can ship them later on.
To deny other people!  If it is obvious that that a later player will benefit greatly from Craftsman, taking it early can deny them a lot of barrels.
To force someone to take Captain.  This is related to the previous one.  If you are going first in a round, and you know that a later player (4th or 5th) will definitely take Captain, you can often convince player 2 or 3 to Captain if you take Craftsman in front of them.
There is money on it.  An extra $ or two can make all the difference!
You are winning and not able to end the game.  Crafting is the engine that drives the game along.  If you are confident that you have a good lead then Crafting can occasionally help things along even if you don't directly benefit from the Crafting yourself.


What stategy should I use when playing as the engineers? I played terra mystica for the first time recently as the engineers. I decided to pick good bridging starting locations, build a stonghold and a bridge the first turn, and spend the rest of the game accumulating as many points as I could from the bridges. I got boxed in the second turn and completely destroyed in terms of points. The engineers low starting resources and few workers from dwellings seem to imply that the ability to build bridges without with workers is extremely powerful.

What strategy should I use when playing as the engineers?

The risk of getting boxed in is always something you have to pay attention to. (Of course, the risk is greatest for this with the Chaos Magicians)

I only played the engineers once (and won with about 135 points), so I don't have much experience with them.  The stronghold ability is very strong but should be used situationally. What I mean by this is that you should not focus too hard on building bridges. I had my first point scoring bridge in round 2 (because for scoring points there have to be 2 buildings at either end of the bridge).

Very important (like always) is the position of the starting dwellings. I chose C11 (lots of possible bridges) and E7 (mainly for power leeching), but of course this depends from game to game.

I also built only 1 bridge with 2 workers, the other 2 bridges I built with the power bridge action. I think you should always do it like that if it's possible.