Can I declare Brood Sliver's tokens as attackers? So in my Sliver deck I am running Brood Sliver and Heart Sliver. Let's say they're both on the battlefield, and a sliver deals damage to a player. Could I declare the tokens made as attackers or is it too late?

Sorry if this question probably has an obvious answer, it's just something I was wondering about.

No, you can't attack with those Sliver tokens the same turn you get them. In your combat phase, the following steps happen:

You declare what creatures are attacking.
Your opponents declare what creatures are blocking.
Combat damage is dealt.

Brood Sliver's ability triggers when a Sliver deals combat damage, so it is only in the Combat Damage Step that you get the tokens. At this point you have already finished dealing damage, so there's no chance to attack with the new tokens.


Can enchantments (briefly) go on protected creatures? Protection is an ability that grants an object or player several benefits, including:

  702.16c A permanent or player with protection can’t be enchanted by Auras that have the stated quality. Such Auras attached to the permanent or player with protection will be put into their owners’ graveyards as a state-based action. (See rule 704, “State-Based Actions.”)

This ability is usually less relevant because when enchantment auras are cast they target, and protection prevents targeting as well. However, if an enchantment aura enters the battlefield without being cast (such as from a flicker effect or Zur the Enchanter), the comprehensive rules say:

  303.4f If an Aura is entering the battlefield under a player’s control by any means other than by resolving as an Aura spell ... that player chooses what it will enchant as the Aura enters the battlefield. The player must choose a legal object or player according to the Aura’s enchant ability and any other applicable effects.

Does the "any other applicable effects" clause prevent me from putting an aura onto a protected permanent? At first I thought yes because protection specifically says 'can't be enchanted'. But then I re-considered, as I'm more leaning towards the interpretation that protection prevents ongoing enchantment, not the act of putting an enchantment onto something.

For a specific example, if my opponent has a creature with protection from blue, and I use Brago, King Eternal to flicker a Reality Acid that is currently on the battlefield, can I choose my opponents pro blue creature to enchant with Reality Acid? Knowing that it would immediately slide off as a state based action, but me being ok with that due to Reality Acid's triggered ability.

This question seems close: If a protection effect "doesn't remove Auras", can auras that are not cast be placed on the permanent?, but I think is subtly different as the card in question specifically removes the 'can't be enchanted' clause which is crucial to my question here I think.

The player must choose a legal object or player according to the Aura’s enchant ability and any other applicable effects.

Now, what is a legal object? That isn't explicitly defined, and neither is illegal object:

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

However, the same word legally is used in

  702.16n Some Auras both give the enchanted creature protection and say “this effect doesn’t remove” either that specific Aura or all Auras. This means that the specified Auras can legally enchant that creature and aren’t put into their owners’ graveyards as a state-based action. If the creature has other instances of protection from the same quality, those instances affect Auras as normal.

which would lead me to conclude that a creature with protection from blue is an illegal target destination for a flickered Reality Acid.


Should the Hare nap when in the lead among remaining racers? One of the rules of the Hare dictates that when he is in or tied for 1st, he doesn't move (naps) when 4 Hare cards are played in the card pool. Once other racers have secured a place on the podium, if the Hare is in the lead among remaining players, should he adhere to napping when 4 cards are played?

From a strict reading of the rules, we can probably agree that he doesn't nap once he's lost the chance to be first place.

From a game balance perspective, I feel like 18 Hare cards (versus the others' 17, 16, 15 and 15) doesn't quite put the occurrence of 4 Hares frequently enough to cut the edge he has moving two spaces each turn. Sure, Hare moves 2 regardless of how many of 1-4 cards, while Fox moves X cards outright, so you could roughly argue Fox averages 2.5 per card and Hare 2.0 per card, but Hare has 18 v Fox's 15 so moves much more frequently at lower cost. If just 4 of Fox's cards are wasted on wolf howls his game is over. From a game balance perspective, I would be ok with making Hare nap anytime he is 1st place among remaining racers. I don't think the likelihood of hitting the 4-card-and-in-first penalty is high and should be an ever-present threat to Hare.

From a story continuity perspective, the same drive that motivates him to nap when he's in the lead probably doesn't hold once he sees he's already lost the race, so this would argue for no napping once another character finishes.

I am interested in opinions and also further analysis on the game balance of the Hare's rules given his card count (18 in the deck). My analysis has just been loose and based on feel.

While you are right that the hare moves more frequently than the other animals, its up to the players not betting on the hare to win to make sure to not let someone just play 1 card per turn, (as this would be the most effective way to win with the hare). If you are playing with new people you will see that this is a clear tale on when someone is betting on the hare.
Usually when this happen all the players not betting on the hare(assuming there is no other player betting on it) can easily horde hare cards and only play them when there will 4 on the board, or when a howl is played.

If no one has willingly picked the hare the game has a total of 76 cards(since each player bets 5 cards out of the deck), and out of those 18 are hare.  Now each player holds 6 cards so the chances that a player has a hare card is 23% this is almost guarantees that the non betting players will have a combined total of 4 hare cards. Since they aren't betting on the hare to win then if played correctly they should be able to throw away 4 cards at least in one turn. Combined with the howling wolfs cards this means that you can at least throw away 7 cards at minimum.

If you assume all players are betting on the hare (including the guy who is dealt the hare) the card total goes from 18 to 13. The more ppl bet on the same animal the less chance that animal has to win statistically, but since more ppl are going for it, it will most likely move more often. (If everyone is going for the hare no one will play more than one hare per turn as there is no benefit).

Overall the game is very well balanced i have played this game probably over 200 times now, (this is a great game to play with anyone, and my friends and family love playing this game for how simple it is to pick up but how hard it is to master) and the outcome of the game now comes down to being able to read what each person is betting on.

Opps forgot to copy and paste the paragraph on answering the question, I interpret the rules as only when the hare is First place (or tie since technically they are tie for first place), so how can the hare be in first place if someone already won the race, and you are racing for second, and third? This is my interpretation and I have found out that this does not make the hare place second automatically. I would not make the hare sleep as I feel that it would significantly lower its chances of even placing at all.

As I pointed out earlier its fairly easy at the beginning to tell what people are betting on if they do the optimal play every turn so this game starts turning more into a meta game of how people play rather than people doing the optimal play because when you end up losing 4 cards of your animal it becomes basically impossible to win.

I would most more statistics on the game but I'm at work currently and this response has gone on longer than it should already(I will try to update it with more numbers on how things play out assuming you have 5 players because with less players the game starts to become more about getting lucky to draw the right cards at the right time).


What is the source of redirected damage? When a card "redirects" damage, does the source of the damage change to the spell or effect causing it to be redirected, or is the original source still the source of the damage?

Cards like: Reflect Damage or many of the 'En-Kor' creatures.

Example 1: So someone Lightning Bolts (Red) my Shaman En-Kor (White) and I redirect it to my Kor Firewalker (which has protection from red).

Example 2: What if one of my En-Kor creatures is redirecting combat damage to another creature while I have Tajic, Legion's Edge out?

The comprehensive rules say

Redirect (Obsolete)
Some older cards were printed with the term “redirect” to indicate a redirection effect. Such cards have received errata in the Oracle card reference so they explicitly state that damage that would be dealt to one object or player is dealt “instead” to another.

In other words, "redirect" doesn't actually exist in Magic any more. So let's take a look at your Shaman en-Kor. The oracle text says

0: The next 1 damage that would be dealt to Shaman en-Kor this turn is dealt to target creature you control instead.

So the three damage that the lightning bolt would deal to the shaman is instead dealt to the Firewalker. It is still dealt by the lightning bolt, and the shaman is still the target of the spell. But the damage hits the firewalker (and is promptly prevented due to protection).
As for example 2, we can still follow the same argument that it's the same damage just dealt to a different creature than originally intended. Which means there is no reason the damage should stop being combat damage; it's still damage that an attacker or blocker deals in the damage step of combat as a direct result of being involved in said combat. However, in this case it's also explicitly addressed by the rulings on the shaman:

When you redirect combat damage it is still combat damage.


If I drive through a pit, do I die? In Robo Rally, if I don't end in but rather drive through a pit, do I die? Instructions seem to literally say if they move into, but I'm not clear if it's strictly if they end there.

Yes, if you drive over a pit, gravity wins.

This is a game, not a cartoon.

This is mentioned in the rules page 8.

  Destruction: A robot is destroyed when:

  It receives its tenth Damage token.  OR
  It moves or is moved into a pit.  OR
  It moves or is moved oﬀ the edge of the board.

In the original version, there where pits that could be opened and closed, not sure if they still exist. But these where safe when closed but deadly when open.


In Arkham Horror, if a monster surge exceeds the max allowable monsters, does the monster that caused the max to be exceeded get discarded? If I the outskirts is already at maximum capacity, and I have to add 5 more monsters because of a monster surge, do I empty the Outskirts and then add 4 monsters? More specifically, does the monster that put the outskirts "over the edge" get discarded (the alternative being he gets carried over to the next group of outskirts monsters)?

Yes. See this example from the official Arkham FAQ, p.12 (emphasis mine):

  In a 3-player game, the  monster limit is 6  and  the  maximum number
  of monsters in the Outskirts is  5. There are 3 open gates on the
  board, 6 monsters in  Arkham, and 4 monsters in the Outskirts. During
  the  Mythos Phase, you draw a location that already has  an open gate,
  so you have to draw 3 more monsters.  You would first draw 2 monsters
  and place them in the  Outskirts. The Outskirts limit would be
  exceeded  upon  placing the second monster, so you would then increase
  the terror level by 1 and return the six monsters in the  Outskirts to
  the cup. Finally, you would draw the third  monster and place it in
  the Outskirts.


In Power Grid, what are the phases and what are the steps? My copy of Power Grid has an strange reversal of terminology between the cards:

... and the rules:

Obviously this isn't a huge deal, but I just wonder which is correct in terms of the other editions of the game available?

Update: after the answer below confirmed that the cards are wrong rather than the rules, I contacted Rio Grande Games to ask about getting replacement cards.  They directed me to the BoardGameGeek store, which sells a Power Grid promotional pack called "Power Grid: Theme Park (BGG Promo Card Set)".  This contains a replacement Step 3 card, but sadly no replacement player summary cards...  If anyone knows how to get them, that would be great to know.

In later revisons of Power Grid phases are used to describe the difference phases of a turn. Steps are used to describe the 3 different game states that happens when a player builds 7 cities or pull the card in OP post from the top of the power plant pile.

The card does say "Step 3" in the later revisions that I played.

For more information check the Power Grid FAQ


Can I strike backward directly? I am an amateur player of carrom and I have seen in tournaments players striking backward their striker to pocket the coins behind the hand.

Is this allowed?

According to the rules of ICF (international carrom federation) you can strike backwards directly. It is popularly known as thumbing as you use your thumb to strike the coins behind the baseline.  Watch any international tournament matches on youtube. you will notice players thumbing.


How is a roleplaying game not a board game? Let's say you have a roleplaying game with these elements:

a board on the table, depicting the rooms of a castle
miniature pieces on the board, representing the different characters in the game
cards and dice used as randomizers

How is this not a board game?

(The question may sound antagonistic, but I'm quite serious.  What is it that makes such a game not a board game?)

To give a short, simple attempt at answer to kick things off: I would say that a roleplaying game must be partly comprised of hidden information that has been invented by one or more of the players.

That's the key difference I can see between The Arkham Horror/Mansions of Madness (boardgames) and The Call of Cthulhu (roleplaying game), where both are moderated by a Keeper.  In both setups the Keeper controls the opposition to the players, but in only one is (s)he asked to invent details, descriptions or outcomes, as opposed to just managing them.

In a boardgame, it would be seriously frowned upon for any player (even in a moderatorial role) to come up with new challenges or house rules for the others that are not in the script.  In a roleplaying game, that's practically compulsory.


When should I play my land for my turn? Does it really matter when I play my land for my turn? Some people get extremely annoyed/agitated when I play a land before spells and I don't actually need the land right away for casting my spells. Does it give away any information of benefit to my opponent, or is it bad for other reasons?

I'm mainly asking about whether to play the land before (as opposed to after), not about whether to play it at all.

You can play a land for the turn during either main phase, before or after casting spells. There's no hard and fast rule about what time is best to play your land. If someone told you there was, they probably don't have a thorough understanding of the game. But if someone told you that in a specific situation you should've played differently, they might've had a point.

To give an idea, here are some of the things that might come up. These aren't meant to be exhaustive lists, just to demonstrate that it's not a black and white issue.

Reasons you might play a land before casting a spell or going through combat:

You need the mana immediately (you're about to spend all you can produce), or you're planning out actions in which you'll eventually want it all available and you want to make sure you count everything correctly.
The land has some effect that you want before playing spells (e.g. the scry from Temple of Silence).
You might need the mana to pay to keep a spell from being countered (if your opponent might have something like Mana Leak).
You have instants you could cast or abilities you could activate, and want to make sure you could do so if something happens in response to the other spells you're playing, or during combat. (Or you want your opponent to think this is the case.)
You want your opponent to think there's a lower chance you have other spells in hand.

Reasons you might wait to play a land until after casting spells or after combat:

You're going to draw cards and the land you'll choose to play depends on what you draw. (In some cases, this could even include choosing not to play a land at all.)
You want to find out what happens when you cast a spell or during combat before you decide what land to play.
You want to cast spells or go through combat with your opponent thinking there's a higher chance you have additional spells in hand, or a lower chance that you have a land (and thus that you have less mana available for spells/abilities).

Sometimes you might even consider not playing a land at all for the turn. Usually you don't want to do that since you might need the mana for a bigger spell or multiple spells later. But if that's not an issue, some of the same ideas as above come into play:

You might want your opponent to think you have more spells or fewer lands left.
You want to wait til later to get a non mana effect from the land.
You might have to discard a card later and would prefer it to be the land.

So, yes, there are definitely reasons it might be much better to play a land at one time than at another time - but it's not "always before" or "always after".


Would a turn order opposite the disprove order affect the strategy or gameplay in Clue? The official Clue rules call for a clockwise turn order, and a clockwise order of disproving suggestions. Would changing the order of the turn, or the order of disproving a suggestion so one is the opposite/reverse of the other have any meaning effect on strategy or gameplay?

  Miss Scarlet— the player with the red token— always plays first. Play then proceeds, in
  turn, to the first player’s left.

  Proving a Suggestion True or False - As soon as you make a Suggestion, your opponents, in turn, try to prove it false. The first to try is the player to your immediate left. This player looks at his or her cards to see if one of the three cards you just named is there. If the player does have one of the cards named, he or she must show it to you and no one else. If the player has more than one of the cards named, he or she selects just one to show you.

  If that opponent has none of the cards that you named, then the chance to prove your
  Suggestion false passes, in turn, to the next player on the left.

It makes a subtle difference, in that, to prove you wrong, they have to reveal a card in your proposed solution.

If you (Ay) say Col M in the Kitchen with the Pipe, and the next player (Bee) has Col M, the one after (See) has Kitchen and Pipe, you don't find out that See has kitchen or pipe; you only know that Bee has the Col M card.

To find out if Kitchen and Pipe are out there, you need to use a guy that YOU don't have, and Bee doesn't have, so that See has to reveal either kitchen OR pipe.

Also note, in the above example, See knows which card was revealed to Ay, because he has the other two. He can now mark it off. But going the other way, Bee doesn't know which card was revealed to Ay. The reverse can happen in other ways, too.

If you go with first to reveal, you might find out about the pipe or kitchen AND Col M.

Note that, if the first to disprove is the one who played last, you have reason to suspect that they don't have their called suggestion; it changes slightly the strategy in what you pick, because you know that they will get to examine you based upon what they have just tried to solve with.
If you go with simultaneous reveal, you guarantee learning more than what you're supposed to.

If you just change the turn order the other direction, you learn either the pipe or the kitchen, but not the Col.


Can you transmute before taking energy tokens? Let's say I have 7 energy tokens, and choose a die face that includes both transmutation and energy tokens.  If I tried to take energy tokens, I would lose any extra energy, because I can't hold more than 7 at once.

Can I transmute energy that is currently in my reserve, before taking the new tokens into my energy reserve?

No, as you have to to receive energy tokens from your crystal before doing anything else. From the 2nd edition English rulebook, p. 8, emphasis mine:

Resolution order of the actions of the player’s rounds
The following actions on the Seasons dice must always be resolved before performing any other action: drawing a card, receiving energy tokens or crystals, increasing your Summoning Gauge. Once these actions are resolved, the players can perform their other actions, in the order of their choice.

After that, you may transmute at anytime and as many times you want during your turn.


Name of the game where you are a monk collecting scriptures and could become pope? I trying to recall the title of a game. I remember its gameplay and mechanics rather well, however its name eludes me.

The premise has you as monks who travel around Italy during the
medieval period, reconstructing holy books. There's a pretty detailed map drawn in the Medieval style which serves as the game board. Edit: Actually the premise is that you are monks trying to construct a common language from analyzing dialects from different part of Italy to come up with a common form of the language.
It uses Action Points system, when you spend 1 AP to move to one
neighboring province,  3 AP to move two. You can also use AP to
gather money. The AP tokens are big purple tokens. You can spend some
AP to unlock more AP.
You are supposed to go to different part of the maps to reconstruct
books from the different pieces.
Towards the end of the game, the Pope will die and one of the players
could become Pope depending on certain conditions.
Name of the game is in Latin

After hunting through various BoardGameGeek lists, I had the idea of looking for games set in Italy (there's actually a list for that!). The game in question is De Vulgari Eloquentia.


If Calamity Janet has a Barrel, can she use it to avoid Indians? If Calamity Janet has a Barrel, can she use it to generate a Missed! and then use her special ability to turn the Missed! into a Bang! in order to avoid Indians?

In order to counter Indians, you must discard a Bang! card.

Calamity Janet can use Missed! cards as Bang! cards.

Barrel, however, does not give you a Missed! card when it works successfully - it just causes a Missed! effect that can be used to cancel a Bang!.

Since you don't have a Missed! card to discard, Calamity Janet can't use Barrel to avoid Indians in this way.


What manners are specific to mahjong? Many games, especially ancient ones, have their own set of manners. For instance, Go players bow before the game and greet each other ("onegaishimasu") and play the first stone in the upper right corner [etc].

Is there something similar in mahjong, too?

I beg to disagree with User545. Mahjong is drenched in formal--even ceremonial--aspects: The sorting of the seats, the selection of the first east, the building of the wall, the breaking of the same, the collecting of the tiles, the procedures of play, the vocabulary... To a person who grew up with the game around her or him many of these might seem commonplace, but to someone new to the game they appear remarkably ritual. And the way expert players seamlessly, silently and knowingly interact in smooth choreography under the same peculiar (and somewhat mysterious) etiquette is uniquely enchanting to those being introduced to the game.

Furthermore, each national variant of mahjong (Japanese, Taiwanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Malaysian, even the Western variants, like American, or the Chinese Classical game now played mainly in Europe, among many others) has variations of these formalities and rites, not just of rules and hands.

For example, the most popular mahjong variant in Japan--riichi mahjong, which is played extensively in that country, across all ages, and which is undergoing a true renaissance (not only in Japan, but around the world, thanks to Japanese manga and anime)--is particularly adept at meticulously keeping this ritual aspect of the game. This aspect affects all forms of game traits, manners, and in-game behavior, all the way down to tile size, as well as their handling, and the body language of the players in doing so.

In Japanese mahjong, there are particular ways to shuffle (if not using automatic machines), hold and handle the tiles, build the wall, arrange discards (in neatly disposed discard rows, exactly 6 tiles across and 3 down), etc. The rules of the game strictly legislate the punishment of deviations of many of these behaviors, especially the ones that lead to time being wasted in the game or the cancellation of a hand.

And it's not only in Japan that mahjong game play generates manners, rituals, and codified behaviors and vocabulary. Also, it's not only because of the central elements of play. Different regional variants introduce locally specific accessories (counting sticks, tile racks, chips, first-east and round-wind markers, tile pushers, dice, different indicators [horse-race chips, yakitori markers, 5th-player bettor]), all of which generate region-specific behaviors and manners around their use.

One more thing to clarify is a notion introduced by the OP: Mahjong is NOT an ancient game like weiqi (go). The oft-repeated bit that the game is an ancient invention of Chinese wise men, and that it was played by Kǒng Fūzǐ, is shameless marketing poppycock introduced by the American entrepreneur that brought the game to the USA. Some of its distant forerunners (in paper card form) date back perhaps to the middle ages, but definitely not to antiquity. The game, as we know it today, originated during the final decades of the Qing dynasty (mid to late 19th century) and spread to the world in the early 20th Century.


How do Chromatic Sphere, Archmage Ascension, and Panglacial Wurm interact? If I have an Archmage Ascension in play with six quest counters and a Panglacial Wurm in my library, and I activate Chromatic Sphere's ability as part of the process of playing another spell, as in rule 601.2f, when do I attempt to start drawing the card? In particular, once the replacement ability takes effect and I instead search my library, can I start casting the Panglacial Wurm while I am still casting the other spell?

can I start casting the Panglacial Wurm while I am still casting the other spell?

Yes. It doesn't matter at all that you are casting another spell[1][2].

If the game instructs you to cast (or gives you to option to cast) a spell, you must (or can) cast the spell. (And that's the only time you can cast a spell.) Most of the time, the instruction is in the rules, but it's on a card in this case.

You might say "But I'm casting a creature when the stack isn't empty, and it might not even be my turn." Doesn't matter. Pangalcial Wurm doesn't say "Cast Panglacial Wurm if it's you main phase and the stack is empty" like priority effectively does[3].

You cast the other spell (TOS):

You place TOS on the stack.
You makes some choices.
You determine TOS's cost.
You activate mana abilities:

You activate Chromatic Sphere's ability.
Chromatic Sphere's resolves immediately:

You add one mana of of the color of your choice to your mana pool.
You search your library for a card to place in your hand:

You cast Panglacial Wurm:

You place it on the stack.
You determine the cost to cast it.
You activate mana abilities.
You pay the cost to cast it.

You place the card in your hand.
You shuffle your library

You pay TOS's cost.

[People get to play spells and activate abilities here if they want.]
Panglacial Wurm resolves:

You place Panglacial Wurm on the battlefield.

[People get to play spells and activate abilities here if they want.]
TOS resolves

Notes:

Chromatic Sphere's ability is a mana ability, and it's possible to activate mana abilities while casting a spell. Casting a spell (or activating an ability) is to put it on the stack, make some choices (including targets), determine its cost, activate mana abilities, and pay its cost.
The stack isn't empty whether you use Chromatic Sphere's ability while casting another spell or not.
Priority could be defined as "Whenever you gain priority, Choose one — Cast a non-instant spell if it's you main phase and the stack is empty; ...; or pass priority unless all players have passed priority in succession."


How high do transfer bids (to 1NT) go? In today's bridge column, opener opened 1NT with (s)A94 (h)AQ97 (d)763 (c) AQJ. Responder had
s)KT (h)KJT863 (d)K52 (c)86.

At two different tables, both pairs got to 4H, but in different ways. At Table 1, responder bid directly to 4 hearts, played and made it. At Table 2 responder bid 4 diamonds (transfer), and opener bid 4 hearts, and was set by a diamond lead through responder's K52, and the K of clubs "offside" opener's AQJ.

My understanding is that the reason for transfer bids was to protect the opener when the responder had a weak hand. For instance, a responder might bid "garbage Stayman" with (s)xxx (h)xxxx (d)xxxxx (c) x. That is, zero hcp, and a clear desire to play in anything except clubs (or NT). Likewise, a responder might bid two diamonds (transfer) with "nothing" and an indifferent five card heart suit. Of course, a responder might also bid Stayman or a transfer, with 8-10 points, while needing help to determine the ultimate suit and level of the contract.

But in the above example, the responder had 10 high card points and a six card suit, enough to bid (and play) game on his own. Why use a transfer in such a case?

Do some pairs play that only two level bids are transfers and higher bids are "natural?" Or do most transfer bidders keep the transfer mechanism even at the four (game) level? Put another way, does a transfer at the two level follow one convention and a transfer at the four level follow another convention?

While the original idea for Jacoby transfers may have been to make the strong hand the declarer (in the 1950s, when Jacoby played with his wife, he bid naturally but she used transfers over partner's 1NT opening so that he would play more hands; this sort of agreement is no longer permitted), that is not their primary benefit.

The primary benefit of transfers is that it gives responder a second chance to make a call. Before transfers, responder to 1NT would bid 2H to play, and had to bid 3H game forcing; this left no room for invitational calls that also showed a major suit. Transfers allw responder to start describing many types of hands with a call at the 2 level, and free up 3-level bids to show other types of hands.

Combining 2-level (Jacoby) and 4-level (Texas) transfers, you can differentiate between the following types of hands:

5+ in a major with no desire to play a game (1NT-2D-2H-Pass).
Exactly 5 in a major with invitational values (1NT-2D-2H-2NT).
6+ in a major with invitational values (1NT-2D-2H-3H).
A balanced hand with a 5-card major and game forcing values (1NT-2D-2H-3NT; some pairs agree that this promises 5332 shape and others include some 5422 hands).
A more shapely hand with a 5-card major and game forcing values (e.g. 1NT-2D-2H-3C shows 5+ hearts and 4+ clubs).
A balanced hand with exactly 5 cards in a major and slam-invitational values (1NT-2D-2H-4NT).
6+ in a major with game forcing values but no interest in slam (1NT-4D-4H-Pass)
6+ in a major with slam interest (1NT-2D-2H-4H).
6+ in a major, asking for key cards (1NT-4D-4H-4NT).

These are just the basic agreements with Jacoby and Texas transfers; with some discussion with your partner, you can also ask for key cards after showing a 5-card suit, show shortness (either to avoid 3NT with a gaping hole or to find a 29-hcp slam when the hands fit well), and show other useful hands.

As for the example that you mention, the pair using Texas transfers got unlucky -- making the 1NT opener the declarer gains far more often than not from an opening lead perspective.


Can I terraform outside of my turn, or during my turn in some other action? I'm trying to figure out Terra Mystica by myself. One thing I'm having trouble with is the spades used for terraforming. The rules seem very clear that these need to be used immediately — they can't be saved for future actions. (And that's backed up by the simple fact that there's no tokens or other representation.) But, there are number of ways you can earn spades during actions other than Transform and Build — and even outside of actions, as in the Cult of Earth spade bonus.

Is terraforming / terrain transformation just a thing you can do whenever you get spades?

Yes, if you ever get a spade you must use it immediately, or forfeit it. The only way to get a spade outside of taking an action on your turn though is the end-of-round cult bonuses that give them.

From the rulebook:

  You may not save Spades for future Actions. Spades need to be
  used immediately.

Note that the spades that you get for the cult bonuses must be used by themselves; you cannot also spend workers to terraform more, nor can you build a Dwelling at that time. Those are things you can do in addition to getting spades when you choose the terraform and build action or a power action that gives you spades.


How do I activate Dauntless Cathar's ability? Dauntless Cathar has the following ability:

  {1}{W}, Exile Dauntless Cathar from your graveyard: Put a 1/1 white Spirit creature token with flying onto the battlefield. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.

Please clarify. If the card is IN my hand, how can I exile if FROM the graveyard if it is not there? Did the writers mean SEND it to graveyard, or actually exile it? Confused, the writing does not make sense.

In general, if a card's ability says to move it from a particular zone, then that ability can only be activated (or trigger, as the case may be) when the card is in that zone. On this particular card, part of the cost of the activated ability is "Exile Dauntless Cathar from your graveyard", so you can only activate the ability when the card is already in your graveyard.
Keep in mind that in general, activated abilities cannot be activated while the card is in your hand. Most activated abilities can only be activated while the card is on the battlefield.
The specific rule that covers this is 112.6:

112.6. Abilities of an instant or sorcery spell usually function only while that object is on the stack. Abilities of all other objects usually function only while that object is on the battlefield. The exceptions are as follows:

[...]

112.6k An ability whose cost or effect specifies that it moves the object it’s on out of a particular zone functions only in that zone, unless that ability’s trigger condition, or a previous part of that ability’s cost or effect, specifies that the object is put into that zone. The same is true if the effect of that ability creates a delayed triggered ability whose effect moves the object out of a particular zone.


What are some of the different interactions with empty remote servers in Android: Netrunner? This is a multi-part question about empty remote servers. Each of these questions came up during gameplay and I'm hoping to get clarification on them since some of the interactions aren't completely clear.

What defines an empty remote server? If a remote server has ICE
protecting it but no agenda/asset/whatever installed behind the ICE,
is it still empty?
Is an empty remote server analogous to a new
remote server? For an example of context, let's say when playing
Mushin No Shin.
Consider a remote server with no ICE that has an asset installed with an
ability that has a cost of trashing the asset (say, like the remove from game ability on Jackson
Howard). The runner runs on
the server and in response the corp trashes the asset. Does the
server still exist or is it simply an empty remote server? Is the
run still successful?

A remote server requires at least one piece of ICE protecting it or at least one card installed in the server itself (i.e. agenda/asset/upgrade) to exist. The three central servers always exist. "Empty" would refer to a server with only ICE protecting it, and nothing in it.

Empty servers already exist so is different from a new server. Cards like Mushin No Shin, which specify a new server, must interact with a new server (i.e. that they create).

If a server ceases to exist during the run (e.g. as the result of a Jackson Howard removal that you describe), the run immediately ends, and is considered neither successful nor unsuccessful.
The same is true if the trashed card is an ICE. For instance, if an empty server is defended only by a Data Mine which triggers, the server ceases to exist.


Axis and Allies 1940 Multinational Defense, AAA and Radar Background:

In Axis and Allies 1940, two powers may occupy the same territory and defend it together.
AAA fire first at enemy aircraft, with each AAA capable of firing at up to 3 enemy aircraft--but no more than 1 per plane. Hits are scored on roll of a 1.
Radar increases the hit score from "1" to "2 or less".

General question: What happens when two powers are sharing a territory, and one power has radar, and the other power does not?

Possible solution 1: Split the rolls?
Example: UK has Radar and has 1 AAA. The USA shares this same territory, doesn't have radar, and has 1 AAA. Germany is attacking with 5 aircraft. Normally, the total number of AAA present (2) is enough to fire up to 6 aircraft; but since total number of aircraft (5) is lower than 6, only 5 total AAA rolls are permitted. How does the defender split the dice rolls between the radar-AAA and regular-AAA? Possibilities: Radar AAA: 3 / regular: 1; Radar AAA: 2 / regular 2; Radar AAA: 1/ regular. 3;

Possible solution 2: radar presence.
I the above scenario, since at least one unit with radar is present, are all the friendly AAA "upgraded" to two or less? (i.e., all that is needed is at least one radar-AAA). This also means that if the territory is owned by UK, but the AAA present are from the US, then they score a hit on a dice roll of a one.

Possible solution 3: territory ownership?
The rule book doesn't explain it this way, but this solution can solve the question. If the territory is owned by the power that has radar, then all friendly AAA also roll on 2 or less-- even if the only AAA present are from friendly-but-foreign power without radar. The justification is that the AAA units themselves do not have radar, but the territory is equipped with a radar network. But if the territory is owned by a power without radar, then all friendly AAA do not hit on a one, regardless if the other power has "radar-capable" AAA.

It depends on the exact wording of the rule that "radar increases the hit score". If there is nothing beyond those words, then it would logically apply to the unit; in your example the Allies have one British AAA that can take up to three radar-assisted shots, leaving the American unit to take the other two without the bonus. (It would be logically possible to decide to take two radar-assisted shots and three 'manual', but this is unlikely in a real game.)


Do I take one card in a room or take all? When I investigate a room, do I take one card per action turn at a time or do I take them all on that action turn?

You resolved them one at the time from the top. Unless you fail a puzzle or is lacking an item this usually means that you take all the cards as one action.
If you find a puzzle in the top of the pile then you can resolve it in that turn and still take all the other cards on the pile, all in one action.


3-3 invasion into 4-4,6-4 In josekipedia, they state that this exchange is a mistake

See http://www.josekipedia.com/#path:pdttpfqcpcqdqepbobrbpaqaqb for the full sequence they argue with.

But, I think that their argument is wrong! Why would white not follow making this shape, which is alive?

It is true that there are perhaps better possibilities for white's second move (in terms of points, not life & death), but the followup of the "mistake" and argument they present doesn't seem right for the above reason. Or did I miss something?

EDIT: actually, this shape works in the following joseki: http://josekipedia.com/#path:qettodqcpcqdperb


How should Bone Splinters and Mirrorwing Dragon work? When playing Magic Duels, my opponent had a Mirrorwing Dragon as his only creature and I cast a Bone Splinters on it, sacrificing one of my three creatures.

The following occurred:

1) The game copied Bone Splinters (once) - I assume from Mirrorwing Dragon (the game is non-specific)

2) One of my two remaining creatures was targetted by the Bone Splinters copy and destroyed.

3) I was left with a single creature (of the original 3) and my opponents Mirrorwing Dragon was destroyed.  My remaining creature did not have hexproof or protection from black.

Is this how this should've worked?

If you cast a spell on a Mirrorwing Dragon as its only target, that spell will be copied for and target each of your creatures.

  Whenever a player casts an instant or sorcery spell that targets only Mirrorwing Dragon, that player copies that spell for each other creature he or she controls that the spell could target.

"Her or she" refers to the caster of the spell. See also the first ruling on the gatherer page for Mirrorwing Dragon:

  The copies are only created targeting creatures that the spell’s controller controls. Copies are not created for all creatures on the battlefield, and the affected creatures may be controlled by a different player than the controller of Mirrorwing Dragon. Notably, if you cast Murder targeting your opponent’s Mirrorwing Dragon, your creatures will each get a Murder, not your opponent’s.

Alternatively, since you said that "he killed one of my creatures*", you may be confusing the creature sacrifice cost of Bone Splinters with its effect. After the sacrifice, however, the spell would still be copied for each of your creatures.


How does Kajia's Swarming style work against attacks measured from markers? For example, say we have the following board setup
S = Kajia Salix
B = Karin Brandtford
bold = Jager's marker

ooSBooo

Karin has an insect token in each discard pile.

Kajia plays Swarming Drive.
Karin plays Howling Grasp.

Because of the insect tokens opponents at range 1 or 2 cannot hit Kajia. Karin is at range 1 so she should not be able to hit. However, the attack is coming from Jager's position, which is range 0. Does Karin hit in this situation?

Howling just calculates range from Jager's position, it doesn't change where Karin is.  Swarming checks Karin's position when determining whether or not you can hit, so the attack misses.


Canceling a creature spell during combat Ok, so I play Shaman of the Pack (I'm using an elf deck) whilst having a few elves (6 or so), and my opponent takes the damage. His creatures are tapped out, and I have a 5/4 elf with an artifact equipped that gives +1/+1 for each creature that shares a type with it, and I begin to declare attackers. At this time, he decides to counter Shaman of the Pack. Is this a legal move or is he in the wrong?

If he has said that he takes the life loss from Shaman of the Pack then the spell has already resolved, entered the battlefield, the enter-the-battlefield-trigger has been put on the stack and resolved. It is then way too late to decide to counter the Shaman.

If he had not yet acknowledged the life loss from the Shaman verbally or by obvious gesture, then he still retains priority and you cannot decide to move to combat.

The important thing is that he acknowledged the loss of life.


Do great Scrabble players ever turn in their tiles? Presumably you would trade in tiles if you thought you would get in one turn, after trading, more than what you'll get in the next two turns without trading.

But then, maybe you should make defensive plays even in some of those situations?

Yes, most definitely.  A good write up on exchange strategy can be found in Joe Edley's book Everything Scrabble, pg. 89 and following.  Tournament players do exchange significantly less than they did when Everything Scrabble was first written, since the recent (well, not that recent any more, 2006) addition of QI and ZA to the official Scrabble lexicon have made moves like exchanging only Q less favorable statistically.  However, good players will also know when it is right to "fish," that is, make a nearly worthless play to get rid of certain tiles in order to greatly increase their probability of bingoing on the next turn.

A great way to get some idea of the frequency with which championship players exchange is to look at some of the games from board 1 of the most recent National Scrabble Championships; all of the games are online in turn by turn form here.  Many of the words in these games will be unfamiliar, but if you want an idea of what great Scrabble players do, that would be the best place to start.

Also, you should note that the best frequency with which players should exchange is going to depend on how large Scrabble word knowledge is (which is almost completely unrelated to your vocabulary).  In other words, based on the words that you know, how soon will you be able to turn your rack into a bingo rack?  If you can't see yourself doing that in the next two or three turns assuming average draws, then you should probably exchange.

The other time to exchange is if any legal play would make your rack worse.  For instance, if your opening rack is AEINQST, your best play by far is exch Q.  Doing so will give you a 95.7% chance of having a bingo on your rack the next turn, and probably even greater than that of bingoing, depending on what your opponent plays.


When do I need to choose a target for "Enters the battlefield" triggers? Consider the following game state.

I have a Sky Skiff in play.  It is not currently a creature.
I cast Herald of the Fair
It has an ETB trigger that targets a creature.

Can I tap the Herald of the Fair to Crew the Sky Skiff to make it a creature so that I can target it with the ETB trigger?  Or do I have to choose the target as soon as the trigger goes on the stack and have no time to respond to the trigger to make the Sky Skiff a valid target?

You have to choose targets as the ability goes on the stack:

  114.1. Some spells and abilities require their controller to choose one or more targets for them. ... These targets are
  declared as part of the process of putting the spell or ability on the stack.

Only spells and abilities use the stack - there is no point at which the stack contains the trigger event "Herald just entered the battlefield". Instead, when a triggered ability's trigger condition is met, the ability itself is put on the stack (and any targets must be chosen) the next time a player would receive priority. Thus you do not get priority between the time Herald enters the battlefield and the time the ETB ability goes on the stack, so you cannot have Herald crew Sky Skiff in time to make Sky Skiff a legal target.


Does Medical Breakthrough still have its effect when forfeited for rezzing Archer? To rez Archer, I need to forfeit an agenda.

Medical Breakthrough has the ability of reducing each subsequent Medical Breakthrough's advancement requirement by 1; whether it's in the runners or corps score area.

Therefore, essentially, I wanted to confirm whether forfeited cards leave the score area, and hence in this case, not have an effect on future cards?

There is nothing about Medical Breakthrough that would function differently than other agendas upon forfeit.  Forfeited agendas no longer affect the game either for points or for their abilities.

Details
Medical Breakthrough's ability is:

Lower the advancement requirement of each Medical Breakthrough by 1.
This ability is active even while Medical Breakthrough is in the
Runner's score area.

It's not that the installed copy of Medical Breakthrough looks to see how many Medical Breakthroughs are in the score area.  Each Medical Breakthrough in the score area has an ability that modifies the advancement requirement of the installed copy.  However, this doesn't matter, because Medical Breakthrough leaves the score area when it is forfeited.
Additionally, from the core rules, page 22:

Forfeiting Agendas
Some card abilities require the Corporation or Runner to forfeit an agenda. When a player forfeits an agenda, he
selects any agenda in his score area and permanently removes it from
the game (it does not go to Archives or the heap). He no longer scores
points for the forfeited agenda.

Given the Medical Breakthrough is removed from the game, it is in neither player's score area and its ability is no longer active:

While an agenda is in the Corporation’s score area, it is active and
adds its agenda points to his score.

Constant Abilities
Constant abilities continually affect the game as long as the card
they appear on is active and any other specified conditions are met.


Why do cards from Alpha have to be in opaque sleeves? In this answer the tournament rules are quoted:

3.3 Authorized Cards
[...]
Players may use cards from the Alpha printing only if the deck is in opaque sleeves.

Why is this? As far as I remember there was an idea of having different card backs for each edition/expansion, but it was decided later to have the only one card back, which makes all cards compatible.
What makes cards from Alpha different so that they could be recognized without an opaque sleeve?

Since the corners of alpha cards are distinctly different from the other editions of magic cards, it would be equivalent to playing with a marked deck, since presumably all your cards won't be alpha.


A question about flickering a stolen creature Some cards like Mistmeadow Witch and Ghostly Flicker specify under whose control the flickered creature will return. What happens when it isn't specified whose control the creature will return under? For example if I'd play Yannik, Scavenging Sentinel or Lumbering Battlement which doesn't specify that, would the creature return under my or my opponent's control?

They won't be 'stolen' anymore when they return to the battlefield. One of the rulings under Lumbering Battlement says

When the cards return to the battlefield, they will be new objects with no connection to the cards that were exiled.

'Stealing' a creature is a continuous effect, i.e. a creature is always controlled by its owner unless another effect changes this. When a stolen creature returns to the battlefield, the game doesn't know about the effect anymore and its owner will control it.

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

Nine exceptions are listed there but this isn't one of them.
There is even a special ruling about these type of cards/effects which I didn't know about (thanks @doppelgreener):

One-Shot Effects

610.1. A one-shot effect does something just once and doesn’t have a duration. Examples include dealing damage, destroying a permanent, creating a token, and moving an object from one zone to another.
610.3. Some one-shot effects cause an object to change zones “until” a specified event occurs. A second one-shot effect is created immediately after the specified event. This second one-shot effect returns the object to its previous zone.
610.3c An object returned to the battlefield this way returns under its owner’s control unless otherwise specified.

Finally, @murgatroid99 mentions a card which explicitly modifies this behaviour, Cloudshift:

Exile target creature you control, then return that card to the battlefield under your control.


Special event cards and timing The Special Event cards all indicate they may be played "at any time". Are there any restrictions to "any time", i.e. in the middle of someone's turn? Suppose an epidemic card has been drawn -- can the airlift card be played while the epidemic steps are being applied?

This question was answered by Matt Leacock, the designer of Pandemic, on BoardGameGeek:

  You can play the cards at any time, however, you can't play them
  between an event and the representation of the event on the board.
  Some scenarios may help explain this:

  Scenario 1: Player #1 has a Special Event card for "Resilient
  Population." During the draw, an Epidemic card is drawn. Since an
  Epidemic card was drawn, player #1 decides to play their Special Event
  card to remove a city from the infection discard pile before they are
  reshuffled. This is legal because the card was played before the cards
  were reshuffled.

  Scenario 2: A player may use the Forecast card to rearrange the cards
  on the top of the infection deck before they're drawn -- but once a
  card is drawn, the player can't rearrange the cards.

  Scenario 3: The Red disease has been [cured but not eradicated]. A player draws the
  Taipei card which results in the 8th outbreak. Since no time elapses
  between the drawing of the Taipei card (resulting in the infection)
  and the placing of the cubes (representing the infection), the players
  lose the game. It's not OK to Airlift the medic over to Taipei to cure
  because the cubes have already been added and the game has already
  been lost.

So in your specific example, yes you can play the Airlift card, if you do so between Epidemic steps.


Homegrown solo variants This afternoon, I played Ascension for the first time - and I played it solo, by simply dealing two decks and playing both players' turns. I had fun, and ultimately Ascension seems like a game where playing for more than one player isn't too much a conflict of interest - you can only do so much to influence the other player.

It led me to a broader idea, and I'm bringing it here as a question.

When a game doesn't have a predefined solitaire rule set, what's a good approach for designing a solo variant?

The three biggest categories I can think of are:

design an AI player who follows rules, and execute them on the AI's turn (see Race for the Galaxy)
design challenges which the solo player must overcome (see Merchant of Venus)
play as more than one player (as I did for Ascension today)

What's a good set of criteria for a custom solo variant to a board or card game?

Any approach to designing solo variants should take into account this impressive body of work on BGG. This user has created 46 (to date) very robust solo versions of popular'highly ranked games.


Are shell and slate go stones fragile? I'm looking to buy a set of fine (but not luxurious) go equipment (board, stones, and bowls).

I have a cheap set of glass stones with a blue plastic sheet "board". Unfortunately my home's floor is covered in ceramic tiles, so when the glass stones drop on the floor, the stones easily shatter or break in halves (I have broken a few already).

Would shell and slate stones be just as fragile? Or are they generally resistant to breakage from dropping? Alternatively, would yunzi be solid enough?

While I could go completely practical and just buy a magnetic set, I would like to avoid that. I find that magnetic sets just don't have the right feel to it and detracts from the appeal and esthetics of the game.

From the Wikipedia article on Yunzi stones

  Like glass Go stones, yunzi are very durable. However, like glass stones, yunzi are still at risk for chipping if they are dropped or otherwise come into sharp contact with hard surfaces such as metal, tile, or stone.

The problem you describe is more a property of your (very hard) tile floor. I would suggest acquiring a small area rug and placing it under your board or table when playing to protect your stones.

I have never enjoyed the pleasure of playing with shell and slate stones, but I suspect that the very properties that make them so beautiful also make them susceptible to chipping from such a hard surface. Being safe seems more prudent than being sorry.


(Dominaria Spoilers) Can the new buy-a-box-promo card deal damage to Planeswalkers? Is this the the equivalent of "new lightning bolt" effect due to rule change on planeswalker damage?

Let me explain below the question and confusion.

The new Buy-a-box promo, Firesong and Sunspeaker, has an effect that spells out “target creature or player”. Is this the first card where we have to remember that the effect excludes planeswalkers, i.e. we don't replace the text with “any target” since it's printed after the planeswalker damage redirection rule change?

Channel Fireball's article Understanding the Dominaria Rule Changes and Sagas says:

  Now, imagine they print a card like this:

    New Lightning Bolt

    New Lightning Bolt deals 3 damage to target creature or player.

  This card explicitly excludes planeswalkers, but, if you don’t know when it was printed, you have no way of knowing. If New Lightning Bolt and old Lightning Bolt are both in your hand, they’ll have the exact same printed text, but one will work very differently. It’s not going to confuse any established players, but I can see how it could confuse someone who’s not already enfranchised.

In early March, the release notes were accidentally published in Simplified Chinese, and Wizards of the Coast responded to that leak by publishing the release notes in all languages. In the release notes, the section about the planeswalker damage redirection rules change includes the following paragraph:

  Cards printed in the Dominaria set that deal damage to creatures and/or players but not to planeswalkers (such as the Planeswalker Deck card Chandra, Bold Pyromancer and the promotional card Firesong and Sunspeaker) require targets as written even though similar cards have received errata.

In addition, the release notes list the text of Firesong and Sunspeaker as follows:

  Firesong and Sunspeaker (Buy-a-Box Promotional Card)
  4RW
  Legendary Creature – Minotaur Cleric
  4/6
  Red instant and sorcery spells you control have lifelink.
  Whenever a white instant or sorcery spell causes you to gain life, Firesong and Sunspeaker deals 3 damage to target creature or player.

and includes this ruling

  The last ability of Firesong and Sunspeaker can't target a planeswalker.


In what order are continuous effects applied across multiple objects? In the Magic Comprehensive Rules, rule 613.1 says

  The values of an object’s characteristics are determined by starting with the actual object. For a card, that means the values of the characteristics printed on that card. For a token or a copy of a spell or card, that means the values of the characteristics defined by the effect that created it. Then all applicable continuous effects are applied in a series of layers in the following order...

This whole rules section clearly explains how multiple continuous effects are applied to a single object. But what if I have multiple objects with static abilities that would affect each other? In what order would those be applied, and why does it work that way?

This matters most in cases where an effect would remove an ability that would create another effect.

Each effect in the order described in that section is applied to all relevant permanents; the application of effects in this order can affect the existence and application of later effects in the same order on other objects.
The rules do not explicitly state that this is how this process works, but the rules section as a whole describes the order in which to evaluate effects, but it does not say anything about evaluating objects in any specific order. The simplest way to apply those rules is to apply each continuous effect to all objects at the same time, and put only the effects themselves in any kind of order

We can consider some proposed alternative interpretations and see that they either require assumptions that are not stated or implied by the rules, or are not self-consistent.
Alternative 1: Objects are evaluated one at a time, in timestamp order
This is the simplest way to put objects in some order that is related to something defined in the rules.
Timestamps are defined in rule 613.6, which says this:

Within a layer or sublayer, determining which order effects are applied in is usually done using a timestamp system. An effect with an earlier timestamp is applied before an effect with a later timestamp.

Rule 613.6c does specify the order of object timestamps, but 613.6 only describes how to use timestamps to order effects within a layer. There is no rule stating that objects as a whole should be ordered by timestamp.
Alternative 2: Objects are evaluated one at a time, in dependency and timestamp order
This is a more complex order than the previous alternative, but it more closely corresponds to how a player would intuitively expect some interactions to work. For example, this question is written with the expectation that Ichthyomorphosis would remove Dryad of the Ilysian Grove's ability before that ability would affect any lands.
Dependencies are defined in rule 613.7:

Within a layer or sublayer, determining which order effects are applied in is sometimes done using a dependency system. If a dependency exists, it will override the timestamp system.

613.7a An effect is said to “depend on” another if (a) it’s applied in the same layer (and, if applicable, sublayer) as the other effect (see rules 613.1 and 613.3); (b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to; and (c) neither effect is from a characteristic-defining ability or both effects are from characteristic-defining abilities. Otherwise, the effect is considered to be independent of the other effect.

Dependencies are only defined as a relationship between two effects. Extending that to objects as a whole and evaluating objects in that order are both assumptions that are not directly stated in the rules.
Alternative 3: Each object is evaluated in a context in which all other objects have been fully evaluated
This is another way that players might intuitively expect this to work. Each ability either exists or doesn't based on the object's fully evaluated characteristics, and for each object those characteristics are evaluated in a context where every other object has already been evaluated.
This is a nice idea, and it doesn't clearly depend on any specific ordering that would need to be specified in the rules, but unfortunately it leads to unresolvable paradoxes. If two objects each have abilities that would remove the other's abilities, either neither one ends up with abilities, in which case neither should have removed the other's abilities, or both have abilities, in which case both should have removed the other's abilities, or one has abilities and the other doesn't, in which case there's no established way to determine which one should have abilities.


What is the difference between 'passageway' and 'regular door' links? In Munchkin Quest, what is the difference between 'passageways' and 'regular doors'? They both cost 1 movement, and I don't think monsters are affected. So, how are they different?

There are monsters that can't pass through the doors, Dragon for example. And the Bullrog kicks out the doors and make them a passageway instead.


What is the most damaging thing a cylon can do in BattleStar Galactica on a turn he is revealing himself? What I have seen people do is try to brig a player making a final attempt to sway someone to help.  The best success I have had in a game was grab the admiral position for a turn with a character power, and hit the FTL early.  Are there any better strategies?  Do you think you should deny it to the bitter end no matter what never taking openly hostile actions?

Most of the absolute best reveals I have seen typically involve either getting an executive order, or playing a critical situation, whilst abusing things like arrest orders.  Most recently, we had Laura Roslin, who had moved to the Admiral's Quarters with the intention of visiting the Ally there, receive an Executive Order from another player.  Roslin immediately played an arrest order with her first action, brigging that player, and then with her second action, activated the location, targetting another human, and then playing the new 6-strength yellow skill card that auto-passes locational checks in order to force him to the brig as well with no check.  That ended the turn of the unfortunate human; next up was... Laura Roslin, who played another arrest order, brigging the last human player, and then revealed as a Cylon (the shock!) damaging Galactica.  That particular game ended in a hurry as the two revealed cylons were now opposed by three inmates, and the damage mounted up fast and furious.

The lesson:

NEVER XO the player whose turn is next, unless all cylons are accounted for.

The contrapositive lesson for the cylon:

Get an XO when your turn is soon or next for maximum carnage.

Other tips:

Use communications to move civilians out of their defended areas straight into raider fleets.
Make sure you use up any Once-Per-Game effects you have;  you lose them when you are revealed to be a Cylon.  That means re-roll successful FTL checks(Gaeta), force humans to decide badly on skill cards (Helo), force humans to lose on Legendary Discovery (Boomer), shoot the President/Admiral (Cally), etc.
Brigging the admiral is more effective than brigging the president;  it throws the title in the air, and you may wind up with it.  If you do, squander the nukes :)
If you are playing with the New Caprica expansion, the most lethal thing you can do is jump Galactica away before any civilians are launched.  Watch for timely opportunities to either be the Admiral (very difficult, lots of groups will execute the Admiral on principle to try to find the Cylon) or be someone who can become Admiral by power (Ellen Tigh) or by succession (be next in line, execute the Admiral).  As soon as Galactica returns, jump out, which causes EVERY CIVILIAN SHIP IN PLAY TO BE DESTROYED. I've never seen a group survive that.
If you are playing with the Ionian Nebula, visit lots of allies.  You can set up negative consequences on powerful allies, and then recommend to the other humans that they be visited :P.
If you are playing with the Ionian Nebula, you can try to eliminate a key human player during the trial by dumping trauma tokens on them with certain trial-crisis cards.  Also, in the leadup to that point, the more turns you can force humans to spend in sickbay/brig, the more likely they are to lose their trial or be flat-out executed.
If you are Lee Adama, you can use your once per game to remove viper cover from civilian ships at a key moment.  Don't forget that every viper launch is a mini-XO for you;  if the player before you launches a Viper, you can use that to launch yourself, trigger your once-per game, wreck the humans viper coverage, and then on YOUR turn, carry out the rest of your nefarious plot.

Overall, the key to a successful reveal is to either cripple mankind directly with big stat hits, or to gain an advantage by wrecking their hands/freedom of movement through execution or brigging.  Bear in mind that in the Ionian Nebula, the longer any given person is in the brig (or sickbay) the more likely they are to get executed or eliminated in the trial.


Can I use a card with "Add one mana of any color to your mana pool" in any Elder Dragon Highlander (EDH) deck? I recently tried Elder Dragon Highlander/Commander, and found it to be a ton of fun.  I've started customizing one of the pre-cons I got, but I'm a little confused by some of the deck-building requirements.

According to the deck-building rules:

A card's color identity is its color plus the color of any mana symbols in the card's rules text. A card's color identity is established before the game begins, and cannot be changed by game effects.
Cards in a deck may not have any colors in their identity which are not shared with the commander of the deck. (The identity of each card in the deck must be a subset of the General's)

If I'm using Animar, Soul of the Elements as my general, my deck's identity is Red, Blue and Green.  I couldn't use Crumbling Necropolis in my deck, because it has a black mana symbol in the rules text.

My question is:  can I add a card to my deck that has the phrase "Add one mana of any color to your mana pool" (such as Mox Opal or Ancient Ziggurat)?  Even though those cards could conceivably add black mana to my mana pool, they don't have a black or white (or any for that matter) mana symbol in their rules text, so they would be valid for inclusion in any deck?

The text file found on the page you linked to with Commander info has a better description of the rules that clears this up. The important parts:

  A card can't be included in your deck if any mana symbol in its mana
  cost or rules text is a color not in your commander's color identity.
  A card also can't be included in your deck if it has a
  characteristic-defining ability defining it to be a color not in your
  commander's color identity.

The cards don't have mana symbols, so you are good on that front. Yes, you could include those cards.

As of a January 18, 2016 change to rule 4, you can now use those cards to add any colour of mana to your mana pool, including Black & White mana if you're using Animar, Soul of Elements who has neither in its identity. Historically, if you tried to add a colour of mana to your pool that wasn't in your commander's identity, it would just add colourless mana instead.


Can a Thief Steal a Really Impressive Title? I thought that this one was pretty simple, but the argument got heated after multiple instances of challenging the rule that a thief can only steal something tangible, like weapons/potions/etc. The notion that a thief could steal your title is akin to (according to my argument) stealing someone's job.

What's the verdict?

Thieves can only steal Items. An Item either has a gold piece value or "No value" printed in the corner. Really Impressive Title has neither of these, so it is not an Item, so it can't be stolen.
Note that in earlier editions of Munchkin, this card was actually misprinted, and confusingly did in fact say "No Value". Per the official Errata, this is corrected in the 19th printing:

Corrected Errata
Corrected in the 19th Printing
Really Impressive Title is not an item, so it should not say "No Value"


Geiger's ace artwork Which of Geiger's ace moves is pictured on his ace card?

As with all Yomi characters, Geiger has two possible options on his ace cards, with only one represented in the artwork.  Unlike other characters, it is not immediately obvious which one is being pictured.  What is the official intent on which move - Cycloid Revolution or Time Spiral Hurricane - is being shown on the card?

Game creator David Sirlin confirmed that the move pictured is Cycloid Revolution.

  The art is Cycloid Revolution. It's sort of like Venom's huge ball super in GGXX.

It can be assumed that Time Spiral Hurricane would look similar to the Sonic Hurricane of Guile from Street Fighter, an inspiration for the character.


Can I bring a visual flow chart for complex magic cards to events? I was reading the card Chains of Mephistopheles and I found these great flow charts for how it's replacement effect works. Would I be allowed to bring a simple flow chart like that to a sanctioned event? Would this change if the event was Competitive or Professional REL?

No, you cannot refer to pre-made notes or diagrams like that during matches in a tournament. The Magic Tournament Rules section 2.11 says the following:

Players are allowed to take written notes during a match and may refer to those notes while that match is in progress. At the beginning of a match, each player’s note sheet must be empty and must remain visible throughout the match. Players do not have to explain or reveal notes to other players. Judges may ask to see a player’s notes and/or request that the player explain their notes.
Players may not refer to other notes, including notes from previous matches, during games.


Playing against underestimated player damages my rank at KGS At GoKGS.com, I (13 kyu) was playing against player ranked as "13k?", and I lost and dropped to 14 kyu. But then we found out (thanks to another user watching the match) that the user is actually much stronger, around 6-8k:

So I actually lost an even game to 6-8k, which is perfectly fine for my rank so my shouldn't drop!!!

Few question:

How is it possible that my rank dropped, when the user is classified with question mark (13k?).
As I mentioned, this isn't fair, as losing an even game to such strong player is perfectly fine at my rank. Will my rank get re-computed and will the penalization effect of the game on my rank go away once the player goes back up to 6-8k? That would be fair.

Your first question is largely answered by my answer to your other post. You lost a game to another player, whose rank was maybe the same as yours, maybe not, and that has to decrease your rating a little bit - in this case it was enough to cause you to drop (maybe you were close to the boundary between ranks, who knows).

And it's all based on current rank, not past rank. The system can't pretend they're 6k just because they used to be. (Although it could be a sign they're trying to cheat, and they might want to boot the user - but in terms of the rating system, there's not really any alternative to using the current rank.) Using the current rank seems pretty fair; imagine a different case, where you won against someone rated 6k who used to be 13k. You'd be pretty mad if it pretended they were 13k, right?

The answer to your second question is yes, your rank will be updated if the system realizes that the other player was stronger. This is mentioned in the FAQ on their site:

  When are the rank graphs updated?

  Ranks are recalculated frequently, but the graphs change only once a day at 0:00 GMT.

  Why does my rank graph change when I haven't even played any games in awhile?

  Two reasons:

  The rank of one or more of your past opponents changed.

  ...

So bottom line, don't worry about it. Presumably they'll turn out to be good and your rating loss from this game will decrease. And if they forgot everything in that 3-month break and really aren't as good anymore, well, you lost to someone close to your skill level, and the rating system gave you what you deserved.


Can a disease be eradicated at the beginning of the game? During the setup the players are required to draw 9 cards to infect the starting cities before the game starts. What if for example no red disease card is drawn? Is the red disease already eradicated before we start the game?

No, a disease with no cubes at the beginning of the game is not eradicated.

For a disease to be eradicated, it must be cured in addition to there being no cubes left of its color. At the beginning of the game, it is clearly not cured. If you subsequently draw an infection card for that color, you still add a cube to that city. If you manage to discover the cure before that happens, then it's eradicated.

Various snippets from the rules:

  If the last cube of a cured disease is removed from the board, this disease
  is eradicated.

  [when discovering a cure] If no cubes of this color are on the board, this disease is now eradicated.

  To infect a city, place 1 disease cube matching its color onto the city, unless this disease has been eradicated.


How to play multiplayer Ticket to Ride (iOS/iPad) with friends over the Internet? I am trying to play Ticket to Ride for the iOS on the iPad (regular full version, not pocket) with friends over the internet (not local wifi).
I tried using Game Center to issue a 'challenge', but it doesn't seem to work.  I always end up in a room with random players when I use the 'local' play feature.
Does anyone know if this type of multiplayer game is possible with the iOS TTR?

It is possible to play with specific friends in real-time, though it may not be possible to play asynchronously. (Last time I tried, the game aborted if either my opponent or I left the TTR app, so it was real-time play only. That was a while ago though.)
Here's how to set it up.
For iPad:

On the main TTR screen (with Gerry the Conductor holding the ticket labeled Play!), click the "More..." gear.
On the next screen, click Online Games. This should automatically log you in to the online servers.
In the spiral notebook at the center of the screen, click either the Game Center tab (for your GC friends) or Buddies (friends you've marked in some version of online TTR - web or mobile).
Tap the name of one friend you want to play with. This will fly out a screen where you can choose the map and whether the game is ranked or not. Make your choices and hit the green Play button
A standard Game Center Multiplayer Game window will appear. It will default to a 4-player game, with you, the friend you selected, and 2 auto-match slots. You can delete slots (though in trying I had to remove my friend first and then could delete the auto-match slots) or add specific friends with the Invite Friend button. If you add, you'll be prompted for the message to send them. If they accept, the game will start.

For iPhone:

On the main TTR screen  (with Gerry the Conductor holding the ticket labeled Play!), click your playername in the upper right. (You may need to click on your player icon first to make it slide out).
Under the box with your playername and account #, click "Edit my profile" and then "Yes" to go to the Days Of Wonder site. This should automatically log you in to the online servers.
From the profile page, you should be able to add/delete buddies.


Can a player swap position with a dead body in lifeboat? In the lifeboat game the rules when you are unconscious specify that :

  Other players could swap their position with yours or steal your cards
  and you can't defend yourself.

But nothing is specified for the cases where you are dead and still in the boat. There is a note allowing other players to steal your cards but nothing about position swapping.

Following the rules it seem to be disallowed (as it isn't specifically allowed), but does anyone have experience with either variant? Is there a FAQ with this info somewhere? The official FAQ is really short and the extensions don't add any details about this.

The FAQ you linked to I believe covers this. Since fights are started by a character refusing a seat exchange, a dead person's seat is just taken from them.

How do I start a fight?
Fights can only be started by a character refusing a mugging or a seat exchange. Incapacitated characters (unconscious or dead) cannot start a fight, join a fight or have a fight fought on their behalf. If somebody wants to take something from them, it just happens.


AI that plays Quoridor? Is there a free program, preferably executable, that allow me to play Quoridor against an AI? There isn't a publicly available one for the Zillions engine, even if it doesn't seem that hard to write one, despite workarounds being required. Programming the game has already been the subject of academic papers (here and here) and a university course (here).

I made an AI agent playing Quoridor. You can play against it right on the browser here: https://gorisanson.github.io/quoridor-ai/. As you can read on the "about" section on the page, I imitated the demonstration model of Daniel Borowski's Quoridor AI (https://danielborowski.github.io/site/quoridor-ai/display.html).

Martijn van Steenbergen's Quoridor program source code in Java (which maybe had been on the link https://code.google.com/p/quoridorai/ of Tom Wilkinson's answer) is now available on https://github.com/MedeaMelana/quoridorai. When I compiled the source code by Java 8 (JDK), it ran well.


How many lands do I need for a Commander deck? A Commander deck consists of 100 unique cards, of which one is designated as the Commander and must be either a Legendary Creature or an allowed Planeswalker.  I'm still very unfamiliar with this format.  How would you go about figuring out the number of lands to put into your commander deck?

Because of the slower pace of play in EDH/Commander, it isn't as drastically important to hit 5-6 land drops in 5-6 turns.  In addition, the number of "mana rocks" (mana-generating artifacts) and dual lands/mana filtering/land fetch cards are usually higher.

Considering that, the 40% lands rule is still fairly close to normal (lightened obviously for the reasons above).  I've run 34-36 land decks successfully, but usually you see 37-40 with some of the previously mentioned accelerators.

Abnormal decks (with huge numbers of accelerators) will run as few as 32 lands (the equivalent of running about 13 in a 40-card limited deck), but I'd recommend starting around 40 and cutting around one land per three accelerators (if you're trying to cut land, and not running very high-cost spells).

Do also remember that running fewer lands with more mana rocks leaves you open to blowouts when someone wipes artifacts with Austere Command, Merciless Eviction, Shatterstorm/Creeping Corrosion, etc. - you don't want to be stuck on four lands when your couple of Signets and Thran Dynamo get wiped.

As an example, the Devour for Power Commander deck shipped with 40 lands and four mana-generating artifacts, but it is fairly heavy on costs.


For Scrabble, Is there a most common phonies list anywhere? There are all kinds of lists out there to improve one's Scrabble play.  For instance, I have a book called Bob's Bible which helps with all kinds of anagrams and other unique groupings.  Google search has given me nothing.  I want to know is there a list out there of the most commonly played phonies?

I'm not a Scrabble expert, but to me it looks like you are going about this the wrong way. Your stated goals

  I learn for sure which words sound like words but really aren't so I
  don't play them.
  I become a better challenger. Part of the game (at
  least in tournaments) is to be able to recognize when your opponent
  has played a bad word. From my experience, this is an often neglected
  part of a new Scrabble player's development.

can both be achieved by learning all legal scrabble words. If you know all the legal words, anything that isn't one of those words is (obviously) an illegal word.

While this might sound like an insurmountable task, to me it sounds a lot more feasible than learning everything that isn't a word. The set of legal words is much smaller than the set of illegal words!


Order of resolution on same player controlled cards I have a Cathars' Crusade in play. I then play Zealous Conscripts. If my opponent's permanent I gain control of is a creature, does this creature also receive the counter from Cathar's Crusade?

You have the opportunity to choose whether or not that creature gets a +1/+1 counter. It comes down to how you order these two triggered abilities involved.
We'll examine giving it the +1/+1 counter first, then examine what you can do differently to makes sure it doesn't receive a counter.
To be clear for those readers who may not be certain: when you take control of your opponent's creature, it will not count as (re-)entering the battlefield, and so does not trigger Cathar's Crusade itself.
Making sure it receives the counter

You cast Zealous Conscripts.

You and your opponent pass priority (in theory), and then Zealous Conscripts resolves and enters the battlefield.

Because someone now receives priority, we check for any triggered abilities that now have to go onto the stack. Zealous Conscripts entering the battlefield has caused two abilities to trigger: that of Cathar's Crusade, and that of Zealous Conscripts. Because they triggered simultaneously, you may put them in whatever order you like:

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order,[note below] puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses.

You choose to place Cathar's Crusade's ability beneath, and Zealous Conscripts' ability on top (the top one resolves first).

You resolve Zealous Conscripts' ability. Your opponent's creature comes under your control.

Cathar's Crusade's ability resolves and places a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control, including the one you took from your opponent.

If the creature survives to be returned to its owner, it will return with its +1/+1 counter still on it. How nice of you! (This could be a totally appropriate gift to an ally in a multiplayer free-for-all game.)
Making sure it doesn't receive the counter
At step 4 above, we'll make a different choice.

You choose to place Zealous Conscript's ability on the bottom, and Cathar's Crusade's ability on the top of it.
Cathar's Crusade's ability resolves first. It grants a +1/+1 counter to each creature you control, which at this point is just Zealous Conscripts and whatever else you already had.
Zealous Conscript's ability resolves, and you take control of your opponent's creature. It gets no counter.

Note: "APNAP" stands for "active player, nonactive player(s)". APNAP order means the active player does their thing, then each nonactive player in turn order. (In a 1v1, that just means one opponent is the NAP.) The active player is whoever is currently having their turn.


What happens when a non-token creature loses all abilities, is exiled, then returns? So I was playing with some friends and we ran into a problem. My opponent had a creature with both hexproof and indestructible.

I drew and played Polymorphist's Jest. I then attacked with my creature, which had Voidwalk encoded on it. It wasn't blocked, so I cast Voidwalk with his currently blue frog creature as the target and exiled it. Now, I know exiled tokens immediately die or cease to exist, but what would happen to his creature? Would it return or simply be gone?

Polymorphist's Jest does not create tokens, it only changes the stats and characteristics of the creature's controlled by the targeted player. It is still the same game object as far as Magic is concerned.

Under the circumstances presented in your question, your opponent's creature would be 'flickered' (magic slang for exiled and then returned to the battlefield) and when it returned it wouldn't be a 1/1 frog anymore, it would be whatever the face up of whatever card was returned.


Equipment cards and the timing of their activated ability 702.6a: Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. “Equip [cost]” means “[Cost]: Attach this permanent to target creature you control. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.”

This seems to imply that activation of an ability on Equipment is generally considered to only happen when you could cast a sorcery.  I have seen equipment cards state that.  I have seen them say any time and there are rulings that any cards activated ability can happen any time you could cast an instant unless noted otherwise.  So what actually applys.  Does 702.6a mean that it is only when you cast a sorcery.  Or is it only when the card itself stipulates it as a socery

The following is the definition of the equip keyword ability:

  702.6a Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. “Equip [cost]” means “[Cost]: Attach this permanent to target creature you control. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.”

(Emphasis mine)

The restriction only applies to the equip ability itself; it doesn't say or imply anything about other abilities on the permanent with equip.

It doesn't even apply to other abilities that attach equipment. For example, Healer's Headdress's second ability ("{W}{W}: Attach Healer’s Headdress to target creature you control.") can be activated anytime you have priority. This is why the second ability is more expensive than the equip ability it also has.

As for the meaning of the "any time you could cast a sorcery" restriction, it's explained by the following rule:

  307.5. If a spell, ability, or effect states that a player can do something only “any time they could cast a sorcery,” it means only that the player must have priority, it must be during the main phase of their turn, and the stack must be empty. The player doesn’t need to have a sorcery they could cast. Effects that would preclude that player from casting a spell or casting a sorcery don’t affect the player’s capability to perform that action (unless the action is actually casting a spell or casting a sorcery).

(Emphasis mine)


Can the beetle start on top of the hive? When placing the beetle, can he be placed on top of another piece as long as he doesn't touch an opponent's piece? The rules don't appear to prohibit this.

You can't. It has to be placed like all other pieces:

  NB When it is first placed, the Beetle is placed in the same way as all the other pieces. It cannot be placed directly on top of the hive, even though it can move there later.

From the bottom of page 5.


MTG Returning lands at upkeep I have a card that says:
"At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice this card unless you return a land you control to its owner's hand."
If I have two of these on the battlefield, do I return one land for each or is returning one land enough to satisfy both conditions?

At the beginning of your upkeep:

Both instances of the card will put their own triggers onto the stack.
You can choose which order the triggers go onto the stack, not that it matters very much.
The stack resolves in LIFO order as always.
The first trigger resolves. You can choose whether to return a land to your hand or sacrifice the specific instance of the card that created that trigger.
The second trigger resolves. You can choose whether to return a land to your hand or sacrifice the specific instance of the card that created that trigger. This is a separate event from the first trigger resolving, so you cannot return the same land or otherwise count that because that land is already back in your hand.

tl;dr: you need to return one for each.


What's the missing white card in this New Phyrexia cycle? There's a cycle of instants and sorceries in New Phyrexia that have an effect and adds at the end a loss of life to the targeted player or the targeted permanent's controller: Vapor Snag, Geth's Verdict, Victorious Destruction and Glissa's Scorn.

Or, at least I think it's a cycle. Problem is, I can't find the white one! Is there one, and I'm missing it? Was this lack of symmetry intentional by WotC?

These aren't a cycle per se.

Note the fifth one, Psychic Barrier:

It's more that "loses 1 life" (or "gets a poison counter") was seen as an easy thing to tack onto staple effects to make them feel more "Phyrexian".


Between prevention and replacement effects, which takes precedence? Looking at the interactions between:
Fog versus Undead Alchemist
Abuna's Chant versus Soul-Scar Mage

In each pair, the first represents an effect that prevents damage, while the second represents a replacement effect that does something instead of damage.

In either case, assume that the appropriate event has happened such that damage is on the verge of being done. Does the replacement effect occur, or does the continuous effect pre-empt the damage?

Both prevention effects and replacement effects apply in the same way and at the same time, and the player who is affected or controls the object that is affected is the one who chooses the order in which to apply them. This is detailed in the rules section interaction of replacement and/or prevention effects:

616.1. If two or more replacement and/or prevention effects are attempting to modify the way an event affects an object or player, the affected object’s controller (or its owner if it has no controller) or the affected player chooses one to apply, following the steps listed below. If two or more players have to make these choices at the same time, choices are made in APNAP order (see rule 101.4).

[...]

616.1e Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.

So, in both of your examples, the player that would be dealt damage decides which replacement effect to apply first.
In the Fog vs Undead Alchemist example, if a zombie controlled by Undead Alchemist's controller would deal combat damage to a player, that player chooses whether to apply the Fog effect and prevent the damage, or apply the Undead Alchemist effect first and mill cards. In either case, once one effect is applied the other one is no longer applicable.
In the Abuna's Chant vs Soul-Scar Mage example, once damage would be dealt by a source controlled by Soul-Scar Mage's controller to the creature that is the target of Abuna's Chant, the controller of that creature chooses which effect to apply first. If they choose to apply Soul-Scar Mage's ability first, the damage is replaced with -1/-1 counters, so the effect of Abuna's Chant is no longer applicable. If they choose to apply Abuna's Chant's effect first, then any remaining damage above the 5 it prevents is then replaced with -1/-1 counters.


How does Switcheroo affect equipment and Unsummon? So I had a Creature equipped with Bladed Bracers and my opponent pulled out Switcheroo against my equipped creature.

My Questions are:
1. Does he also get the Bladed Bracers with my creature since the creature was equipped with it?
2. If the answer to the above is yes, does my opponent keep the Bladed Bracers if I played Unsummon?

The bladed bracers remain attached to the creature and will continue to confer the bonus as long as they remain attached, but you are still their controller.  Next time you have an opportunity you could use the equip ability to move them to another creature you control.  (Note there is no "unequip."  You need to have another creature under your control to move them on to in order to activate the ability.  In this case it's likely you do since you got one from Switcheroo!)


What's a good use for Chancellor? I'm having a hard time figuring out when Chancellor is useful. Forcing a reshuffle of the deck just seems of little use to me, at least relative to the other actions I could buy with 3 coins.

I've seen a few suggestions that Chancellor is useful when paired with cards in some of the other expansions, but can you help me see how it could be useful in the base game?

  +2 Gold.  You may immediately put your deck into your discard pile.  (Cost 3)

You just need to gain a clearer picture of the circumstances in which forcing a reshuffle of the deck is useful.  Imagine that:

You have drawn a lot of the useful cards from your deck, and few of your victory cards.  Obviously reshuffling will save you from the inevitable victory-card-heavy hands.
You have just bought a powerful card, that you want a chance to draw again immediately.  Or if you have just played one or more of your best cards, that you want a chance to draw again immediately.  Why wait to cycle through the whole rest of your deck, before you get that chance?
The Chancellor defends against the Bureaucrat, the Spy, or any other situation where you know the top card of your deck is not something you especially want to be part of your next hand.

So there are circumstances when it's better to reshuffle your deck.  (Though of course, there are equal and opposite cases where it's definitely better not to reshuffle your deck, so you have to be on the ball if you're going to play with the Chancellor, he's not a card you want to just automatically play any time!)

Obviously he has a big downside, in that he takes up an Action.  But, if you weren't going to spend that Action on anything else, he's all upside compared to a Silver.  Early in the game, before your deck is filled with good Action cards that you really want to play, and when you have a clear idea of the total composition of your deck, the Chancellor is probably just plain better than a Silver.  And never underestimate the power of getting off to a good start in the early game!