Do I have to keep a creeper whenever I draw cards in Fluxx, even if I was drawing cards to give to other players for "Everybody Gets 1"? Interesting scenario the other day. When playing the Action card "Everybody Gets 1" I drew a Creeper card. At this point though I had a conundrum. The Creeper card states I "must place it face up in front of you as soon as you get it." Well I wasn't "getting" this card, I was going to give it to another player under the rules of "Everybody Gets 1". Under this, the player I give it to should play the Creeper. However the Creeper also states "If you drew it, immediately draw another card to replace it." I did draw the card, so perhaps I should put the Creeper down and continue with the Action card. But it's that they put the word "if" in there that makes me hesitate since the wording makes it sound like only if I receive it, which brings me back to the previous point. So I'm wondering, when playing this Action card do I put down a Creeper if I draw it or does the person I'm giving it to do that?

If people are wondering, when playing the game we've pretty much just gone with whatever ruling feels more appropriate at the time. If someone's feeling generous they put the Creeper down and draw another. If we're feeling more evil, we'll give it to someone else ;) But each time it's come up we're still confused.

After reading the rules carefully, I found that this is mentioned in the Creeper section:

  Note that this is true any time you draw a card; for example, with 'Everybody Gets 1' you must keep all Creepers you get while drawing the cards you'll be giving to other players.

If you drew Creepers during Everybody Gets 1, you would keep the Creepers you got, draw new cards to replace them, and give 1 non-creeper to each other player. After some searching I found it on the mailing list for Looney Labs. :)


Do I have to shuffle with Settle The Wreckage? Settle The Wreckage says:

  Exile all attacking creatures target player controls. That player may search his or her library for that many basic land cards, put those cards onto the battlefield tapped, then shuffle his or her library.

I recently got this played against me on Magic Online, however I had just scryed a card I wanted to the top of my library and I didn't need any more land. As a result I did not want to look for land or shuffle my library.

Magic online didn't give me any choice here though and shuffled my Negate away from me. Is that correct? By my reading of the card the entire second clause is a "may" so I should have had the option not to?

You shouldn't have had to shuffle your library.

This is actually a known bug in Magic Online. It is listed here as "Settle the Wreckage does not give the targeted player the option to not search their library."

As for the rule itself... unfortunately there's no card ruling on Gatherer, but the rules of grammar should make this clear. If the card's intent were that the "may" applies only to searching the library, and not to the shuffling part, then the shuffling would have to stand alone as an instruction outside of the "may". It would look like this:

  That player [may search his or her library for that many basic land cards, put those cards onto the battlefield tapped, then] shuffle his or her library.

The problem here is that "shuffle" would have to be "shuffles" for that to be grammatically correct. If the card did say "then shuffles his or her library", then it would be reasonably to interpret that as a separate instruction apart from the "may".

So the only way for it to be grammatically correct is if it's:

  That player may [search his or her library for that many basic land cards, put those cards onto the battlefield tapped, then shuffle his or her library.]


How does Rat-a-tat-cat strategy change as the number of players increases? As already discussed in Do the vast majority of Rat-a-tat Cat rounds end very quickly?, optimal play leads to rounds ending quickly with a small number of players. Is this true when playing with 5-6 players? I just played my first 5 player game yesterday and did not enjoy a similar level of success when employing that strategy. Consider:

For one thing, the chance that an opponent will draw a power card is no longer very small, which matters a little for a draw 2 and matters a lot for a swap. But more importantly, if someone else is likely to call for the round to end, why not just wait and get your extra turn? Of course, if you were thinking to call for the round to end, you may not have visible cards that can be improved all that much anyway . . .

This isn't my answer yet, just some observations. I might take a stab at creating a computer simulation that can be easily customized with different numbers of players, different player strategies, and possibly different rule sets (children's variant where the outermost cards are public information, and perhaps a reverse of the normal rules where the outermost cards are only known to player whose hand they are in, but the innermost cards are known to every other player).

When the entire draw deck has been gone through once:

In a 2-player game, the highest known card for each player will be a '1'. This will occur if both players have '0's in their hidden cards. All 54 cards (minus 8) will be drawn when the draw pile is exhausted, and players will always discard either a known higher card for a lower card, or a random unknown card for a (0-4). This isn't counting the 3 peek cards being drawn either, but it is likely that players will discard unknown random cards at least when a drawn card is higher than their known cards but 4 or less, since an unknown card is worth '5' on average. This unknown random card is discarded face up for their opponent to take, so eventually all low cards will be claimed by the end of the draw deck.
In a 5-player game, the highest know card for each player will be a '4'. With 5 players, you can use the same reasoning as in the 2-player game. By the end of the draw deck, all the low cards will have been taken into players hands (4 zeros, 4 ones, 4 twos, 4 threes, and 4 fours).
From the reasoning above, we can see that Power Cards in hand are actually worth more than '5' on average as then number of cards are drawn. In a 5 player game, if the discard pile gets reshuffled into a new draw pile a hidden Power Card is worth 7.4 on average.
From the reasoning above, I believe it is also true that at least one player will knockout after the draw pile has been exhausted (or slightly before). At that point, a player should know exactly which cards are in the draw pile, so they will know if they can reduce their score further (they will also know how many swap cards are in the draw deck).

When a player discards a known card, we know that the card that the face up card they discarded was greater in value than the card they kept. This might be helpful in determining how many points we think an opponent has. (i.e. If an opponent discards a '9' card, we only know that the card that they kept is less than or equal to 9 and their total known score could be as high as 9+9=18. If they discard a '5' though we know that the card that they kept was less than or equal to 5 and their 5 was most likely their highest value card (discarding the highest known card, or an unknown card if the difference between the known card and kept is less than the AVG difference between an unknown card and kept card is optimal play. We cannot rely on this information since a player may not be playing optimally, but it should be the best move in most games.). Their total known score is no higher than 5+5=10). If we track exactly which cards are being discarded, and each card that is kept we can gain extra information about our opponents.

The game can end in several different ways, depending upon the End Game condition.

Play for a certain number of rounds. - Hopefully, the number of rounds is divisible by the number of players. The first player has the greatest incentive of knocking out, since if they knock out each other player has only taken as many turns as they have. The last player has the least incentive of knocking out, since if they do, each other player will have taken one more turn than they have. Strategy for this end condition will vary slightly as the number of rounds until the last round gets nearer.
Play for a specific length of time. - This is a poor choice of ending condition. Players in the lead can effectively stall the game to keep their lead.
Play to stay in the game and not reach 100 points. When a player
reaches 100 points, he is out of the game. The last player in the game is
the winner. - The Strategy for this end condition will vary slightly as a players point total nears 100 points. A player will probably not knockout when they are more likely than not to be out of the game. It would also depend upon what happens when all remaining players lose at the same time (all players have 100+ points). Do all players draw? Does the player with the fewest points win? Do the players play a final hand? The strategy will differ according to the rules.


Can a well-timed Twisted Image kill a player using Tree of Redemption? What happens if my opponent activates Tree of Redemption and I cast Twisted Image with the life-exchange ability on the stack?

Looking at the comp rules, these seem most relevant:

  701.8a A spell or ability may instruct players to exchange something (for example, life totals or    control of two permanents) as part of
  its resolution. When such a spell or ability resolves, if the
  entire exchange can’t be completed, no part of the exchange occurs.

  Example: If a spell attempts to exchange control of two target creatures but one of those
             creatures is destroyed before the spell resolves, the spell does nothing to the other
             creature.

  112.7a Once activated or triggered, an ability exists on the stack independently of its source.    Destruction or removal of the source
  after that time won’t affect the ability. Note that some    abilities
  cause a source to do something (for example, “Prodigal Sorcerer deals
  1 damage to    target creature or player”) rather than the ability
  doing anything directly. In these cases, any    activated or triggered
  ability that references information about the source because the
  effect    needs to be divided checks that information when the ability
  is put onto the stack. Otherwise, it    will check that information
  when it resolves. In both instances, if the source is no longer in the
  zone it’s expected to be in at that time, its last known information
  is used. The source can still    perform the action even though it no
  longer exists.

Is the entire exchange ability countered because the Tree is dead by the time it resolves? Or do we use the "last known state" (toughness 0), thereby killing its controller?

From the Oracle:

  9/22/2011 If Tree of Redemption isn't on the battlefield when the
  ability resolves, the exchange can't happen and the ability will have
  no effect.

Which is consistent with the golden rule that if one rule says a thing can happen and another says it can't, can't wins.


How does Ixalan drafting work with its double faced cards? Will Ixalan pack drafting change due to the double-faced cards? If the draft is sealed and not cube, people can see whether you have a double-faced card in your hand, if you are not careful.

This FAQ has all the answers. Tl;dr: For the majority of tournaments, you reveal all double-faced cards as they are opened. And, since picks are put in a pile in front of you, any opponent can see when you pick a double-faced card. For further details (including e.g. what happens if you don't want to pick a card until you know if your opponent is choosing a double-faced card or not), see the FAQ.

There is also a way to draft completely normally using double-faced cards: tournament officials can open the packs beforehand and sleeve everything in opaque sleeves. However, while Wizards of the Coast does do this at some high-level tournaments, they suggest that your friendly local game store does not use this method so that the store and the judges can't get accused of stealing valuable cards from the packs they'd pre-open.


Where does the phrase "MTG is not a game about reflexes" come from? I recently got talking to a long term payer who when I asked him why he got into MTG told me that he was heavy into the FPS shooters of the 90's but as a teenager developed a tremor in his hands that made dexterity-based FPS games impossible for him to play competitively.

He told me that he read somewhere that MTG is not a game based on dexterity and he got curious as to what that meant and got into the game from there.

I'm curious as to where this phrase originates from. I have heard rules experts quote it before. It seems rather famous.

When people say "Magic is not a game about reflexes", they mean that you never have to react quickly to anything in the game. Beginners have frequent misunderstandings of the rules such has "Whoever announces that they're casting a spell first gets to have it resolve first.", which is incorrect because spells and abilities use the stack, and there is a turn-based priority system to ensure that only one player has the opportunity to take action at any one time. Similarly, people commonly believe some variation of "If you don't respond within five seconds, the spell resolves unopposed", which is simply incorrect: you have as much time as you need to respond to anything.

Brandon Burton has cerebral palsy. Brandon has competed at Worlds and the Pro Tour (two of the highest levels of competition in Magic). That goes to show that dexterity and reflexes are not a requirement to play competitively.


If Dealer is dealt an ace, and then dealt another card, will he bust? I recently saw this play (not in an official casino, but essentially friends playing with themselves):

  Dealer was dealt a 2 and an Ace. Being forced to hit, dealer was dealt a 10.

Player argued that it was a 23, therefore a bust (because Ace would be counted as 11).

Dealer argued that since Ace being equal to 11 would bust him, Ace cannot be 11 and therefore is 1, making his Hand 13, not 23.

Later on a judge decided that the hand was a bust because, and I quote:

  The 2+Ace is 13. That's set. 13+10 = 23. What's confusing? once an ace is 11, it's 11.

I find it rather odd that he ruled like that, and I suspect something screwy going on, because (at least from my understanding of the rules) if the Ace were to bust him, Ace is valued as 1, not 11. Which is the right call here?

An Ace has a value of 11, unless it would bust your hand, at which point it becomes 1

Quoting from Wikipedia (due to lack of an official online source for blackjack rules):

  If a player holds an ace valued as 11, the hand is called "soft", meaning that the player cannot go bust by taking an additional card; the value of the ace will become 1 to prevent the hand from exceeding 21. Otherwise, the hand is "hard".

In your example of an Ace an a 2, that's a Soft 13. If you draw another card, and that card would push you past 21, you don't bust because your Ace will now count as a 1.

A common rule for casino tables is that the dealer must hit on a Soft 17 (meaning a hand with a value of 17, containing an Ace valued 11) - if they were operating under rules as suggested in the question, that would make the Ace the worst draw for a dealer (and therefore the casino), as a 17 containing an Ace would mean only a 2, 3 or 4 would not make them bust. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that casinos wouldn't blow themselves out in such a manner.


Researcher with the coworker relationship (spoilers) The coworker relationship sticker states:

  Co workers: you may share knowledge as long as one if you is in the
  correct city. (The researcher may give any card to their co worker for
  one action)

My question is in regard to the researcher: If the researcher is given coworker status with another character, can the researcher give any card to their coworker from any city?

For example, if the scientist and the researcher are coworkers, and the researcher is currently in Milan and the scientist is in another city, can the researcher give the scientist the Tokyo card as an action on their turn? Could the researcher do this multiple times on their turn?

Yes,

Since the only restriction on the researcher giving cards is that they are in the same city if they get that relationship sticker they can give cards to the person they share it with at any time. This is a really useful combination that can be very powerful for the players.

In your example the researcher could to that and they can trade as many cards as they have actions with the co-worker.


Can I move from a tunnel to any tunnel? About mine movement: can I move from a mine where I am to any other mine in the map? or only to the closest one?

There are two different things in Scythe which are related here, Mines and Tunnels.
Mines are buildings you can build, they look like this:

And here's how they work, from the rulebook:

The Mine acts as a
tunnel that only you can use.
You may move units to and
from your Mine as if it is a
tunnel (even if an opponent
controls the territory the
Mine is on). Unlike the other
structures, this is an ongoing
ability associated with all
unit movement.

And then there are Tunnels, they look like this on the map:

And here's what the rulebook says about them:

For the purposes of the Move action for any unit, all
territories with the tunnel icon are considered to be
adjacent to each other.

So, in short, you can move:

From a tunnel to any tunnel
From a tunnel to your mine
From your mine to any tunnel

You cannot use mines built by your opponents for your movement in any way.


Winged Dragon of Ra's Attack and Defense Points On the card of the Winged Dragon of Ra, the attack and defense points are ????. I am wondering that does the Winged Dragon of Ra has infinite power, and if not, what are his defense and attack points?

Winged Dragon of Ra has a special ability. Well, it has a lot of them. But the important one is this:

  When this card is Normal Summoned: You can pay Life Points so that you only have 100 left; this card gains ATK and DEF equal to the amount of Life Points paid.

So if you're at 3,500 life, you can choose to activate this ability leaving you with 100 life. Winged Dragon of Ra would then have 3,400 ATK and DEF, representing the 3,400 life you paid.

If you choose not to pay, then he enters as a 0 0. You can still activate his kill ability, although consider that you have to tribute 3 monsters to do it, so to even that out you'd have to pay 3,000 life. He's definitely a card you build around if you're going to play him.


Is a vehicle still a vehicle if it's no longer an artifact? Let's pretend I have a vehicle (say, Smuggler's Copter) enchanted with a Siege Modification. This vehicle creature has not been crewed this turn. I also control a Neurok Transmuter and activate the second ability of the Transmuter, targeting the Copter.

The Copter is a creature due to the Modification.

  As long as enchanted permanent is a Vehicle, it’s a creature in addition to its other types.

The Transmuter takes being an artifact away.

  Until end of turn, target artifact creature becomes blue and isn’t an artifact.

Is the Copter still have the Vehicle type and therefore is a 6/3 blue creature? Or does not being an artifact mean not being a Vehicle, and therefore, the Copter is a blue permanent with no types, and the Modification falls off?

The Smuggler's Copter will stop being a vehicle and a creature, and the Siege Modification will fall off.

Rule 205.3g says

  Artifacts have their own unique set of subtypes; these subtypes are called artifact types. The artifact types are Clue, Contraption, Equipment (see rule 301.5), Fortification (see rule 301.6), Treasure, and Vehicle (see rule 301.7).

And rule 205.1a says

  Some effects set an object’s card type. In such cases, the new card type(s) replaces any existing card types. Counters, effects, and damage marked on the object remain with it, even if they are meaningless to the new card type. Similarly, when an effect sets one or more of an object’s subtypes, the new subtype(s) replaces any existing subtypes from the appropriate set (creature types, land types, artifact types, enchantment types, planeswalker types, or spell types). If an object’s card type is removed, the subtypes correlated with that card type will remain if they are also the subtypes of a card type the object currently has; otherwise, they are also removed for the entire time the object’s card type is removed. Removing an object’s subtype doesn’t affect its card types at all.

Once the artifact type is removed from the Smuggler's Copter, the vehicle subtype is no longer correlated with any of its remaining types, so the Vehicle subtype is removed for as long as the artifact type is removed. This means that Siege Modification's ability that makes the Copter a creature is no longer active, so it will also not be a creature. Since it is at that point neither a creature nor a vehicle, Siege Modification is not legally attached to it, so Siege Modification will go to the graveyard. Smuggler's Copter ends up as a typeless blue permanent.


Why are there so many easily avoidable game changing translation errors in Dominion? (This question is for people who have knowledge about the process of game translation.)

In Dominion each card (and event, landmark, project, ...) has some text on it explaining what it does and to what and how it reacts.
The original language of the game is english but I am german so I have the german translations of Dominion.

What I noticed when I read the cards and the corresponding Dominion Strategy Wiki pages was that some cards have got some slight but game changing alterations when they were translated.
Like a card which can attack other players if you choose one of two options, but in the german translation it attacks every time no matter the choice you made (Minion).

There is even a whole page dedicated to (german) translation errors in Dominion: Übersetzungsfehler.
The page also lists fixes for each translation error and you can see how easy it would have been to fix them (in a review for example).

I always thought that people who translate games must be super sensitive when they translate rules (as opposed to the lore of a game) in order to avoid alterations to a carefully balanced and play tested game.

So my question is: Why are there so many easily avoidable game changing translation errors in Dominion?

Clearifications:

A comment pointed out that translations are hard. My question can be understood as: Why is the translation so hard so that so easily avoidable mistakes happen?

Also I don't know how big of a problem this is for other games so I asked specifically about Dominion.

Sorry that this is not strictly an answer to the question, but it is too long to be a comment and it does give some information about where to find more.

From the late 1990s to the mid 2010s I was a frequent participant in the Spielbox discussion forum. During that time we had a couple of threads about that topic. This is a link to the oldest one from the archive (the site has since then moved to a new URL, but old threads are archived): Eurogames-Spiele nicht mehr kaufen.
Unfortunately the search engine will ignore "dominion" because of too many hits :-(
If you search for "Übersetzung" and restrict it to "Nur im ersten Beitrag der Themen", you will get 207 hits in the Archiv of Spieleforum. Several of them are specific to issues in one particular game, but often some people with insight (working for the publisher or translators) gave answers.

What I do remember from those discussions was different publishers have different approaches - some hire professional translators (sometimes translators with little or no ties to gaming, which is considered a big problem in the gaming comunity, because they lack the knowledge of particular or usual gaming terminology), sometimes games are translated by gamers with good English knowledge.

On a few occasions some of the latter stated something like:

  I just got a pdf of the original language rules and had one(!) week to translate it. I didn't even get a copy of the game so that I could have played it at least once as I would have preferred. I know that the translation is not good, but it is the best that was possible under these circumstances

So if there is a short answer to your question, it is quite trivial: time pressure.


Can Boss Monster work with 5+ players? The Boss Monster game is specific in that it says only 2-4 players can play the game, but from reading all the rules, and the fact that there are more than 4 monsters, I don't understand why it cannot go to five or six. I imagine it might be because there might not be enough resource cards to go around. (Note: I've only played a couple of rounds of the digital product but just recently got the physical game.) However, if I put in the expansions would 5-6 players be more reasonable? Or is there some additional catches that keep it from allowing more than four players?

I was just considering this a few days ago:

No, there are simply not enough hero types to go around.

Because the game operates on 4 basic hero types, it is limited to 4 players for fairness. (ie each player can concentrate on one hero type in a 4 player game: A goes Thieves, B goes Clerics, C goes Fighters, D goes Mages).

If you add more players ( E & F ), then the players come into conflict over resource types ( E tries to go for Fighters. Suddenly, (depending on luck of the draw) either E or C is getting all the Fighter heroes and the other player gets nothing.

The problem magnifies more for each player as you add players beyond 4 in our thought experiment. Get to 8 players and 4 are unable to score any points.

Not very fun.

Edit/Update: Official Brotherwise opinion on the matter (from their website):

  Boss Monster 2 is balanced and recommended for 2-4 players. However, if you also own the core set, it is possible to play with 5-6 players. Here are some unofficial guidelines for larger games:

  Play using the Unlimited Lives variant described on page 17 of the rulebook. (Players are not eliminated upon reaching five Wounds. The game ends when a turn ends with no cards left in the Hero decks. The winner of the game is the player with the highest total Souls minus Wounds.)

  For a 5-player game, start with all the Heroes and Epic Heroes from one set. Then add an extra 4-Health Cleric, Fighter, Mage and Thief. Add an extra 11-Health Cleric, Fighter, Mage, and Thief.
  For a 6-player game, also add an extra 6-Health Cleric, Fighter, Mage and Thief.

  We are currently developing a set designed to facilitate larger multiplayer games. If you would like to share feedback on multiplayer over 4 players, please e-mail us at bossmonster@brotherwisegames.com!


Rules for a "short to medium length" game? The standard rules for Trivial Pursuit say that in order to win, the player must collect all six wedges from the special category spaces, then proceed to the center and answer a final question in a category selected by the other players.

In my experience, however (and especially if more than 3 players/teams are participating) it takes way to long for the game to end with a winner this way.

Are there any other set of "universally accepted" (or not) rules for Trivial Pursuit to ensure shorter games? I've seen (for example) proceeding to the center with less that 6 wedges, or specifying an ending time (with a "penalty shootout" if there is a tie) but none of them seem all that satisfactory.

I have no idea if any of these are "universally accepted", as I haven't consulted with the rest of the universe, but I have seen a few variations on ending the game.

A large number of people I've played with don't like getting back to the center for the final question, because you're basically holding out for a lucky roll to get back to the middle.  Instead, once you have your sixth pie wedge, you immediately are asked the final question; if you don't answer correctly, on successive turns you get another final question, no moving required.
If we want a shorter game, we've altered the number of pieces required to win, anywhere from 4-6.  It's been pretty satisfactory for us.

If you want to make things a little more interesting to prevent people from avoiding their least-favorite category, we'll sometimes randomly select one of the six color wedges from a pile -- you must have this piece in your collection to win.

I'm not a fan of a time limit, because slower players can make the game end prematurely by (intentionally or not) dragging out the clock.


Can Cancel counter a creature on the battlefield? Say, I have Cancel, which is an Instant, on my hand. It can counter any spells.

The opponent has had a creature, for example Ajani's Pridemate, on the battlefield for several turns attacking and blocking.

Can I use my Cancel onto Ajani's Pridemate and send it to the graveyard (or to its owner's hand)?

A creature on the battlefield is no longer a spell.
(as Gendolkari says)
Once your opponent's Ajani's Pridemate makes it onto the battlefield, there is nothing Cancel can do to stop it's reign of attacking and blocking terror.  Here are the step by step actions that were taken, including the only time your Cancel can hope to stem the tide of destruction caused by Ajani's cat friend.

Your opponent chooses to cast Ajani's Pridemate from their hand.
They place Ajani's Pridemate onto the table and says "I cast Ajani's Pridemate" to explicitly indicate that they are casting the spell, rather than accidentally dropping it onto the table. The spell is now "on the stack".
They pay any costs involved in casting the spell (mana cost, and any additional costs such as sacrificing a creature for Fling).
Your opponent, having not explicitly stated they are retaining priority implicitly passes priority to you. The spell is in the process of being cast, but has not yet resolved. It is still a creature spell on the stack.

At this point, if you do nothing, the creature spell will resolve, it will make it onto the battlefield, and your Cancel will not be able to do anything about it. This is your first and last chance to prevent the otherwise inevitable cat invasion.
After your opponent passes priority, with the spell on the stack, you gain priority, and have the opportunity to cast any and all instants, or cards with flash, or activate any abilities of creatures you control for which you can pay the costs. This includes your Cancel.

You gain priority and with it the opportunity to cast Cancel targeting the Ajani's Pridemate spell on the stack.
You do so, your Cancel goes on the stack above Ajani's Pridemate.
You implicitly pass priority.
Your opponent has nothing else they can do, and so must state "Cancel resolves" or something equivalent, indicating that they too pass priority without doing anything.
The top card of the stack resolves, this is your Cancel. Cancel's effect happens, removing Ajani's Pridemate from the stack and sending it to the graveyard.
Everything is fine, the world is once again safe from marauding cat men.

I recognise the above is a long-winded and thorough answer to your question, and the majority of it is overkill for the interaction that you are asking about. However, it should give you some insight into the complexity of the game. We should be clear, there are games where every one of these steps is absolutely critical to the victory of a player, and doing things at the exact right time can make the difference between winning and losing.
TL;DR
The only time your Cancel can target the Ajani's Pridemate is the moment when they pay mana to cast it from their hand. At this point, before it officially enters the battlefield (even though it may be physically "on" the battlefield i.e. the table), you always have an opportunity to say "No, because I cast Cancel". After that moment, it would be too late.


In Android: Netrunner, is there a bias towards a particular sub-type of ICE in corp decks? I'm looking to put together a runner deck that takes advantage of Tinkering and Paintbrush. I'm also considering cards that care about ICE or breaker sub-types, such as Kit for my identity, or supporting cards like Lockpick. After looking over some corp decks on NetrunnerDB and seeing the quantities of different types of ICE, and keeping in mind click management, I'm trying to decide if my primary breaker should be a decoder or a different sub-type.

So, in general, do corp decks tend to have a bias towards a particular sub-type of ICE?

Expected answers do not have to be exhaustive and can be as detailed as you want. At a high level, I'm hoping to discover which ICE sub-type is more numerous in corp decks. Do sentries tend to outnumber barriers or code gates? Or, can you expect an even distribution of sub-types?

Some detailed information could break things down based the corporation or even the type of deck itself (such as NBN fast advance or Jenteki flatline), if available.

I'll answer the question of "are particular corporations more inclined to use certain types of ICE".

The answer?  Kind of.  If you look at the whole list of ICE and where the 'good' ones are, you'll get a sense of what each corporation likes to use to stop a runner from getting in.  Just to be sure, each corporation has one of each type of the basic three ICE (Barrier, Code Gate, Sentry).  And, while some of the corporations have different 'affinities' for one type or the other (such as Jinteki and NBN having more code gates then anyone, and Weyland having more Barriers), you'll see more paradigms then straight-out "corporation X uses ICE type Y".

So, as Kit, will you want to use just Decoders?  Absolutely not.  Will you want to take good Decoders?  Absolutely yes.  You should use the best Decoder you can get your hands on as your main Icebreaker, and have copies of the other types for when there are more ICE on the server (consider Omega, if you can get it).


In bridge, can "good" players get away with bidding "light"? The conventional wisdom is that it takes 26 points to make a game. But authors such as Terence Reese have written compendiums of how they made games with 23-25 points by "outplaying" the defense; tricking a defender into a bad discard, or setting up a complicated squeeze/endplay pattern.

My understanding that the dynamics are something like the following: With 24 points, the chances of making game are about 50-50; with 26 points, 65%-70%; with 28 points, 80%-85% (mostly bad suit breaks, 5-0 or 4-0 will hurt you).

Do experts like Reese bid "light" because they can beat the above odds? Or did they blunder into contracts "light" and then find a way to pull them out.

Once I surprised a partner by making a game (3NT) when we had only 24 HCP points between us. But I had AJT9x in a key suit, opposite her Qx. After losing a trick to the king, we made four tricks in the suit with only 7 HCP, leaving 17 to make five more tricks.

I argued that the JT9 sequence was really "three jacks" and we had 26 HCP de facto, if not de jure. Could it be that experts have a better sense when "24 or "25" points are really more like 26?

"It takes 26 points to make a game" is clearly a rule of thumb, not a hard rule.  Anyone who has played more than a few hands of Bridge should be able to see that, sometimes, light hands combined with intelligent play make a contract; and, sometimes, a solid point count is brought down by a bad lie of cards or a clever defence.

I don't think any of this is at all controversial.  An expert is going to be able to read his/her hand for more than just a bare point count.  As you say, JT9 is worth more "points", in the right circumstances, than J32, though an absolute beginner may not yet understand why.  An expert is more likely to have the confidence to relish the challenge of trying to win out with a borderline hand.  An expert is more likely to have the arrogance to assume he/she can outplay the opponents, even from a seemingly unfavourable position.  If the expert bids correctly, the opponents may not even realise the cards and the points actually favour them, until it's too late!

I'd definitely worry slightly about a partner who is "surprised" by 24 HCP making a 3NT contract, I have to say!  It seems like they must still be missing something crucial in their understanding of what causes a Bridge round to be won or lost...


Pokemon Asleep Status I have looked all over for this and can't find any good information on the sleep status, even in the rule book.

This came up because in a game recently with a friend: I was put to sleep with an attack that had 100% chance to do so, after I had less cards in my deck, effectively causing me to lose.

As I currently understand it, flipping to remove the sleep status happens after my turn, so even if I remove it they can just apply it right away again.

Is this the correct way that sleep works? If so, how do I avoid automatically losing as soon as an opponent has a sleep attack?

From the rules, p15:

  Between turns, flip a coin. If you flip heads, the Pokémon wakes up.

So you flip a coin to wake up your pokemon after every turn - both yours and your opponent's. This means that even if the opponent can put your active pokemon to sleep every turn and you have no other way of cancelling it (like evolving the pokemon, or sending it to the Bench with a Switch), there's still a half chance that by the time your turn starts it'll be awake and able to act.


Which Magic Ring should I choose in DungeonQuest? Which Magic Ring is superior to the others on average?

Does the best ring vary based upon which character you have?

I usually try to get the Healing Ring every time I play because the Champion of Chaos and Skeleton Warrior tend to hit me pretty hard if I encounter them.


Can Canopy Spider block Treetop Rangers? I know that creatures that have "can't be blocked except by creatures with flying", like Treetop Rangers, can't be blocked by creatures with reach like Giant Spider since it does not have flying. What about creatures that don't have reach but have a description like "may block as though it had flying", for example Canopy Spider?

Basically, can Treetop Rangers be blocked by Canopy Spider even though it can't be blocked by Giant Spider?

The text “can block as though it had flying” does not exist on any cards any more; any cards that used to have it, such as Canopy Spider, have received errata to have Reach instead. Note that even Giant Spider was printed at one time with the “can block as though it had flying” text.

When determining the correct card text of any card, all that matters is what is written in the Oracle card database at gatherer.wizards.com. It does not matter which printed version of the card you are playing with.*

However, to answer your question in terms of MTG history, back when those cards did have that text, yes, they could block Treetop Rangers. This is because for the purposes of declaring them as blockers, you acted as though they had flying. The errata to use Reach changed this interaction.

Source:

  Creatures with reach (and without flying) won't be able to block creatures that say they "can't be blocked except by creatures with flying," simply because those creatures don't actually have flying (and will no longer act as though they do). Cards affected by this change are Elven Riders, Silhana Ledgewalker, Treetop Bracers, Treetop Rangers, and Treetop Scout.

*The un-card R&D's Secret Lair aside.


What is the correct opening move in mancala when you go first in a 6 hole per side board? Obviously the first thing you want to do is get the bonus turn. But I'm confused after that. You don't want to do your 4th hole from the left because that would allow your opponent to get 2 bonus moves. I also imagine you wouldn't want to do either of your 2 on the far left because you could use those for captures or maybe extra moves later. I'm assuming you would probably choose the 5th hole from the left as your last hole is much harder to capture and better to use for around the board captures.

Is my logic anywhere near correct? What is the preferred opening in Mancala to maximize your chance of winning?

This site suggests third-from-the-left (your 4) followed by far-right (your 1).

  This opening has the following strengths:

  It empties bin F* early in the game, allowing Mi to play a single pebble from F into her mancala each time a single pebble lands there.
  It empties bin F at a time when at least two of the pebbles from F (those landing in J and I) will likely eventually come back around the board to Mi’s side.  Furthermore, if Yo makes the defensive G play, all five of the pebbles from G are ultimately likely to wind back up on Mi’s side.  For example, after playing G, Yo has six pebbles in H.  If she plays H on a subsequent turn, the sixth pebble in H will land in A, back on Mi’s side.
  It allows Mi to play from A, B, C, and F without repopulating Yo’s side of the board.  It therefore sets Mi up for an effective “starving” strategy.
  Because of the large number of pebbles in each of Yo’s bins, it is unlikely that Yo will be able to counter with a stalling or starving strategy herself.
  Most importantly, it puts Yo in a defensive position at her very first move of the game.  Yo has an immediate glaring vulnerability to being raided in bin G, and must therefore seriously contemplate the defensive G or HG responses.  Either of these responses, however, leaves her in the weakened board position of having each of her remaining bins populated with enough pebbles to play around to Mi’s side, thus reinforcing a starving strategy by Mi.

They go into a considerable amount of detail explaining subsequent moves, analysis, and their conclusions: I would definitely recommend reading the entire page to understand it better.

*Note: this page labels your far-left bin A and continues counter-clockwise, so your far-right bin is F, your opponent's far-right bin is G, and your opponent's far-left bin is L. Yo is the opponent with the mancala on the left; Mi is the player with the mancala on the right.


What is this game involving moving circular levels and small balls that get moved up and down them? I remember a childhood game for many player, with each player receiving multiple small plastic balls. The balls were placed on the game board, a circle with many moving levels, each with indentations for the ball. On each turn, a player could move a level as far as they wanted until a ball fell from the level above. Any idea what game this is?

Your description seems to match Stadium Checkers, or it's Tournament variant.


In UNO, is it legal to throw a Draw 4 card that you just picked up on purpose? A player decides to draw from the draw pile instead of playing one of his cards (he has a color matching card).
He draws a Wild Draw 4 card and he plays it.

Can the next player challenge him because the play is illegal?

According to official rules

  NOTE: if you suspect that a Wild Draw 4 card has been played on you
  illegally (i.e. the player has a matching card), then you may
  challenge that player. The challenged player must show you their hand.
  If guilty, the challenged player must draw the 4 cards instead of you. [...]

Yes, the play is illegal. It doesn't matter that the card was just drawn; it is still prohibited.


Speeding up complicated games by limiting player interaction Without changing "the official rules" of the game, what sorts of house rules can be imposed on player interaction to speed up game-play for games that generally encourage players to discuss options (in cooperative games) or cut deals with each other (in competitive games).

For instance, I imagine adding a rule to some board games which makes secret deals more difficult that says "once per turn, you may pass a note to someone else at the table.  Otherwise you can't discuss anything in secret."  To make it more interesting, one might even add a die roll:

1 <- Throw away the note
2-5 <- Successful pass
6 <- Reveal the note for everyone else at the table to see

But I imagine such a rule might backfire and slow down the game even more; especially if people start trying to come up with systems to encrypt their notes.

Although my friends would probably tell you that this is a lie and that I'm usually the worst offender, I'm not thrilled with sacrificing game-pace for the sake of over-analyzing.

EXPLANATION:
This question is meant to be general, but the Game of Thrones board-game was the particular example I had in mind.  I played this game with a group which had added the (IMHO awful) house rule that anyone may look at anyone else's house cards still in hand.  Supposedly this rule was added to keep people from writing down which cards everyone else had played already and to minimize the advantage more experienced players have.  What it did was ensure that everyone spent time analyzing all possible outcomes of each battle before the battle is even fought.  Unsurprisingly, the same group had to also add a house rule that the game only lasts 5 turns rather than 10.

There are various ideas that I've used in the past to help. Be warned though - ultimately long games are long, and there's only a limited amount you can do about it.

1) Use a timer

Timed negotiation phases go back to Diplomacy. They're an official rule feature of Here I Stand. Not only does the time limit help the game along, and focus players, but it actually adds an interesting layer of strategy because you can't always talk to who you want to when you want to, meaning players have to work around it.

Only a few negotiation-heavy games feature a specified negotiation phase. But it's quite easy to add one - look at the turn structure and decide where it's best put and then enforce it, and the timer, with an iron first.

2) Ban paper and mobile devices

As you've discovered one of the worst culprits for slowing down games generally are players who insist on making notes, referring to them and optimizing their strategies. Unless it's absolutely essential as part of the play that they be allowed to do it, ban the recording of anything on anything except for the officially supplied game components and enforce it with an iron fist.

3) Overlap wherever possible

There are a surprising number of games where players can actually overlap their turn structure to try and get things done faster. This isn't specific to negotiation per-se. In Titan, for instance, the meat is the movement phase. So after playing X is has finished moving and is recruiting, the next player in line can be checking their stacks, splitting and rolling for movement. Identify areas suitable for concurrent play in your game, and enforce everyone doing just that with an iron fist.

4) Play online

I never play Diplomacy in real life any more, because it takes too long. I do, however play by email. And doing so has given me a particular delight in the fact that I have to negotiate via email. You can't see the face, or the body language of the person you're negotiating with, which leads for interesting decision making. Not to mention that it's pretty thematic since early 20th century diplomats spent a lot of time writing to each other. The same is probably true of AGoT, except they probably write with iron fists.


Seafarers - Ships over Ports? Quick question about seafarers. Ports are added onto the map by placing them alongside the edge of a hex. Once a port is there is it right to consider that edge as Coastal or not? i.e. Can a ship be built along that edge?

A port is coastal.

A ship can be build if a settlement or city is present (or as a continuation of other ships).


Cribbage counting a hand If I have the following in cribbage : 8H, 8D, 9H, 9D, 10C

I come up with 4 double runs  8H, 8D, 9H, 10C and
                              8H. 8D, 9D, 10C and
                              8H, 9H, 9D, 10C and
                              8D, 9H, 9D, 10C

but I know it's not possible to get 32. What am I doing wrong? Is this 16 or 24?

Thank you.

You can't count it as 4 double runs, as that double counts a number of elements.  It is 4 runs of 3

8H, 9H, 10C

8H, 9D, 10C

8D, 9H, 10C

8D, 9D, 10C

and 2 pairs (the 8s and 9s) for a total of 16.


How to prevent being overrun in the early game? My girlfiend has a U/G standard deck (Scars/M12/Innistrad), and she's having issues with being overrun in the early game so that she can take off late game with her deck (once it takes off it's nearly impossible to kill off).  She has some mana ramp, including Llanowar Elves and Rampant Growth.

What are some strategies to tie up the early game to get her set up for late game?

If she's in blue/green, then she has several options:

On the blue side, lean on counterspells and bounce. 4x Mana Leak will probably go into any blue deck. It's cheap (only 1U), and in the early game it's very unlikely that your opponent will have the extra 3 mana to pay to power through it. You can also run Vapor Snag to return cards to your opponent's hand (and do 1 damage!) for only U. A few of these can slow down your opponent's tempo enough to get you to your finishers.

You're also looking at cheap early creatures that can choke up the board enough to hold off your opponent's attacks for a few more turns, and hopefully provide a decent side-benefit. Here's a list of all Standard-legal green, blue, and colorless creatures with a CMC of 2 or less. Especially promising creatures for early defense include:

Oculus (chump early and get a free card)

Phantasmal Bear (a 2/2 for U)

Phantasmal Image (copy anything else on the board)

Ambush Viper (flash, deathtouch)

Viridian Emissary (trades up nicely + free land when it dies)

Memnite (free 1/1)

Necropede (great potential for a 2-for-1)

(Note that I've left several great cards like Snapcaster Mage out of this list; not because they're not good, but because their primary role is something other than early defense/control.)

The exact cards you play depend on your overall strategy, but you can certainly find something useful in this list.


What is this game with Knights and Ogres and wolf riders I played when I was a kid? I grew up in the 80s, so the game should of come out in the late 80s or early 90s. I believe that the game was made by the same makers that made Hero Quest, but I might be wrong.

The game was an War based game, that had 2 sides a good side and a dark side. The light side had knights and the dark side had a giant Ogre, wolf riders, and other stuff. I really liked it because there was different strategies based on the side you were on.

As a kid, I felt like the map was an 8' x 8' map.

Hopefully this is enough info that someone can answer me... I've done a bunch of googling, but have had no success...

Battle Masters a collaboration of Milton Bradley and Games Workshop:

BoardGameGeek Page

This is a great game, had a huge board and the wolfriders and cool units you were describing.  I played several matches of this as a kid with my buddy who also played HeroQuest with me.  I don't remember the mechanics very well, but I will never forget how cool the pieces and map are.


Coin at the edge of the pocket A coin was very close to falling into the pocket (let's say 70-30 over the edge). It stayed there for some time.

In one of the plays the striker hit the edge of the board so hard that the coin fell into the pocket (the striker never touched the coin or anywhere near the coin). The colour of the coin was same as the player's coin colour.

What should happen to the coin?

According to the official ICF rules:

  71) If a C/m resting perilously at the mouth of the pocket and
  actually falls into the pocket for any reason, it shall be considered
  to have been properly pocketed.

source

So the coin is pocketed.


Ramses and Babel tile 23: are Guilds free or do you have to pay coins? If you have recruited the Leader Ramses and the Babel tile 23 is active, can you build Guilds for free, or do you have to pay coins?

Leader Ramses: (Leaders, page 6)

  As soon as Ramses enters play, the player can build all of his or her Guilds for free, without having to pay their resource costs.

Babel tile 23 (Babel, page 5):

  The construction of […] Guilds (purple cards) via resources is forbidden. Their construction requires a number of coins equal to the number of resources present in their construction cost. […]

With Ramses in effect, guilds are still free. This is the reason Babel tile 23 specifies "construction of guilds via resources" is forbidden.

Antoine Bauza (the game's creator) was asked this directly on his forums this past December. The question was posed:

«When we built a guild with Ramses Leader in play but the tile Babel No. 23 (resources become parts payable) is also at stake, what's happening? The guild building is it paying off in parts or completely free in the end?»

To which he replied:

«Your Free guilds remain with Ramses (Free resource becomes free rooms)»


Is the luck factor indeed overwhelming in the Catan Card Game? I recently bought the Settlers of Catan Card Game, played two partial games, and was very disappointed because of the seemingly huge importance of luck. Just about every action is based on chance:

resources are distributed based on dice rolls
land tiles are drawn randomly, except if you were lucky enough to pull the magic card allowing you to actually choose the land tiles
hand cards are randomly drawn, except if you are lucky enough to own some resources you can spare. However, even then you still need some luck in choosing the best card stack.
some action cards need some more dicing
when I played, the "mill" event was thrown over and over again by my opponent, so I never had any resources to advance my kingdom

I particularly hate investing effort to plan ahead, just to see my strategy crushed under bad dice rolls. I am seriously considering throwing away the game after having played it only twice. However, I bought this game because it received a lot of good internet reviews, even from reviewers I trust. Therefore I ask myself: is there really some strategy involved in this game, or do you just need a large amount of luck to win?

No, not in my experience. In fact, the Catan Card Game has a great depth of strategy and many ways to offset the luck of the dice.

Your chances will be greatly helped if you've found a Scout card, certainly. It should ALWAYS be one of your starting cards if you have the chance. If you don't, then you know there's one in the three stacks that neither of you searched to start with. Use the ability to cycle a card from hand, and pay two useless resources (gold, or sheep or corn) to search more stacks for a Scout.

When you do get a Scouted settlement, choose the numbers carefully. I try to choose a brick or ore that has the same number as my gold hex, so I get a real resource on every number. You could do the opposite and deliberately seek out both 5s so that you have a natural choice to Alchemist for.

After a game or two you acquire something of an instinct for which cards are good early, good late, good all the time (Merchant), or never good. Cycle your hand aggressively: you should always be aiming to draw a card per turn unless you have a really perfect hand.

There are several different approaches / strategies for how you deal with the event die, depending on your attitude to the luck of the game. If you're playing cautiously, you'll try to keep windmill points at least balanced with your opponent so they can't steal from you, and try to seek out tournament-point knights to get the tournament resources. I personally tend to go for the windmill token anyway as one of my 11 VP.


Functional figures in board games In all board games I played that include 3D figures (plastic, metal etc.) the figures itself can be easily changed to flat cardboard tokens.

My questions is do you know any games in which the actual shape, orientation and modules of it play more significant role than just a token?

HeroScape is a miniature game where the battleground had complex 3D terrain. Line of sight was determined by where in the miniature the "eye" was.


Is it possible to bluff in board games like chess generally? Let's think of games like chess or go, where everyone can see everything, but also games like uno where it's hard to predict what color or value the person has with one card. Can you bluff here? According to the definition

  .. an attempt to deceive someone into believing that one can or is going to do something.

it would be generally yes, but how can you bluff in e.g. chess? Would a move showing you are skilled, while you're not, be a bluff?

The definition just fits to every 'intention', so according to it.

  .. try to deceive someone as to one's abilities or intentions.

If the definition tells, that every move is a bluff, answer the opposite, is it possible not to bluff in a game?

Bluff (verb):
  1. Try to deceive someone as to one's abilities or intentions.

I like this definition because it speaks to the two different kinds of bluffing - abilities and intentions.

In poker, bluffing is focused on deceiving your opponents about your abilities - that is, how many different hands your hand of cards is capable of beating.

In chess, this sort of bluff is not possible, because all information about your possible decision space is public knowledge.  Instead, bluffing in chess is about deceiving your opponent about your intentions.  Tricking them into defending against a pawn advance in a way that leaves them vulnerable to an attack by the your knights, that sort of thing.

That said, there is some overlap in both games.  Concealing your abilities in poker goes hand in hand with concealing your intentions, since your intentions are shaped by what your abilities are.  And in chess you can try to conceal your skill level, creating traps that your opponents are more likely to fall for because they assume that your move was an error or mistake on your part and thus don't look as carefully for the hook hidden in the bait.  But the primary forms of bluffing for the two games are distinct.


When are good times to build early roads "inland" in Catan? In most cases, it is a good idea to build early Catan settlements, close to, but not on the coast, and then build roads toward the coast. This has the dual advantages of 1) heading toward key ports, and 2) minimizing conflict with other players, and the resulting wasted effort.
Like every rule, this rule probably has exceptions. Which might they be? For instance, might it make sense for both settlements to point their roads toward each other, aim for a "connection" (and intervening third settlement), and later on longest road?

This is a pretty open-ended question, as it's very situational and depends on lots of things such as play style, board setup, other players placement, resource distribution, etc. With that in mind, take this answer with a grain of salt.

In most cases, it is a good idea to build early Catan settlements, close to, but not on the coast, and then build roads toward the coast

Assuming that the number tiles are somewhat fairly distributed, I'll usually try and take this strategy and place my second settlement (in the snake draft) such that I can build one road and my third settlement to be on a port.
Some of the exceptions to this might be:

Crowding. If the folks you are playing with are hogging the coasts and leaving the middle more bare, forward settle them. You'd have the advantage of potentially blocking them from moving in towards the island, which could keep tiles for yourself.
Attempting longest road. As you briefly mentioned, it may be in your best interest to start building wide and connect your empire. I'd say this is rare (going for longest road over preferable resource placement), but certainly not impossible. Especially if you're going 4th, you can potentially guarantee connecting your initial settlements early on. Personally, I've found it better to not ever go into the game planning longest road. If it comes around as an opportunity later in the game, great. If not, then there are plenty of other ways to get VP's.
The number tokens are not well balanced. If you do not place the number tokens in the recommended pattern (or place the desert in-between two outer edges which would offset the tokens), then there might be a particularly good spot (e.g. 6-8-4) that would probably supersede shooting for a coast.


(MTG) Can Trespasser’s Curse revive a player? After I died, one of my opponents that I previously enchanted played a creature which supposedly heals me by one. Does that cause me to come back to life with one hp? If not, why not?

You will not be revived.

First of all, any enchantments that you own will leave the game at the same time you do:

  800.4a. When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game[...]

So if you had enchanted your opponent with Trespasser's Curse, that enchantment would go away as soon as you lose, and your opponent would no longer be enchanted by it.

And in addition to not getting any benefit from your enchantments, there is no effect in the game that could cause you to gain life once you have left the game. If another player has an effect such as Triskaidekaphobia, when it says "each player gains 1 life", "each player" does not include you.

From the comprehensive rules:

  102.1. A player is one of the people in the game. The active player is the player whose turn it is. The other players are nonactive players.

(Emphasis mine)

You are not in the game, because you have left the game:

  104.5. If a player loses the game, that player leaves the game.


How do you resolve black cards in quests you haven't started in Shadows Over Camelot? If you pull a black card that goes against a quest that you haven't started, do you still place the black card on that quest, or do you discard it? So, if you get an Excalibur card before starting the quest, what do you do with it? For the Grail, can you fill the board with despair cards before even starting the quest?

If the answer is that the black cards are only used once a quest is started, on a solo quest is it only used if drawn by the knight in the quest, or by any knight?

Also, is the answer different for perpetual quests?

The rule book under Progression of Evil a.) Drawing a Black card (page 10-11)

Yes, you follow the instructions on the card Special Black cards or Standard black card or place the card in its respective quest, regardless of whether any Knight has begun a quest. The instructions are on the card, or detailed on the pages listed here. Excalibur cards move the sword towards the evil side of the river. Grail cards like Despair can fill up the quest before you even start, and if it does you lose the Grail Quest and turn it over, further Black Grail cards place siege engines outside Camelot.

The very end of section a). explains that a quest immediately ends when you place the final black card (or Saxson/Pict) to fill a particular Quest, and tells you to consult the particular quest for win/loss conditions. In general, you will add a number or White(win)/Black(lose) Swords to the round table, add a number of Siege Engines/Draw White Cards, and whether the particular quest is flipped over or not. This information is usually printer on the Quest cardboard itself, but is explained in detail within the rule book.


Contract Bridge Better minors Using better minor convention partner open one club, and I have five diamonds with three honors. I answer two diamonds to show the diamonds. Is this correct?

No, playing a natural system such as Goren or Two Over One the jump shift response into a new suit shows about 17-18 points in addition to the good suit. You have the good suit but (at time of writing) not the requisite overall hand strength. If the suit being bid is not at least 5 cards in length then the bid must also show 4+ card support in Opener's suit..

In addition to the above the bid announces that:
- The opponents shall not be allowed to play undoubled;
- Slam will be bid if a fit is found and sufficient controls are present.

It is because of the first point above that the bid should be made on HCP rather than playing strength. Good suits with playing strength but less defence can make a delayed jump shift, a delayed jump raise, or a delayed jump rebid. These now deny sufficient defensive strength for the initial jump shift. The jump shift response must never be made with a two suited hand unless the second suit is Opener's first bid suit.

When partner opens 1C it is very likely (especially playing a Strong 1 NT) that partner intends to rebid either 1 or 2 NT. Narrowing the jump shift response to slam going hands leaves more room for additional exploration below game, which will not only improve any NT games stumbled into but also find more good minor suit slams.


Does showing my opponent I have an effective win condition qualify as improperly determining a winner? This question is focused on the tournament rule, IPG 4.3 Unsporting Conduct — Improperly Determining a Winner.

Two players playing the Bant Nexus of Fate combo deck meet each other in a round. This deck wins by ticking up Teferi, Hero of Dominaria to the ultimate, exiling all the opponent's permanents, and then passing until the opponent loses to decking. The lock will beat just about anything. Anything, that is, except an opponent with their own copies of Nexus of Fate. Now they can also discard their Nexus to handsize and never deck out.

Let's assume Alice is executing the lock and Bob is discarding to hand size. Bob suggests a draw, since Alice is apparently incapable of winning. Alice says she has a win condition in her deck that will let her win regardless (say, Approach of the Second Sun), but she hasn't drawn it yet. Bob is reluctant to concede before seeing the win condition.

Are any of these allowed?

Bob says "I'll concede if you show me a win condition". Alice searches her deck and shows Bob the Approach of the Second Sun. Bob concedes.
Bob says "I'll concede if you show me a win condition". Alice gets her decklist slip and shows it to Bob (this actually gives up equity since Bob knows what to play around better now). Bob concedes.
Bob says "I'll concede if you show me a win condition". Alice says she can't do this legally without violating the "improperly determining a winner" rule. Bob concedes anyway. Later he finds out Alice lied, and she doesn't have a win condition maindeck.

Finally: if #2 is legal but Alice doesn't want to do it (since it gives up equity), how can she legally demonstrate that she has a win condition in her deck?

The key phrase in that rule is in the first sentence:

  A player uses or offers to use a method that is not part of the current game (including actions not legal in the current game) to determine the outcome of a game or match.

Importantly, it is not a violation of this rule to take an action that is legal in the current game to determine a winner. For example, Magic Tournament Rule 3.12 says in part

  players may choose to reveal their hands or any other hidden information available to them, unless specifically prohibited by the rules.

So, it would be perfectly legal to determine a winner by having a player reveal a card from their hand.

Regarding the specific examples:

At that time, Alice is not legally allowed to search through her deck, so determining the winner that way would violate that rule.
The decklist slip is not part of the game, so using it to determine the winner that way also violates that rule.
Alice's statement that she cannot legally show a win condition is correct. Bob is allowed to choose to concede at any time. Alice is allowed to lie about the existence of a win condition, according to the commentary on Magic Tournament Rule 4.1:

  Private information is the catchall category for everything that is not free or derived information. For example, the contents of hidden zones (i.e., library and hand) and the identity of face-down cards in public zones are considered private information. Players are allowed to give their opponents false information about the contents of a hidden zone. ...

So, every part of this example is perfectly legal.


What is the optimal strategy to solve Hanoi Solitaire? I recently discovered for the first time a variation of Solitaire called Hanoi (sometimes spelled Hanoy or Hanoii). My Solitaire app says it's rated easy, but I have never solved it because I only get so far before I get stuck. Is there a simple strategy I can employ to finally start winning?

The biggest piece of strategy is knowing how to move a pile of cards from one stack to the next.

The basic algorithm is a recursive algorithm.

To move n cards from stack a to stack b, you need to:

  move the n-1 cards from stack a to stack c
  move the nth card to stack b
  move the n-1 cards from stack c to stack b.

To move a stack of three from a to b you need to move the two cards from a to c.   To move the two cards from a to c you need to move the one card from a to b.  Move the second card from a to c.  Move the first card from b to c.  Move the third card from a to b.  To move the two cards from c to b, we need to move the first card from c to a.  Move the second card from c to b.  Move the first card from a to b.

The key strategy is to keep one ordered stack.  When a new card is unearthed, put it in to the stack in the order that it belongs by moving your stack that belongs on top of the new card to it and then moving it to the top of your ordered stack.

This strategy will not likely lead you always to the shortest solution but will lead you to a correct solution.

There are more basic strategies for the Towers of Hanoi peg and disc game on the Wikipedia article http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Hanoi but I'm not sure how explicitly applicable they are to this game.


Trash an Estate or Curse your opponents? Full Version I just asked a question about whether to trash an Estate with Jack of All Trades or play a Witch to curse my opponents. The answer was a definitive "trash!", because Jack is so good at trashing that the curse wouldn't be effective at all at slowing the others. My question now is how good does a trasher have to be to make trashing a better move than Cursing?

I put a list below of (I think) all the action cards costing $5 or less that you can use to trash one of your own cards but don't give +Actions. Given the same set-up as in the previous question, which of these should be played rather than a Witch?

## Trashers
Ambassador
Bishop
Chapel
Island
Jack of All Trades
Masquerade
Mine
Moneylender
Remake
Remodel
Salvager
Steward
Trader
Trading Post
Transmute

As in the other question, the other cards available are

$6: Harem, Fairgrounds
$5: Witch, Horn of Plenty
$4: Bureaucrat, Gardens, Smithy
$3: Smugglers
$2: Pearl Diver

It's early in the game, no opponents have a Witch yet, the both have 1 trasher, and your hand is

Trasher, Witch, Estate, Copper, Copper.

What makes an early-game trasher powerful, especially against an opponent giving out curses, is determined mainly by two things: how many cards it can trash at once, and the benefit it gives.

Curse:

Develop
Island
Mine
Moneylender
Trade Route

Island fails to negate the VP loss when trashing a curse and gives no benefit when played. Trade Route likewise gives no benefit when played at this point other than the +Buy. Mine and Moneylender can't trash curses at all, so Witch away! And, well, we don't talk about Develop...

Trash:

Ambassador
Bishop
Chapel
Masquerade
Remake
Steward
Trading Post

Ambassador, Chapel, Remake, Steward, and Trading Post all trash multiple cards per play. Bishop gives similar trashing power in a multiplayer game. Your Witch is unlikely to be able to keep up cursing fast enough to hurt your opponents.

Depends:

Hermit
Jack of All Trades
Remodel
Salvager
Transmute
Trader

Hermit and Jack can't trash treasures, and the rest give little or no benefit when trashing a Copper. Now, of course your question specified that you have an Estate in hand. To me, playing any of these would be contingent on having that Estate.
For Remodel in particular, the relevant things to consider are:

Is there a 3 or 4 cost card that I really want?
Is there a decent 2 cost card my opponents can turn that curse into?


If a blank POI marker is set on fire, does it still count as a victim? We've tried to understand the manual, but maybe the fact that it is written in English, which is not our mother language, could be making it hard for us to understand.

When an explosion occurs, and a POI is in the way, the manual said that you flip the POI marker and take it off the board, to the dead toll.

So if the POI marker is blank, does it still count as a victim at the end of the game?

No, blank markers are "False Alarms", not "Victims".  They do not count towards the loss condition of "4+ Victims Lost", just like you place revealed False Alarms on the Rescued space but they do not count towards the victory condition of "7 Victims Rescued".


Should the Deck Marker change more frequently? The Deck Marker never changes for me - should it?

The Deck Marker has three symbols - Morning, Noon, and Night.  According to the rules, it begins the game on Morning, and then change each time the Encounter Deck cycles.  Once it is at Night, it remains on Night indefinitely through any subsequent shuffles.

  Place the morning marker next to the deck.  When  there  are  no  more
  cards  in  the encounter deck, reshuffle the discards and re-use them.
  Also, replace the morning marker with the noon  marker. If  you
  reshuffle  a  second  time,  replace  the  noon  marker  with  the
  night  marker.   (If you need to use the deck a fourth time, leave the
  night marker in place.)

The only problem is, the game never seems to last long enough for the Encounter Deck to cycle, even once.  I've played the game about a dozen times, and I've never seen the Encounter Deck run out.  Ever.  This includes some games with the maximum of six players, which should be very long.

Are we doing something wrong, or misunderstanding how the Marker is supposed to be used?

Since we've never played in any time of day other than morning, there seems to be a good chunk (upwards of 2/3s?) of content we're missing out on.  Is this normal?

As you say, from the rules:

Shuffle the deck of Encounter cards and place it to one side. Place
the morning marker next to the deck.  When  there  are  no  more
cards  in  the encounter deck, reshuffle the discards and re-use them.
Also, replace the morning marker with the noon  marker

If  you  reshuffle  a  second  time,  replace  the  noon  marker  with  the  night  marker
(If you need to use the deck a fourth time, leave  the night marker in place.)

There is nothing in the rules or FAQ that would enable you to go through the deck faster than one per turn. For a game that plays a wide range of players (2 to 6), that creates a wide range of rounds required to get through the deck. Combined with the many options in the story book, this could result in small groups not seeing significant parts of the stories over time. Which is what has been widely reported.
Suffice to say it requires some changes to make it work well, and there are a number of options, some suggested in the above links:

Divide the encounter deck into smaller decks each marked with the morning, noon, and night tokens, simply switching to each deck as you finish the previous one. This will work well for player counts where you do manage to get almost through, or through the deck at least once.
Start the game at a different phase, either by consensus, or randomisation. This is good for groups that play together frequently and want to experience the different stories over a longer period of time.
Change the phase at the start of each round (i.e. when you reach the starting player). Works for any player count, and can add more variety into the game. Story wise it allows everyone to play through a morning, noon and evening phase and can make a story of a thrilling day.
Switch phase with each player. Doesn't work with player counts of 3 or 6 as players will always have the same phase on their turns. Will work well for other player counts.
Randomise the phase for each player using the destiny die, utilising a pre-determined specification for the -, +, and blank results (e.g., - is morning, blank is noon, and + is evening)
Utilise predetermined triggers in destiny and story points to decide when to change the phase, e.g. when someone reaches 6 total points, go to noon, when someone reaches 13 total points switch to night. Could be a group wide change, or per player change.

And many, many more variations. Changing the phase doesn't seem to increase or decrease difficulty, so there's no reason to stick to the rules as written when they don't give the variety needed in a story telling game. As with all house rules, it's best that they are identified as house rules, be explained clearly, and all players agree to utilising them.
As the FAQ states:

The    Golden    Rule    of    Tales    of    the    Arabian    Nights    is,   "Whatever    makes    for    the    most    entertaining    story,    makes    for    the    best    game."

So choose the option that give your group the most entertaining story, whether that be sticking to the rules, or implementing one of the variations above, or something else.


What happens if Humble Defector is sacrificed before its ability resolves? Humble Defector reads

  {T}: Draw two cards. Target opponent gains control of Humble Defector. Activate this ability only during your turn.

Anthony controls Humble Defector and Butcher of the Horde. He activates Humble Defector's ability and holds priority. He then sacrifices Humble Defector to activate Butcher of the Horde's ability.

When Humble Defector's ability resolves, does Anthony draw two cards?

Yes. Abilities exist on the stack independently of their source.

  112.7a Once activated or triggered, an ability exists on the stack independently of its source. Destruction or removal of the source after that time won’t affect the ability. [...]

That means that even if the object that has the ability changes or ceases to exist, the ability spawned from it will go on to resolve as normal.

In this case, that means you get to draw two cards, then the targeted opponent attempts to gain control of Humble Defector and fails to do so.


Master Transmuter + token artifacts The card Master Transmuter reads:

  {U}, {T}, Return an artifact you control to its owner’s hand: You may put an artifact card from your hand onto the battlefield.

Can Master Transmuter return a token artifact to your hand (which causes it to cease to exist) and then put an artifact card from hand to the battlefield (like Metalwork Colossus)

Yes, the artifact was returned to your hand. The fact it then ceased to exist doesn't matter, you still returned it to your hand.


Do progress tokens carry forward in the Lord of the Rings LCG? If you've successfully quested during the quest phase and come out +7, but you only need 3 more quest points to finish the current stage, do you put your extra 4 progress tokens on the quest card for the next stage or can you only make progress through one stage per round?

No, you place all progress tokens at once, so you can't get progress on the next stage of the quest by overcompleting the first one.


Can a Barrel block Gatling? Can a barrel (or the character whose power emulates a barrel) be used to attempt to mitigate the Bang! effect from a Gatling card?

"Any card with a Missed! symbol can be
  used to cancel the effect of a card
  with a BANG! symbol",

says the  "Remember" section of the latest version of the rules.

Gatling has a BANG! symbol, barrel has a Missed! symbol.  They're a match made in heaven, or at least Boot Hill.


Do multiple encounters combine for craft? On page ten of the rulebook, there is the rule:

  If there is more than one Enemy that attacks by Strength on a space and they have the same encounter number, they fight as one during battle, adding their Strength together with just one attack roll to make a single, combined stack score.

Does this rule still apply if a player encounters two or more enemies that attack by Craft? What if one enemy attacks by Strength, but the other attacks by Craft?

I am assuming 4th edition (Fantasy Flight Games) here.

For the two cases you laid out:

If there are two Craft enemies on the same space, then according to the rules as written, their craft scores would be combined. The rules for Psychic Combat (combat using Craft) are literally Ctrl-C Ctrl-V the rules for Battles (combat using Strength), and then find-replace "Strength" with "Craft". So, yes, that rule does apply for encountering two enemies that attack with Craft.
If a Craft enemy and a Strength enemy are on the same space, both enemies are fought separately (one in Battle, one in Psychic Combat). The lower encounter number is fought first, then the other.


Betrayal at house on the hill question about monster turns In the betrayal at house on the hill rule book it says the traitor gets an extra turn on the monsters turn but what if there are no monsters in that haunt does the traitor still get the extra turn? Also is there a post somewhere that could help balance some of the haunts?

The traitor does not get an "extra" turn. Rather, he gets a turn to control his own character, and then the monsters get a turn, in which the traitor controls what they do. So if there are no monsters in a given scenario, then the traitor just takes his normal turn, once, and nothing happens on the "monster turn".

Rule quote:

  After the traitor’s turn, any monsters
  controlled by the traitor get a monster turn. (This means that the traitor gets two turns: one
  for his or her actions and one for the monsters.) Then the first hero to the left of the traitor
  takes a turn, and so on.

So while it does describe the traitor as getting "two turns", it is also clear that the "second turn" is the monsters' turn, not actually the traitor's turn.


What position takes the most moves to solve for the jail puzzle (Klotski)? For full details on the puzzle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klotski#Khun_Chang_Khun_Phaen

May only use the legal pieces available in the original puzzle.  A move is counted as moving any piece on square in any direction.

The minimum number of moves for the original puzzle is 81.
2442
2442
0330
2112
2112

This position for example takes a minimum of 126 moves to solve:
4420
4420
1233
2212
2112

Where 4 is the main piece, 2 is the vertical pieces, 3 is the horizontal pieces, 1 are the single square pieces and 0 are the gaps.  The exit is at the base of the puzzle.

What is the positions which takes the most moves to solve?

As the wikipedia article states, there are many, many names for that puzzle.
 I'm a bit surprised, the Wikipedia article does not mention an exhaustive analysis documented in the book Winning Ways for your Mathematical Plays, Vol 2.  The authors state that the longest possible puzzle has the starting position:

1441
2442
2022
1021
5566

and the ending position is the flipped version of that position.  They call it the "Century and a half" puzzle, and state it's the longest sliding block puzzle with those pieces.  They also provide a "map" that shows the entire space of configurations, and how to move between them.


Banishing cards from the graveyard What does it mean to banish a card from the grave yard? I have a card that says to banish a card from the graveyard and I don't know what it means.

There are a lot of zones on the yugioh board. If you look at this playmat (not currently up to date with the newest rules for link summons, but it's fine for this purpose), you can see that there is a "Banished Zone".

Now, this is not an official zone in Yugioh, since "banished" used to mean "removed from the game" and cards that are banished are supposed to be in "no particular zone". I will however refer to the place where you put banished cards as the "Banished Zone" for simplicity's sake.

To "banish" a card from anywhere means to put the card from wherever it was before faceup into the "Banished Zone". Both players may look at their own or the opponent's face-up banished cards at any time. Each player has his own Banished Zone.

A card in the Banished Zone can usually not be accessed again, but there are some cards that allow you to get back your banished cards.

Cards that interact with banished cards (examples):

Kycoo, the Ghost Destroyer
Necroface
D.D. Warrior Lady
Breakthrough Skill

Card can be banished from anywhere, be it your field, your hand, your graveyard (your discard pile), or your deck. Cards may be banished facedown if a card tells you to do so. You may not look at your opponent's facedown banished cards, but you may look at your own.

For any further information, see the wiki article on this topic: Banish | Yu-Gi-Oh! Wikia


Is the following considered battle-forged? I have recently been collecting models for my first WH40k Army, but I have yet to receive a core rule book that I have ordered. However, I do have the Space Marine book and have constructed a Gladius Strike Force that includes the base core requirements (1captain/chaplain, 3 tactical squads, an attack bike, and 1 devestator squad) with a handfull of auxiliary components. If the cost of this met whatever allowance a match had, would this be considered a Battle-Forged army?

Your choice really. If you take a formation you generally aren't Battle Forged (you get formation benefits instead)... However all you need to be Battle Forged is an HQ and two Troops. If your formation includes that you can choose whether to play it as Battle Forged or as the Formation.


Can you Twisp off-turn? My opponent attacks, and I have a Baby Ninja and a Twisp in hand.
I play the Baby Ninja, and she attacks again. Can I play Twisp to duplicate the Baby Ninja? It seems like you should be able to, but there is an explicit list in the rule book, that doesn't  cover PVP Defense.

Edit for clarity: This question relates to Penny Arcade: Gamers Vs Evil and NOT to the Penny Arcade Card Game.

No. You don't play PVP Defense cards, you use abilities on those cards. Twisp doesn't mention copying PvP Defense abilities. This is supported by the fact that play is only used in reference to a player's own turn. From the correct Rulebook.

PVP ATTACKS AND DEFENSES - Some cards allow you to make a PvP Attack against the other players in the game. When you play a card with a PvP Attack ability, each other player has an opportunity to block the attack with a card that has a PvP Defense ability. A player using a PvP Defense card’s ability negates the attack only for that defending player.
Twisp: Catsby’s special card Twisp simply copies all abilities of any other card played in a turn, including Tokens, Power, card drawing, and PvP Attacks. If the card would be deleted, then Twisp is deleted.
Baby Ninja - {2}, +1 Power, PVP Defense: Discard this card to block a PVP Attack. If you do, draw a card.
Jim Darkmagic: Jim’s special hero power must be used before you take any actions or play any cards for your turn.


In Pass the Pigs, when is the optimal point to stop? I can imagine that there is a point at which a single player would always be wise to no longer advance. I see it being a function of all of the various combinations. The problem is, I've never quite been able to figure out all of the probabilities of a given combination coming up. Does anyone out there know what the optimal value is where you are more likely to lose then to continue onward? BTW, the version I have is this one, not sure if it makes a difference... Thanks!

This is a much more complex issue than it at first seems.  The game of pass the pigs is derived from an older, simpler game called Pig.  In Pig each player takes turns with a six sided die and may roll as many times as they like, or until they roll a 1.  If they roll a 1 they score nothing for the round, otherwise they score the total rolled.

Pass the Pigs is roughly equivalent to this.  Think of a game with a weighted n-sided die, with sides "Pig out", "Double trotter", "Razorback", etc.  A player may roll this die until they roll "Pig out", and their score for the round is the cumulative score, or zero if a "Pig out" was rolled.  The difference is the inclusion of "Making Bacon" (reset your score to 0), and "Piggy Back" (player is out of the game).

In Pig each player's optimal play is dependent only on the current scores. This means that when you receive the dice, you can calculate what your target score for the turn should be.  If you reach that score then you should bank it, and pass the dice on.

Wikipedia is a good starting point for further information about optimal play.  Also this website has graphs and an AI opponent to demonstrate the best play in pig.

So finally, it should be possible to apply the same methods to Pass the Pigs if you knew the probabilities of the various pig rolls.  These probabilities have been calculated here (see Table 4), using a data set of 6000 throws.  They have also calculated the value you should aim for to maximize your expected score in a turn in Section 3.2 (the target is about 21 or 22).  I can't find a similar analysis corresponding to multiplayer Pass the Pigs though.


Is Starship Catan similar enough to be considered a two-player adaptation of Starfarers of Catan? I've played Starfarers of Catan(BGG|Wikipedia) once and loved it. Usually, I only have one other to play board games with. I'd like to know how similar Starship Catan(BGG|Wikipedia) is so I can decide whether it's worth the purchase.

It has some similar ideas (e.g. your ship gets new abilities as you build it up), but it's really a totally different game.  And, I think, a better one.


Diplomacy - dislodged unit still disrupts another? The scenario:

Turkish army in Moscow move to St Petersburg

Turkish army in Livonia support Moscow to St Petersburg

English army in St Petersburg hold

English army in Prussia move to Livonia

German army in Warsaw move to Prussia

German army in Silesia support Warsaw to Prussia

I (Turkey) would have expected to get into St Petersburg, as the disruption from Prussia -> Livonia was prevented by Warsaw -> Prussia, but actually I didn't get into St Petersburg.
Can anyone clarify if this is correct, and why?
Thanks

Each unit has one potential action each phase. But each year has five phases:

Spring movement
Spring disband/retreat (if needed)
Fall movement
Fall disband/retreat (if needed)
Build/break (if needed)

Dislodged units (normally) still cut support. Because they cut support in the movement phase and are dislodged in the retreat/disband phase. There are a few exceptions where support is not cut, but that is not for this setting.
In this case, we have 6 units with their orders:

Let's first check the support orders:

Turkey: A lvn Supports  A mos -> stp. This support is cut because of (A pru -> lvn).
Germany: A sil Supports  A war -> pru This suport succeeds.

Next the moves.

Turkey: A mos -> stp (unsupported so strength 1, fails because A stp holds with strength 1).
England: A stp Holds (succeeds)
England: A pru -> lvn (move fails, but still cuts support)
Germany: A war -> pru (supported strength 2 so the move succeeds).

The failed orders are shown below:

Now it is time for retreats/disbands

England: A pru is dislodged and can only move to Berlin.

This is the relevant quote from the rules:

A  unit  being  dislodged  by  one  province  can  still  cut  support in another province. Just as a unit being dislodged by one province can still cause a standoff in another, a unit still manages to cut support even if it’s dislodged. Just make sure  that  the  dislodgment  isn’t  coming  from  the  province  where  the  unit  is  giving  support.  (Remember  this  rule:  A  dislodged  unit,  even  with  support,  has  no  effect  on  the  province that dislodged it.)


What is the average lifetime of a pack of casino cards? I've heard that casinos never reuse a pack of cards for some anti-cheating reasons I was never quite able to figure out. Then they do various modifications to mark them as "used" cards (e.g. punch a hole through them, burn the corners, or mark them with permanent ink) and sell them for about a buck apiece. They had about the same look and feel as a pack of air-cushioned Bicycle cards, but lasted only about half as long when I played with them.

So here's my question - does this lack of reuse factor into the build quality of the cards? Does anybody know how long those cards were built to last? Or does it vary from casino to casino?

Ultimately, it's going to vary on many more factors than the casino, but I think I can sort of answer the question

does this lack of reuse factor into the build quality of the cards?

First I should note that as I started Googling around for an answer to this, it is abundantly clear that there is not a definitive answer on this. This answer will assume you're talking about plastic playing cards since paper playing cards have such a short life span that they probably couldn't be resold.
There also is a lot of discrepancy on the length of time a casino even uses a pack of cards before retiring them. I have seen references that the Bellagio uses a deck of plastic playing cards for poker for 2 months, but this isn't official or even supported. That same page has a user saying they saw on a TV show that cards are used between 2 and 24 hours depending on what game it is and how they are shuffled, a claim that is impossible to check. This probably refers more to games like blackjack, where the house's money is on the line and they'd want to ensure that no money would be lost because players could identify cards.
The best information I could even find relating to casino cards was on the COPAG Cards website. In talking about use of their cards in casinos, they say

The primary use for 100% plastic playing cards in the casino is in the poker room. Since poker is a game where the players handle the cards extensively, plastic cards are preferred due to the durability and additional security that they provide over their paper counterparts. COPAG cards are used in casinos throughout the world and are dealt in many of the finest poker rooms across the United States.

Later in that same FAQ, there is this question and answer:

How long will COPAG cards last?
The longevity of your COPAG cards differs depending on how they are handled during play. Therefore, we can not give an accurate length of time that they will last. However, 100% plastic playing cards will last significantly longer than paper playing cards.

This is where I'm going to do some fuzzy logic. Given that on the same website they a.) talk about their cards being used for poker in casinos, and b.) they talk about the length their cards will last as if answering anyone that could buy their cards (and you can buy COPAG cards from their website), I would think that the used cards you buy from a casino are not qualitatively different than the cards you could buy new from a store, except that they've already been used.
I'm unsure how long a pack of plastic cards normally lasts since this also varies on how much it's used and how rough it's shuffled and myriad other factors. If you knew that, you could guess that any used pack you buy from a casino will have either 1.) months of almost constant play reduced from their life if they were used for poker, or 2.) a much smaller amount of time, potentially only a few hours of play, reduced from their life if they were used in games where the house's money was at stake.
Edit:
Figures that just after I post this, I noticed that there are separate tabs for purchasing on the COPAG website for retail and casinos, so some clarification is needed. On the retail purchasing tab, the plastic poker cards are measured at 63mm by 88mm. On the casino tab, the size of plastic poker cards is 63mm by 88mm. They are the same size.
Additionally, I would think there is no qualitative difference between the two for economic reasons. It wouldn't be cost efficient to have separate machines for different qualities of plastic for different cards, but changing the pattern on the back would be pretty simple.


Are Magic: the Gathering Conspiracy cards colorless? What is the color of the following Magic conspiracy cards:

Advantageous Proclamation
Backup Plan
Brago's Favor
Double Stroke
Immediate Action
Iterative Analysis
Muzzio's Preparations
Power Play
Secret Summoning
Secrets of Paradise
Sentinel Dispatch
Unexpected Potential
Worldknit

Conspiracy cards (cards with the Conspiracy type) are colorless. They are not permanents, they cannot be played in decks, they only exist in the command zone*, and they never interact with cards, abilities, or effects that care about color.

Rule 105.2 says

  An object is the color or colors of the mana symbols in its mana cost, regardless of the color of its frame. An object's color or colors may also be defined by a color indicator or a characteristic-defining ability.

and rule 202.2b says

  Objects with no colored mana symbols in their mana costs are colorless.

Conspiracy cards do not have mana costs (in particular, no colored mana symbols), color indicators, or characteristic-defining abilities, so they do not have any color; they are colorless.

* This was clarified in the Magic 2015 update:

  313.3. Conspiracy cards remain in the command zone throughout the game. They’re not permanents.
  They can’t be cast or included in a deck. If a conspiracy card would leave the command zone, it
  remains in the command zone.


In Sequence, can I add to both ends of a completed sequence to make it 2 sequences? Can we win in Sequence by having 5 in a row using the middle numbers and then add on to both ends to create a total of 10 in a row?

I've never played this but reading the rules here it seems explicit you can not.

  A connected series of five of the same colored chip either up or down, across or diagonally on the playing surface.

I'm assuming this is the definition of 'Sequence' as its not stated elsewhere in rules.  This however is the key rule with emphasis mine

  If you are playing the game which requires two SEQUENCES to win, you
  may use any one of the spaces from your first SEQUENCE as part of your
  second.

So you can just use ONE of your original Sequence.  If you add onto both ends of a 5 then you will be using more than one.

I don't see however why you couldn't extend 5 into a line of 9 meaning you have two sequences of 5 as this using just one of the original sequence. But it looks as you you may not extend both ends the way those rules are written.