Why are the OCG and TCG banlists radically different? From wiki:

  As of September 2013, the OCG and TCG have had different banlists, with multiple cards in fact being Forbidden in one list but Unlimited in the other (in both directions).

Dumb question: How could banlists be so radically different?

Guess: This has something to do with some cards' being TCG-only xor OCG-only.

If so, then what specifically are some of these cards that may influence the radical banlist differences, and why?

For other reasons , what and why?

How could banlists be so radically different?

Well, TCG (Trading Card Game) and OCG (Original Card Game) are two separate and different games actually; you can't use cards from one on official games from the other. I am not Konami, but seems logical to me that such lists exist separately.

As you probably know, Yu-Gi-Oh! started first as a Manga, and then an Anime went out (and then translations). Only after some time later is that the OCG was created, and shortly after the TCG. We can see that since it's inception they were conceived differently and for different target audiences.

Another reason that justifies different lists is the fact that cards first come out on OCG, and some time later they appear (or not) on TCG in the latest Booster set available.

This means that for a period of time some cards actually don't exist on the TCG and are legally unable to be played on official events. This shows that OCG has different needs/situations, and at different moments, than TCG regarding the cards that need buffing, nerfing, or erratas.


How are cards awarded on defeating a player in risk? I'm playing Risk, the Hasbro game on my iPad.

How are cards awarded once someone eliminates a single player? Sometimes it's 2, sometimes it's 4.

It's possible the iPad version is using different rules, but the official rules for the classic Risk Game are as follows:

  Eliminating  an  opponent.

  If  during  your  turn  you  eliminate  an
  opponent  by  defeating  his  or  her  last  army  on  the  game  board,  you  win  any
  RISK  cards  that  player  has  collected.

So you get all of the cards that the opponent had on hand. This will never be more than 6 cards (which is only possible if you somehow defeated a player who had just defeated another player on their turn). It does occur BEFORE drawing a RISK card from conquering a territory this turn, as your turn hasn't ended yet.

There are two highly-relevant bullet points with regards to this:

If you gain enough risk cards to cause you to have 6 or more cards on hand as a direct result of defeating an opponent, you MUST trade the cards in immediately for reinforcements so that you have 5 or fewer cards.
If you have 5 cards as a result of defeating an opponent and then your additional card from conquering a territory puts you at 6 cards, you trade at the start of your NEXT turn.


Why is queen placement on the first turn disallowed? While official rules allow placing the queen on the very first turn, online play, community and tournaments prohibit it. Why? Does it provide an unfair advantage? Does it quickly lead to a draw? Can you give an example?

From Wikipedia on Openings,

Bee - Spider - Spider (in a V formation with the bee at the point): This is an aggressive quick-strike opening that allows the player the fastest possible opportunity to move (on the third turn if necessary); the Spiders can thus quickly block the opponent's opening pieces. In addition, if the opponent answers with the same or a similar opening, it provides the best opportunity to force a draw if necessary as the Bees are adjacent. For this last reason, tournament rules forbid the placing of the Bee on the first move, as this opening leads to a preponderance of draws. Bee-Spider-Ant is a common variation very similar in its mechanics.

Emphasis mine.
Bee - Spider - Spider
Bee - Spider - Ant


Pocketing last c/m along with striker What happens if I pocket my last c/m along with striker?
Opponent's n C/m are still on board.

Will I win with minimum n points?
Will it be a double-due?
Will I lose the game?

Neither you won nor lose the game, keep the Queen on board and pocket along with your C/m


Canasta Playing Wild Card on a Canasta Can you play a wild card on an existing Canasta if it becomes the 4th wild card in the meld?

It depends on which rulebook you follow.

Most commonly, Canasta rules say that a legal meld cannot contain more than 3 wild cards:

  A meld is valid if it contains at least two natural cards of the same rank - aces down to fours inclusive - and not more than three wild cards.

Melds must be valid at all times, whether during the initial meld, or when adding to an existing meld:

  A player may add additional cards to a meld by his side, provided that the melds remain valid (having no more than three wild cards).

You can find these rules here and here.

However, some rules teach a variation on this rule, and say that rather than being limited to 3 wild cards, a meld cannot have more wilds than naturals:

  It is possible to add a wildcard to a column of cards of any rank on the table. The wildcard is then seen as a card of that rank (but the value remains unchanged). However, there may never be more wildcards than natural cards within one meld.

Under this rule, a meld with 4 naturals and 4 wilds would be a valid meld.

Under most circumstances, these 2 rules function the same; they prevent a Canasta from being made with 3 naturals and 4 wilds; and prevent melds such as 1 natural and 2 wilds.

Note that if you need to meld an extra wild in order to go out, you can always just add it to any meld you already have; it seems like it would be a very rare situation that a Canasta is the only place you have to add it to.


How to identify miniature parts that correspond to in-game enhancements? I'm totally new to Warhammer and to assembling my own miniatures. I'm preparing a team of tau fire warriors and I am confused with the enhancements and how to prepare the miniatures to reflect them in 'what you see is what you get' games. The codex says that the Shas'ui of the team can take a markerlight and that the team can take EMP grenades. How do I know which of the dozens of optional pieces in my box corresponds to these? Moreover, my kit comes with two options for the tactical support turret (smart missile system and missile pod) but I'm also having trouble identifying the pieces for these. I have one piece with three missiles and another with six, but no idea of which is which.

Is there a guide, with pictures, if possible, linking each piece to what they are supposed to represent?

I recommend you check out the Modelling Section of the Advanced Tau Tactica forums. This will probably be more helpful for their great magnetization guides, but there are a TON of other guides linked there... if you stick with Tau it will be an invaluable resource.

If you can find a copy of some of the older codexs they often have better pictures of what counts as what, but to some extent, even in a WYSIWYG tournament no one is going to check whether or not your squad has Grenades (or give you a hard time for not buying grenades even though they're modeled with them).


Does "prevent all damage to target creature" save the other creatures in a gang block? In The Great Designer Search 2, one of the participants designed this card:

  CW15 - Improvised Shield

  1W

  Instant

  Prevent all damage that would be dealt to target creature this turn.

  Draw a card.

MTG designer Ken Nagle said this in his review:

  KEN: Nice enough. This kind of effect got better when we changed the
  combat rules in Magic 2010. You can gangblock and the creature with
  the Improvised Shield will protect everyone else.

Is this correct? Which rules (in the comp rules) make it work out this way?

For an example, say I attack with a 7/7 creature, and you block with a 3/3, 2/2, and 2/1. I arrange damage to the blockers in the same order. After blockers are declared, you cast "Improvised Shield" (or Indestructible Aura, if you want a real-card example) on the 3/3. What will happen during the combat damage step?

If one of the blockers has or acquires a relevant protection ability, does the same thing happen?

No; you must assign lethal damage in blocking order, but this doesn't take into account effects that prevent, redirect, or alter damage when it's actually dealt.
From the Comprehensive rules:

509.1. First, the defending player declares blockers. This turn-based action doesn't use the stack. To declare blockers, the defending player follows the steps below, in order. If at any point during the declaration of blockers, the defending player is unable to comply with any of the steps listed below, the declaration is illegal; the game returns to the moment before the declaration (see rule 717, "Handling Illegal Actions").
509.2. Second, for each attacking creature that's become blocked, the active player announces that creature's damage assignment order, which consists of the creatures blocking it in an order of that player's choice. (During the combat damage step, an attacking creature can't assign combat damage to a creature that's blocking it unless each creature ahead of that blocking creature in its order is assigned lethal damage.) This turn-based action doesn't use the stack.

bunch of other stuff happens.

509.5. Fifth, the active player gets priority. Players may cast spells and activate abilities.

Therefore, yes, there is an opportunity to play prevention spells after blockers are assigned and assignment order has been decided.
So, the Oracle text for Indestructible Aura reads: Prevent all damage that would be dealt to target creature this turn. Let's use that on the first creature in the assignment order. Sounds like a plan.
As per 615.6

615.6. If damage that would be dealt is prevented, it never happens. A modified event may occur instead, which may in turn trigger abilities. Note that the modified event may contain instructions that can't be carried out, in which case the impossible instruction is simply ignored.

As per 509.2, the rest of the creatures in the assignment order can't be assigned damage unless the creature ahead of it has been assigned lethal damage. You might think "hey, all that damage is prevented, and therefore it never happened."
But — wait a sec! We skipped the damage assignment part of the rules. This is the long and confusing but most important rule in this situation. Emphasis mine.

510.1c A blocked creature assigns its combat damage to the creatures blocking it. If no creatures are currently blocking it (if, for example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns no combat damage. If exactly one creature is blocking it, it assigns all its combat damage to that creature. If two or more creatures are blocking it, it assigns its combat damage to those creatures according to the damage assignment order announced for it. This may allow the blocked creature to divide its combat damage. However, it can't assign combat damage to a creature that's blocking it unless, when combat damage assignments are complete, each creature that precedes that blocking creature in its order is assigned lethal damage. When checking for assigned lethal damage, take into account damage already marked on the creature and damage from other creatures that's being assigned during the same combat damage step, but not any abilities or effects that might change the amount of damage that's actually dealt. An amount of damage that's greater than a creature's lethal damage may be assigned to it.
Example: The damage assignment order of an attacking Vastwood Gorger (a 5/6 creature) is Pride Guardian (a 0/3 creature) then Llanowar Elves (a 1/1 creature). Vastwood Gorger can assign 3 damage to the Guardian and 2 damage to the Elves, 4 damage to the Guardian and 1 damage to the Elves, or 5 damage to the Guardian.
Example: The damage assignment order of an attacking Vastwood Gorger (a 5/6 creature) is Pride Guardian (a 0/3 creature) then Llanowar Elves (a 1/1 creature). During the declare blockers step, the defending player casts Giant Growth targeting Pride Guardian, which gives it +3/+3 until end of turn. Vastwood Gorger must assign its 5 damage to the Guardian.
Example: The damage assignment order of an attacking Vastwood Gorger (a 5/6 creature) is Pride Guardian (a 0/3 creature) then Llanowar Elves (a 1/1 creature). During the declare blockers step, the defending player casts Mending Hands targeting Pride Guardian, which prevents the next 4 damage that would be dealt to it. Vastwood Gorger can assign 3 damage to the Guardian and 2 damage to the Elves, 4 damage to the Guardian and 1 damage to the Elves, or 5 damage to the Guardian.
Example: The damage assignment order of an attacking Enormous Baloth (a 7/7 creature) is Trained Armodon (a 3/3 creature) that already has 2 damage marked on it, then Foriysian Brigade (a 2/4 creature that can block an additional creature), then Silverback Ape (a 5/5 creature). The damage assignment order of an attacking Durkwood Boars (a 4/4 creature) is the same Foriysian Brigade, then Goblin Piker (a 2/1 creature). Among other possibilities, the active player may have the Baloth assign 1 damage to the Armodon, 1 damage to the Brigade, and 5 damage to the Ape, and have the Boars assign 3 damage to the Brigade and 1 damage to the Piker.

You prevent all damage to that target creature but the rest of the damage assigned to other creatures isn't prevented. In the middle of rule 510.1c it says that the attacker does not have to take into account any abilities that change the amount of damage actually dealt. If the attacker chooses, he could assign all the damage to the first creature and it all would be prevented, but he doesn't have to take the prevention effect into account so that would under most circumstances be sub-optimal.
In your example, the attacker doesn't have to assign more than three damage to your first creature. Three damage is lethal damage. Among other options, his best choice would be to assign 3 damage to the first creature, 2 to the second, and two to the third, killing the 2/2 and 2/1 blockers.
PS. If this is an accurate quote, Ken got it wrong in 2010. Here's the rule change announcement in 2009. From that post:

So ... what is "lethal damage"? For the purposes of damage assignment, "lethal damage" is the amount of damage necessary for a creature to be destroyed, ignoring all abilities and damage prevention effects. In other words, it's that creature's toughness minus any damage that's already been dealt to it or that is simultaneously being assigned to it. It doesn't matter whether that creature has protection, is indestructible, will prevent the next 8 damage that would be dealt to it, etc.


Missed triggers in two-headed giant My partner and I recently played in a Two-Headed Giant Sealed. As is the case with most multiplayer tournaments, the event was run at Regular REL. My partner has an upkeep trigger (Thopter Spy Network). The following events occur sequentially:

Our opponent's pass the turn.
I untap, draw a card, and mix it into my hand.
My partner says, "Wait! I have an upkeep trigger."

Has the trigger been missed?

  805.2. Within each team, the player seated in the rightmost seat from that team’s perspective is the primary player. If the players on a team can’t agree on a choice, such as which creatures attack or what order triggered abilities are put on the stack, the primary player makes that choice.

Comprehensive rule 805.2 states that if players on a team can't agree on a choice, the primary player decides. However, we didn't really disagree on anything, so I don't think 805.2 applies. I reference this rule because I have moved to the draw step, while my partner wants to remain in the upkeep step. I guess one could argue that I silently disagreed with him by drawing a card.

If the primary player has moved forward to the draw step, then the trigger was missed. If the secondary player is the one that drew a card, then that player has drawn extra cards.

In either case, at regular REL, you should call a judge, explain what happened, and allow the judge to decide whether the trigger was missed or whether the game should be rolled back. If the game is rolled back, you would have to put a random card from your hand on top of your library, then do your upkeep stuff, and then continue as normal with a reminder to play more carefully. From Judging at Regular:

  If the identity of the card(s) were known to all players, return them to their proper location. Otherwise, determine how many extra cards have been drawn, take that many cards at random from the player’s hand and place them on top of the library. Don't shuffle the library after doing this!

In general, play penalties at regular REL are basically nonexistent, and mistakes should be fixed more often than punished.


Is there a penalty in Uno for incorrectly accusing a player of failing to call "uno"? I was playing Uno with my family when I had two cards left in my hand. My sister yelled out "one card", thinking I have one card left and have failed to call "uno".

Does she now need to take two cards (which is the penalty for getting caught when failing to call "uno")?

I assume that yelling out "one card" is the way your group has decided to implement this rule:

  If [the player with one card is] caught not saying “Uno” by another player before any card has been played by other players, the player must draw two new cards.

That rule does not establish a penalty for incorrectly "catching" another player not saying Uno. You could add a house rule to this effect, especially if people abuse the rule by yelling "one card" incorrectly very often. However the house rule would itself be open to abuse since it would encourage people to mask how many cards they have, so I would only add it if people are being really annoying with the incorrect calls (and in that case why are you playing with really annoying people anyway?)


Can I choose the order in which these effects trigger in Yu-Gi-Oh? Suppose that I have Yubel - Terror Incarnate on the field and I normal summon Inaba White Rabbit.

Both of them have effects that trigger at the end phase:

Yubel - Terror Incarnate: destroys all other monsters.
Inaba White Rabbit: returns itself to the hand.

In which order do I execute them? Can I choose?

I would like to return Inaba White Rabbit to my hand before it gets destroyed.

In which order do I execute them? Can I choose?

Yes, you can choose.

Both effects are mandatory, so you have to activate them eventually.

As they both happen at the same time, and because it's your turn you chose which effect goes first, and each one goes in a separate chain (naturally you'll want Inaba to go first).

For reference, lets consider this wiki page, with my emphasis:

  ... effects that activate "During the […] Phase…" or "At the end of the […] Phase…", such as "Gladiator Beast" monsters. Instead, each effect activates as Chain Link 1 of its own Chain.

Furthermore, on that same page they indicate the following (which is based from the Official Rulebook p. 50, 3rd part):

  If multiple effects fall into the same category [mandatory/optional], the player that activates them chooses the order in which they are activated


Sample Wares Intrigue Card Disambiguation The card Sample Wares states:

  Assign 1 of your unused Agent to a Building in Builder's Hall.  You immediately use the effect of that Building as though you controlled it.

This is very strange wording. The rules regarding buildings says:

  Owner Benefit: Once a new Building is in play, it is available for
  anyone to assign an Agent to, just like any other Building on the
  game board. However, when someone other than the owner
  assigns an Agent to that Building’s action space, the owner gains
  the benefit described in the tile’s “Owner” line.

First of all the Sample Wares card uses the term "controller" where the rules use the term "owner". To resolve this I will just assume they mean the same thing.

The rules say that the owner benefits are only relevant when a player who isn't  the owner moves there. This implies when the owner moves to a build he owns he gains the regular benefit of the building, without regard for his ownership. The Sample Wares card specifies that the player should use the building as though they are the owner, which according to the rules would mean there is no special benefit and the player would get the regular benefit of the building.

The question is then why would the Sample Wares intrigue card specify "as though you controlled it." it could just as well leave this part out. So the card seems to imply that there is some additional affect that should be considered.

My own ruling on this when I play: This extra clarification of "as though you controlled it." is to imply that no other player should get the owner benefit, and that the card simply lets the player take the regular benefit of the building without any other player getting the owner benefit.

I think this is probably what they meant, but the wording is confusing and it causes some argument when I play. Does anyone have a better clarification on this?

This has been answered by designer Rodney Thompson on BGG here

You gain the primary benefit of the action, not the owner's benefit. The part about "as if you controlled" the building is simply there to dispel any questions about where the owner benefit goes. Just like when you assign an agent to a building you control, you gain only the primary benefit, not the secondary benefit.
However! If you are playing with the Undermountain expansion and have completed the plot quest Impersonate Tax Collector, you would gain both the primary benefit and the owner benefit.


Bidding a very special hand I would like your advice about what I should bid in the following situation. Partner opens 1C, I answer 1H, he bids 2H. My hand is:

S : none
H : K Q J x x x
D : A K Q x x x
C : J

What should I bid now?

My concerns are:

That the opponents aren't in this auction yet despite a ton of distribution, and so suits are likely to be breaking badly for us; and
My hand is far too strong to make a descriptive splinter call and appoint partner captain of the hand.

Therefore I wish to take advantage of the opponents silence to describe my hand, so partner can make an intelligent bid again or double decision on the next round. Therefore I bid a simple 3D.

This bid:

Is forcing one round (by virtue of being a new suit by responder);
Promises strength to play 3H or 4D, or better, safely;
Promises a fifth heart (or slam interest, or both); and
Promises either a fourth diamond or hidden club support.

It is intended to give partner the greatest possible room to complete the description of his hand, which so far sounds like the only balanced hand at the table with 3-4-2-4.

It sounds like RHO is long in clubs and diamonds, and LHO is long in hearts and clubs, and no-one is holding better than honour-fourth in spades. At least two, if not three or four, spades are missing from this deck unless the opponents are red against white.

What is the vulnerability, and who is the dealer?

Update From OP above, both vulnerable and partner dealt.

Continuation. Partner will take 3D for a game try and bid one of:

3H to decline - you will continue with 3S game forcing, showing a control in spades, requesting partner to show a control. If partner shows the club ace you will continue with 5NT GSF as below;
4H to accept, no extra values - you will continue with 4S control showing; if partner then bids 5C you will bid 5NT GSF and continue to 7 if he shows 1 with or without a side king.
4C to show the club control - continue with 5NT GSF as above.
3S to show the spade control then bid 4D to reveal the missing club control. If partner then bids 4H to deny it, you will have to guess - and rue not responding 1D originally.

Note how much easier the auction is if the original response is 1D receiving a raise; hearts can be cue-bid without ambiguity to locate the other missing card.  Ease in correctly deciding between 5 or 6 r 7 is worth far more than the difference between a major or minor denomination.


The Inner Sanctum Sealed Door and Objective 1C Yesterday, we played the Mansions of Madness core scenario, The Inner Sanctum I can't remember the exact options that I selected, but the final objective was 1C, where the investigators we're being lured into the mansion to be fed to the monsters and Mary, the person we are attempting to find, was being held in the ceremony room.

Now, the final clue was placed in the ceremony room, the room that has two sealed door markers on it and no other entrances that I could see. This room also has a lock card.

My question is: how are the investigators supposed to interact with the lock card if they can't even attempt to move into the room due to the sealed doors? I double and triple checked the setup of the cards and I couldn't find anything that had been set up incorrectly.

I think you must have had either the Furnace or Ceremony rooms in the wrong orientation, because there's a connecting door from the Basement to the Furnace Room to the Ceremony Room, via the 'top' of the Ceremony room tile. From the Investigator Guide:


Do creatures put on the battlefield via a sorcery have summoning sickness? I have a card named Doubling Chant, the effect of this card is "For each creature you control, Search your library for a creature with the same name and put it onto the battlefield. Then Shuffle your library".

After this phase can I then attack with the creatures gained this way or do they suffer from summoning sickness?

My guess is that If they do not have haste they suffer but doubling them seems to suggest a mirroring of the original creature at the time... Its a vague mechanic in all honesty

Summoning sickness applies to all creatures without haste, regardless of how they came to be. From the comprehensive rules:

  302.6. A creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated unless the creature has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. A creature can’t attack unless it has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the “summoning sickness” rule.

"Summoning sickness" is not a characteristic of the card. It cannot be copied or added. Haste allows creatures to ignore the rule, but if they somehow lose haste, then the rule will apply once again.

A creature does not have summoning sickness; a creature is affected by the summoning sickness rule. The former is just an easier concept for players to latch on to, and it works most of the time.

The Judge's Corner (on YouTube) has a video on Summoning Sickness that explains the ins and outs of summoning sickness in greater detail. Both new and veteran players will get something out of it.


Should I buy Gold or Hoard? Hoard is a treasure worth 2 that also reads:

  While this is in play, when you buy a Victory card, gain a Gold.

It costs the same as a Gold (i.e. 6) and while it's not immediately worth as much as a Gold, it obviously generates Golds. I get the impression that Hoard is suited to being bought under specific conditions and at specific points in a game.

What should I consider when choosing between Gold and Hoard?

One common mistake people make is picking up a Hoard right away, and then buying a Duchy (or even Estate) to get the extra Gold. When you do that, you have added 3 cards to your deck, for a total of $5 money. That's less money-per-card than just a Silver gives you! Each time you buy a Duchy and get a Gold, you're adding 2 cards for $3 money... again, worse than Silver.

But Hoard certainly has it's place. If there are other useful Victory Cards, like Island or Tunnel or Nobles, then Hoard becomes great. Also, if you think that it's likely that a Gold would give you $9 to spend on the turn you see it, then Hoard will probably be better, because then you'll have $8 to spend, which is still enough for a Province.

To figure out how likely it is that you'll be able to get a Province, it really depends on the rest of your deck. If you have lots of other money, or you have a good engine that can draw a lot of cards, then it's a pretty safe bet usually that buying Hoard over Gold won't cost you that Province. A general rule of thumb that I personally follow on most boards is to buy a Gold first, and then Hoards after that.

Here's a good article on Hoard strategy: http://dominionstrategy.com/2010/12/02/prosperity-hoard/


How does Fist of Suns work with my Commander? I am working on a deck that features Progenitus as my Commander and started looking at Fist of Suns. Besides just being good because of the large number of high cost spells in the deck, I was curious how this worked with my Commander on every cast beyond the first. And honestly, I'm not entirely sure how to word this question.

For each cast of the Commander, the mana cost is increased by 2 colorless. The Fist of Suns Oracle text says

  You can't pay more than one alternative cost for a spell.

Does the additional colorless cost added after the first casting of a Commander count as alternative costs? Can I use Fist of Suns to make the cost of Progenitus WUBRG every time, or just the first time it is cast? I know that it can't be cast for WUBRG plus the additional colorless, since it seems unreasonable to combine mana costs like that.

Fist of Suns only replaces the mana cost. The mana cost is the cost written in the top-right corner of the card [CR 202.1]. You seem to think it's the total cost or the portion of the total cost payable using mana, but that's not the case.

Fist of Suns doesn't replace any additional costs or cost increases, so you still have to pay the Commander tax.

In game terms,

Fist of Suns provides an alternative cost [CR 117.9].
The Commander tax is an additional cost [CR 903.10].

total cost to cast the second time
= mana cost or alternative cost + additional cost and cost increases - cost reductions [CR 601.2e]
= alternative cost ({W}{U}{B}{R}{G}) + additional costs ({2})
= {W}{U}{B}{R}{G}{2}


Bang! pocket and expansions I'd like to ask two questions regarding bang!

Is bang! pocket sold elsewhere? Or just in Brazil? I could not find it in amazon.com, so I guess it only exists here.
Are there any expansions compatible with bang! pocket. I am thinking that card sizes would be incompatible between bang! pocket and the normal-sized edition.

I haven't heard of this "Bang! Pocket" edition before and admittedly there isn't a lot of it going on on the Internet either - this very question is the fourth result in Google and the first three are in Portuguese. This leads me to think that it is indeed specific for Brazil.

Due to the lack of information on the card sizes, I can't tell if these cards are compatible with the expansions, but the graphic looks very similar. Normal sized Bang! cards are 87 mm × 56 mm, so if yours are also this size there shouldn't be any compatibility issues.

Hope that helps :)


Phases order in "Catan: Cities & Knights" According game rules, each player can perform any action (building, trading, knight activation, etc.) in any order during her/his turn.

Can an action type be done more than once in the same turn?

Example: It's John's turn:

he activates a knight
he builds a settlement on an harbor with 3:1 commercial ratio
he uses such 3:1 change ratio to exchange resources with the bank
he trades with othere players
he builds a road
he activates another knight

I have that conundrum since in the classic Catan, the trading phase and the building one are strictly separated and you cannot mix them up (you can just if you use advanced rules).

Yes, you can take the same kind of action at multiple points in your turn. The relevant rule is:

You may do any or all of the following in any order:
– Trade resources and/or commodities with the bank and/or other players.
– Build roads, settlements, cities, knights, city walls, and/ or city improvements.
– Activate, promote, and/or perform actions with your knights.
– Play any number of progress cards.

This could be read to mean that each of those four bullet points are "phases" that can happen only once each in an order of your choice, but we can infer that the intended meaning is the more permissive one by this later rule:

Trading and Building
In Cities & Knights, you are allowed to build and trade any number of times and in any order. You do not need to finish all of your trading before you begin your building.


Does the 2nd ability of Teysa, Orzhov Scion trigger with mass destruction? Let's say Teysa, Orzhov Scion and my ten other black creatures are wiped out with "Wrath of God". Do then 10 white 1/1 Spirits appear on the battlefield even though Teysa has just been destroyed?

Sounds pretty strong to me.
Am I right?

Thanks a lot.

Yes, if Teysa, Orzhov Scion and 10 other black creatures all die at the same time, you get 10 Spirit tokens. Rule 603 covers how triggered abilities work:

603.6c. Leaves-the-battlefield abilities trigger when a permanent moves from the battlefield to another zone, or when a phased-in permanent leaves the game because its owner leaves the game. These are written as, but aren't limited to, "When [this object] leaves the battlefield, ..." or "Whenever [something] is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, ..." An ability that attempts to do something to the card that left the battlefield checks for it only in the first zone that it went to. An ability that triggers when a card is put into a certain zone "from anywhere" is never treated as a leaves-the-battlefield ability, even if an object is put into that zone from the battlefield.
603.6d. Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions. Continuous effects that exist at that time are used to determine what the trigger conditions are and what the objects involved in the event look like. However, some triggered abilities must be treated specially. Leaves-the-battlefield abilities, abilities that trigger when a permanent phases out, abilities that trigger when an object that all players can see is put into a hand or library, abilities that trigger specifically when an object becomes unattached, abilities that trigger when a player loses control of an object, and abilities that trigger when a player planeswalks away from a plane will trigger based on their existence, and the appearance of objects, prior to the event rather than afterward. The game has to "look back in time" to determine if these abilities trigger.

The ability is a leaves-the-battlefield ability and it existed before the creatures were destroyed, so the ability triggers.


cooperative game that is NOT like pandemic, forbidden island et al The cooperative games I have played (pandemic, forbidden island, ghost story) share very similar mechanics in which players have to deal with different threats as fast as they can or they loose.

Is there any other good cooperative game without that rush-playing style? I would like to try something that allows players to use more long term and complex strategies.

You have Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective, in which the goal is to find the truth in the smallest number of steps. You can never lose to SHCD, you can simple have a very bad score.

In Shadows over Camelot, each quest will give you either white or black swords. The game ends when the players collected 12 swords or more and they win if more than half of them are white.

And my favourite: Les Mousquetaires du Roy (Ye King's Musketeers) is a semi-cooperative in which a player incarnates Milady, the evil spy of the Cardinal of Richelieu and all the others play Athos, Portos, Aramis, D'Artagnan and/or Tréville. Quests will reward the players but as they don't play against the game but against another player, the game isn't quite like a usual cooperative game.
The game can be a 1-vs-0 up to 5-vs-0 game, or a 1-vs-1 up to 5-vs-1 game.


Board game that you set up each time differently with little cards I played it in probably early 90s. You had little cards and each time you played you put down the cards or tiles along the spaces on the board so each time you played it was different. They were like go back 3 spaces or go forward 2 spaces. I remember I had played it so much I knew the best way to set the board up. It was essentially a make it yourself game. This is driving me crazy! I thought it was similar to grape escape or splat BC I thought maybe it came with playdough but I'm not sure if I'm just remembering wrong. Please help me.

The description of playing cards on a track that have different movement instructions sounds like "This Game Is Bonkers".  I had this in late 80s early 90s so it would fit the time frame.

It was a roll and move game.  When you landed on an empty space you would play a tile from your hand with an instruction such as 'back 3' or 'forward 2' with the objective of trying to land on scoring spaces.

Only thing that doesn't fit is play dough as thats not in this game but you did say you might have remembered that wrong.

BGG link to game


Can I kill an opponent in response to lethal activated abilities, and not take the damage? Here's the situation.

Life totals: Not relevant

Player 1: Activates Borborygmos Enraged (Discard a land card: Deal 3 damage to any target) enough times for lethal, aims damage at Player 2. Passes priority.

Player 2: In response, uses Mirage Mirror's activated ability to copy Borborygmos Enraged, no responses. Activates the ability for lethal themselves, aims all damage at Player 1, no responses.

Player 1 dies.

Does Player 2 still live, or do the triggers persist after Player 1 loses the game?

You will win; in a 2-player game, a player leaving the game for any reason means the remaining player wins immediately and the game is over, no matter the game state. In multiplayer, once a player has left the game, all cards they own and all non-card objects they control on the stack leave the game with him.

104.2a A player still in the game wins the game if that player's opponents have all left the game. This happens immediately and overrides all effects that would preclude that player from winning the game.
104.5. If a player loses the game, that player leaves the game.  [..]

Additional rules for multiplayer, when one player leaves the game but the game still continues:

800.4a When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game and any effects which give that player control of any objects or players end. Then, if that player controlled any objects on the stack not represented by cards, those objects cease to exist. Then, if there are any objects still controlled by that player, those objects are exiled. This is not a state-based action. It happens as soon as the player leaves the game. If the player who left the game had priority at the time they left, priority passes to the next player in turn order who's still in the game.


7 Wonders Duel: Age cards before or after Wonder selection? I have a question about the initial setup of a 7 Wonders Duel game. In the basic game, the rule book describes the initial setup of the board, then the wonder selection phase, then how to set up the cards for each Age. It's not explicit, but it seems implied that wonders are selected before the Age I cards are dealt out.

With the Pantheon expansion, however, the rules are a bit more explicit. It states:

  Prepare the basic game and the Age I structure. Place 5
  randomly-selected Mythology tokens face-down on the indicated spaces
  of the structure, then reveal these tokens. Return the remaining
  tokens to the box. Perform the Wonders selection phase

Here, it's clear that the Age I cards are dealt before the wonder selection phase. Is the order really different between the base game and the expansion, or are the Age cards always dealt before wonder selection? It won't make a big difference most of the time, but knowing I'll have first dibs on a choice resource among the Age cards could make wonders requiring that resource more attractive.

I had a look into rules. Choosing the wonders is part of preparation of game so something done before any age starts. When you have a look on Age description it says:

  At the beginning of each Age, shuffle the corresponding deck, then display the
  20  cards

So for me it is quite obvious that you don't know cards when choosing a wonder as preparation of game need to be completed to start first age.

For Pantheon it is even bolded sentence:

  Perform the Wonders selection phase.

As part of setup for age one which comes after instruction to prepare cards.

So in fact it looks order is different with addition than in main game.


What exactly "triggers an additional time" in the interaction between Afterlife and Teysa Karlov? I'm pretty new to MTG and just have built my first commander deck around Teysa Karlov. One of her passive abilities is:

  If a creature dying causes a triggered ability of a permanent you control to trigger, that ability triggers an additional time.

My deck features a lot of cards with death triggers, such as:

  Afterlife N. (When this creature dies, create N 1/1 white and black Spirit creature tokens with flying.)

Let's say Teysa is on the battlefield and a creature of mine that has "Afterlife 2" dies, such as Ministrant of Obligation: what exactly gets triggered an additional time?

I see two options:

"Afterlife" triggers an additional time, so Afterlife 2 becomes Afterlife 3
"Afterlife 2" triggers an additional time, so 2x Afterlife 2

Which interpretation is correct and why?

Option 2, you will get 2x Afterlife 2.
The thing that triggers an additional time is "that ability", based on the wording of Teysa Karlov. And "that ability" in this case is "Afterlife 2". So "Afterlife 2" triggers an additional time, meaning that on the stack you get both "Afterlife 2" and "Afterlife 2".
The first interpretation would require seeing Afterlife 2 as an ability that triggers twice, and then triggering 3 times instead. But nothing about Afterlife 2 is an ability that triggers twice. It is an ability that triggers once, and just happens to have an effect that involves the number 2.
This hinges on the definition of a triggered ability:

603.1. Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[When/Whenever/At] [trigger condition or event], [effect]. [Instructions (if any).]”

Whatever the number "afterlife" is; afterlife itself is a triggered ability:

702.134. Afterlife

702.134a Afterlife is a triggered ability. “Afterlife N” means “When this permanent is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, create N 1/1 white and black Spirit creature tokens with flying.”

From the wording on the Afterlife rules, you can see that under normal circumstances, when a creature with Afterlife 2 dies, only 1 ability would trigger and be put on the stack. That ability would cause 2 tokens to be created when it resolves.
Teysa Karlov makes this 1 ability trigger an additional time (triggering twice instead of once). So you get 2 separate instances of "create 2 tokens" on the stack, instead of the normal 1. You would choose the order that they are placed on the stack, though because they are identical to each other, the order is meaningless. Then each of them would resolve independently.


1st Edition missprints on base set pikachu Hello there I've trying to get my hands on a rare miss printed base set pikachu. Where the 1st edition symbol is faded, aka the (ghost print). I just wondered is the pikachu on the right is a (ghost print). Thanks for your help.

It does not appear that this is a "Ghost Stamp Pikachu". I checked online and found several for sale that are slabbed and rated, but the "First Edition" marker looks quite different than yours, with parts of it missing:

Note that all of these genuine "Ghost Stamp Pikachu" cards are also Yellow Cheek Pikachu cards, so you are on the right track with it being a Ghost Print.


Can Feasting Troll King be countered when it returns to the battlefield? If I return my Feasting Troll King from my graveyard using its activated ability:

Sacrifice three Foods: Return Feasting Troll King from your graveyard to the battlefield. Activate this ability only during your turn.

can troll, as a creature, be countered? I know that the activated ability can be countered, but I would like to know if my opponent could counter the troll itself, using for example Essence Scatter:

Counter target creature spell.

No. That's an activated ability and not a spell, and Essence Scatter can only counter spells. You'll need something like Trickbind to counter it.
Rules 112 and 113 define what spells and abilities are, and they are distinct:

112.1. A spell is a card on the stack. As the first step of being cast (see rule 601, “Casting Spells”), the card becomes a spell and is moved to the top of the stack from the zone it was in, which is usually its owner’s hand. (See rule 405, “Stack.”) A spell remains on the stack as a spell until it resolves (see rule 608, “Resolving Spells and Abilities”), is countered (see rule 701.5), or otherwise leaves the stack. For more information, see section 6, “Spells, Abilities, and Effects.”

113.1. An ability can be one of three things:
113.1a An ability can be a characteristic an object has that lets it affect the game. An object’s abilities are defined by its rules text or by the effect that created it. Abilities can also be granted to objects by rules or effects. (Effects that grant abilities usually use the words “has,” “have,” “gains,” or “gain.”) Abilities generate effects. (See rule 609, “Effects.”)
113.1b An ability can be something that a player has that changes how the game affects the player. A player normally has no abilities unless granted to that player by effects.
113.1c An ability can be an activated or triggered ability on the stack. This kind of ability is an object. (See section 6, “Spells, Abilities, and Effects.”)


Would using 2 progressions of evil and 2 heroic actions per turn destroy the balance of Shadows Over Camelot? After reading so much about how Battlestar Galactica was a better game than Shadows Over Camelot, I became determined to help it and see if I could help it at all in the contest. One of the issues was how easy it is for your turn to become very boring, like when you do nothing but play a grail or other card. This requires very little strategy, discussion, or decision, and it seems like the game could be speeded up a little without any huge disadvantages.

Since the game is based on the balance of good vs. evil actions, why not just do 2 evil actions and 2 heroic actions per turn? This could be a small disadvantage as more bad things will happen before your next turn, but is it fairly balanced out by the double good actions? Most other cooperative games give you multiple actions, and as it gives you more choices, it makes the decision of what to do during your turn all the more interesting.

Would this hurt the balance of the game? Is there anything I can do to counteract its effect or reduce turns where very little thinking is required?

This would make the game much easier.  The ability to focus effort on quests is how the knights win.  Travel time relative to card draws would go down.

Quick example, 5 player game, you have fought cards 1-5, so you go to the Picts quest.  It starts as your turn:

Progression of Evil / You move to quest
PE / You play 1
8 other PEs from other players
PE / You play 2
PE / You play 3
8 other PEs from other players
PE / You play 4
PE / You play 5 -- Quest Completes

Total PEs possibly ending your quest in a loss: 22

In the original rules, it looks like this:

Progression of Evil / You move to quest
4 other PEs from other players
PE / You play 1
4 other PEs from other players
PE / You play 2
4 other PEs from other players
PE / You play 3
4 other PEs from other players
PE / You play 4
4 other PEs from other players
PE / You play 5 -- Quest Completes

Total PEs possibly ending your quest in a loss: 26

So, by focusing the effort, you've saving 4 progressions of evils (the other player's turns) on your quest.


How to add of story-telling elements to increase player satisfaction? My question is focused on the board game Eldritch Horror, but perhaps it could be applicable to other lore-based board/card games.

Does anybody use additional story-telling elements to embellish the game?

If so, how do you go about it?

Some background, I have been playing Eldritch Horror for nearly three years and love the game. However, my friends and I have always thought the gameplay was missing something. I recently started reading some of the short stories of HP Lovecraft and have found the works to be very enticing. I think that's what the board game has been lacking for me and several other dedicated players; a cohesive story of what we are up against and what we are trying to accomplish.

The idea came to me after finishing the short story The Dunwich Horror. I think all the players of the board game would get inspiration and a moral boost if they knew in detail what they are up against, and what it would mean for the hamlet of Dunwich should we fail. I think this holds true for other aspects of the game (i.e. the destinations, the ancient ones, other monsters, and certain items).

If anybody has any tips or currently uses any methods to achieve the desired story-telling and lore elements, your advice would be appreciated, and would most likely save a dusty board game box from being lost in time and space.

I think that's what the board game has been lacking for me and several other dedicated players; a cohesive story of what we are up against and what we are trying to accomplish.

This surprises me, since Eldritch Horror is usually praised for creating a cohesive story through the three Mysteries that you have to solve to defeat the Ancient One, creating a sense of progression and a beginning, middle, and end to the story.

I think all the players of the board game would get inspiration and a moral boost if they knew in detail what they are up against, and what it would mean for the hamlet of Dunwich should we fail. I think this holds true for other aspects of the game (i.e. the destinations, the ancient ones, other monsters, and certain items).

I think this is your real problem: a lack of knowledge, or immersion, in relation to what is going on in the board. Fortunately, there are several things you can do to help that (but keep your expectations in check; Eldritch Horror will never have as strong or cohesive a narrative as something like Time Stories).
For what it's worth, I think that Arkham Horror is better at solving this problem, but we're talking about Eldritch Horror now.
Read the cards aloud
This may seem like a no-brainer to some players, but I have played with people who draw a location card, read it silently, roll some dice, then say that they need a Common Item. That is beyond boring and disconnects everyone from what is going on. Reading the cards aloud adds to the atmosphere and increases enjoyment for everybody.
Also, there are ways to increase the drama as you read. I don't recall if this is an official rule or not, but when I played in a game with one of the designers, he said that every time it says "Make a  roll" or similar, he intentionally made it so that they always ended a sentence. While reading, he said you should stop as soon as you read that sentence, make your roll, and then continue reading. This helps immersion by leading to anticipation as to what will happen. Some players even prefer to have other players read the card to prevent players from silently reading ahead.
Start your game with one of the descriptions in the rule book
The rule book for the base game and each of the expansions has a brief paragraph from someone in-universe describing the the general atmosphere of the threat, and this can be helpful for setting the tone for players. If you see other things like this, read those too.
Read descriptions from Lovecraft's works
Say that your Ancient One is Azathoth. You might choose to at some point read a quote from The Dream Quest of Unknown Kadath:

[O]utside the ordered universe [is] that amorphous blight of nethermost confusion which blasphemes and bubbles at the center of all infinity—the boundless daemon sultan Azathoth, whose name no lips dare speak aloud, and who gnaws hungrily in inconceivable, unlighted chambers beyond time and space amidst the muffled, maddening beating of vile drums and the thin monotonous whine of accursed flutes.

Lovecraft had a gift for describing things in a way that evokes a specific emotion. Reading these quotes helps convey that to the players, and also educates them if they are unfamiliar with that being.
Do this with whatever you feel is appropriate. I don't know that there are any evocative passages on shotguns, but you might read one when the Necronomicon is revealed.
Read descriptions you write yourself
I once played a game of Eldritch Horror's sister game, Arkham Horror, where the first time a player entered a location, the game owner read descriptions of the places, which he wrote. For instance, when I went to the Graveyard, I was told that I saw graves of veterans from the Great War (i.e. World War I), but one of the graves I passed was old, yet recently dug up. I then read the encounter as normal. This could be done with Eldritch Horror too.
Invent your own rationalization and connections
Why did I get a book from a random dude on the street in Cairo? Maybe I saved their life from the zombie I just killed and they gave it to me in thanks. Just let your players run with it.


What are the differences in strategy going first vs going second, vice versa, in Scrabble? My initial thoughts: when going first, you have no choice but to open the board, but you get to choose how you want the board to be opened, most likely based on your rack and if you know your opponent's playstyle. When going second, you can choose to either open the board more or close it, but you have less control over how the initial board is opened.
I feel like I might be missing more than just those differences though.

There's no real difference other than, if you go first, you get an advantage worth roughly 10 points (because you are starting on a double word score tile, and if you can make a 5-letter word, also a double letter score tile).
Only thing worth noting if you go first is not to give up easy double crosses on the double letter score tiles near the starting tile. For example, if your starting word is FAME, you should not play it such that the two vowels are next to the double letter score tiles.


+1/+1 counter, where does it go when my adversary bolts it's target? Vastwood Hydra is on the field, 7/7 atm (7 x +1/+1 counters). My adversary blocks it for combined strength of 7, all creatures in combat die when the damage resolves.
When Vastwood Hydra dies I get to distribute all it's +1/+1 counters among my creatures.
I designate my Kioras follower (2/2) as a recipient of a counter. My opponent decides to shock it for 2 damage (instant).
What I want to know is, what happens? What comes first, the counter or the shock? If the shock comes first and my 2/2 goes to graveyard, does the counter "fizzle" lacking a target, or do I still have a +1/+1 counter to distribute?

Your Vastwood Hydra comes first if your opponent waits for the ability to resolve.

You distribute the counters upon resolution of the ability. This means that your opponent must choose to Shock your followers, before the Hydra ability resolves. The Hydra's ability doesn't use the word "Target", so you need not declare which creatures get the counters until the resolution of the Hydra's ability. From the cards rulings.

  The ability that triggers when Vastwood Hydra dies doesn’t target any of the creatures. You can choose to put counters on a creature with protection from green, for example.

  You choose how the counters will be distributed when the ability resolves.

Essentially, your opponent must choose what creature to target with Shock while the "distribute Vastwood Hydra's" ability is on the stack. If you have multiple 2/2s, your opponent can only Shock one and you can distribute the counters on the other.


Attack/defense diplomacy So England has attacked Denmark with a fleet in the Skagaric support from Helgoland Bigbt and the North Sea. Russia has attacked the Skagaric from the Baltic Sea and with support from Sweden and the German fleet in Denmark. Would the offensive prevail?

The Baltic Sea is not adjacent to Skaggerak, so the Russian move is invalid. Around Denmark, England attacks with two uncut supports, so a total strength of 3. Denmark would need at least two defensive supports to stay, so the English attack prevails.

Even if the Russian unit moving to Skaggerak was moved to Norway to make it a valid move, this would not affect the situation in Denmark.

In general you can check the outcome of any situation you desire at Stabbeurfou (this is not the only sandbox out there online that you can use, I believe at least Backstabbr has one too)

The Diplomacy rulebook (pdf) is also available online to help you.


Can I trade my own resources in exchange for another player's Settlement, City, or Road? In Catan, can I trade my own resources to "take over" another player's Settlement, City, or Road?

For example, can I offer 5 Bricks and 3 Ore to another player to have them convert one of their already placed Road pieces from their (e.g. blue) piece to my (e.g. red) piece? i.e. They would no longer have the Road that they had played along the edge of a hex, I would have it instead.

No, you may not trade game pieces.

The rules have this on trading:

  Trade
  Afterwards you may trade freely (using either or both types of trades below) to gain needed Resource Cards:

  a) Domestic Trade

  On your turn, you can trade Resource Cards with any of the other players. You can announce which resources you need and what you are willing to trade for them. The other players can also make their own proposals and counter offers.
  Important: Players may only trade with the player whose turn it is. The other players may not trade among themselves.

  b) Maritime Trade

  You can also trade without the other players! During your turn, you can always trade at 4:1 by putting 4 identical Resource Cards back in their stack and taking any 1 Resource Card of your choice for it. If you have a settlement or city on a harbor, you can trade with the bank more favorably: at either a 3:1 ratio or in special harbors (trading the resource type shown) at 2:1.
  Important: The 4:1 trade is always possible, even if you do not have a settlement on a harbor.

It is allowed to trade the resources for a road for some other resources, with this restriction: You are not allowed to trade the same goods. This means you cannot exchange brick for brick, or in this case 4 bricks for a brick and a wood. I believe handing over entire roads, settlements and/or cities worth of resources is tactically a dubious move for your opponents under most circumstances, but it is allowed.

  You may not trade like resources (e.g., 2 wool for 1 wool).


Progenitor Mimic destroyed in response of its triggered ability What happens if Progenitor Mimic is destroyed in response of its triggered ability? Does it still generate the token?

This questions is not a duplicate of Does an ability resolve if the source of the ability leaves the battlefield? because I am not asking if the ability will resolve. I am asking what happen when the ability resolves in this particular scenario when an object that was part of the ability is not longer in the game.

Thanks to Hackworth for his excelent answer.

Yes, it will still create a token that's a copy of itself.
Spells and abilities on the stack that are resolving use the "last known information" of an object that has left the required zone, if properties of that object are required for that spell or ability to resolve.

Abilities

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

Alternatively:

Resolving Spells and Abilities

608.2g If an effect requires information from the game (such as the number of creatures on the battlefield), the answer is determined only once, when the effect is applied. If the effect requires information from a specific object, including the source of the ability itself, the effect uses the current information of that object if it’s in the public zone it was expected to be in; if it’s no longer in that zone, or if the effect has moved it from a public zone to a hidden zone, the effect uses the object’s last known information. See rule 112.7a. If an ability states that an object does something, it’s the object as it exists—or as it most recently existed—that does it, not the ability.


Can Hour of Devastation kill Heliod, Sun-Crowned? Hour of Devastation says:

  All creatures lose indestructible until end of turn. Hour of Devastation deals 5 damage to each creature and each non-Bolas planeswalker.

Let's say my opponent has Heliod, Sun-Crowned and four Healer's Hawk in play. This hits the Devotion threshold, so Heliod is a creature. Now I cast Hour of Devastation to clear the board.

Does Heliod die because it's a creature that has taken 5 damage + no longer indestructible, or does Heliod survive because the Healer's Hawks dying makes it no longer a creature (Devotion not met) and so no amount of damage can kill it?

Heliod will die in this situation.

The key is that state-based actions are evaluated simultaneously. After the spell resolves, Heliod and each Healer's Hawk all have 5 damage marked on them. Then state-based actions are evaluated, and all of those creatures die at the same time. There is no time when Heliod has the damage marked but is not a creature.

This is all covered by rule 704.3:

  Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 117, “Timing and Priority”), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. If any state-based actions are performed as a result of a check, the check is repeated; otherwise all triggered abilities that are waiting to be put on the stack are put on the stack, then the check is repeated. Once no more state-based actions have been performed as the result of a check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, the appropriate player gets priority. This process also occurs during the cleanup step (see rule 514), except that if no state-based actions are performed as the result of the step’s first check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, then no player gets priority and the step ends.

The answer is actually different if the Healer's Hawks are replaced with 2 or 3 Benalish Marshal, which has the ability "Other creatures you control get +1/+1.". In that case, when evaluating state-based actions, the Benalish Marshals have lethal damage marked and die, but Heliod does not because he has more than 5 toughness. Then state-based actions are evaluated again and Heliod is no longer a creature so again he does not die.


Is there efficient token generation in Black or White? Is there any black or white cards that whenever opponent loses a life (or when I gain life) create a creature token?

I'm planning a combo with Corpse Knight and Impassioned Orator.

If so can you show me what set it is in. And if not can you tell me if there are any other combos I could use.

I cannot think of anything that combos with them for as many iterations as you want. There are a number of effects that create tokens once per turn based on gaining/losing life.

In standard (as both cards you mentioned are standard legal):
Regal Bloodlord
Resplendent Angel

Outside of standard, the best I can find is:
Crested Sunmare
Regna, the Redeemer
Angelic Accord
First Response

In general I think they are quite careful with this effect, and restrict it to happening once per turn specifically to not enable the combo that you're seeking.


Is it better to pick up a Chapel or Steward? Consider a game where both Chapel and Steward are present.

If the copper split is 4/3, is it better to pick up a Chapel or a Steward?
Can you think of any situations where you'd pick up Steward if the split was 5/2?

I would (almost) always prefer Chapel.

Honestly, if Chapel's on the board, I will buy it before my first shuffle, almost no matter what. This is because I love putting together combos, and Chapel is the fastest way to thin a deck, which then removes most of the chance from getting a combo to go off.

@ColinD's 5/2 hypotheticals all sound playable. (Steward/Fool's Gold sounds especially fun to me, especially if you can get another cheap card with +Buy.) But in every one of those cases, I think Chapel would work better than Steward. For example, in the Fool's Gold case, you can literally trash everything but Fool's Gold (and the Chapel) very quickly. If you can pick up a Market or two (or anything with +Buy) you'll soon buy out the Fool's Golds -- and that's the point when you want card draw. After the Fool's Gold pile is empty is the appropriate time to pick up an action for card-draw, though hopefully there's something better than Steward's +2 Cards.

The thing about Chapel is that it makes your deck fast. If you open Chapel/Silver and start trashing like crazy (and if you open with a Chapel you must buy something else that produces coin or gains cards), pretty soon you'll be down to a 7 or 8-card deck with no chaff. The good cards you've bought come up again really quick. It's fine if your non-Chapeling opponent has 2 Golds and you only have one if you're playing yours almost every turn! The situation is even better for terminal actions: a single Goons in an 8-card deck is much better than 2 Goons in a 16-card deck because it'll come up just as frequently and there's absolutely no risk of collision. This is why Chapel is so good at setting up engines: the engine cards are about the only ones in your deck, so they come up together every time.

Decide up front if you're going to use Chapel; if you are, buy it before the first shuffle. Waiting for an unlucky $2 hand defeats the purpose of Chapel: speed. With Chapel, you want to trash all the Coppers and Estates ASAP, and if you've waited a few turns and already bought several other cards you want to hang on to, you've already missed the boat on the Chapel.

When not to use Chapel:

Don't use Chapel for a Big Money. Big Money + Chapel is slightly slower than just Big Money.

Chapel is great because it can trash 4 cards at a time. Chapel is not great when your hand is small. If you've discarded down to 3 cards, your Chapel is now a crappy Steward, lacking the options that round Steward out into a useful card. Chapel is fast enough that expensive discard attacks (especially Goons ($6), but also Ghost Ship ($5) and Margrave ($5)) aren't too concerning. (Torturer even less so, just take the curse and immediately trash it.) But Militia and even Cutpurse can get in the way. This is especially true in > 2-player games where you have more than one opponent causing you to discard. If you almost always have a hand with < 5 cards, Steward is probably a better choice than Chapel.

Jack-of-All-Trades can also compete with Chapel. Chapel will be much more effective at setting up an engine, but it needs to be a darn good engine to beat "doublejack" (Big Money + 2 Jack-of-All-Trades).

@User1873 astutely pointed out that you need to consider available card-stealing/trashing attacks in evaluating Chapel. Thief, Noble Brigand, Pirate Ship, etc. steal/trash treasures and make a Chapel strategy riskier. A lucky attack or two could leave you in the unfortunate situation of needing to buy Coppers to afford a Silver! Any heavy trashing increases your treasure density so much as to make treasure-stealing cards very appealing. Masquerade can also make you give up good cards if they're the only ones left in your deck. Like the drawback of discarding attacks, the risks are exacerbated if several opponents are using stealers.


How Does Chains of Mephistopheles Work? I need to understand the rulings on this card, as it seems to form an infinite mill and draw combo all on its own!

I will explain:

The rule states:

  If a player would draw a card except the first one he or she draws in his or her draw step each turn, that player discards a card instead. If the player discards a card this way, he or she draws a card. If the player doesn't discard a card this way, he or she puts the top card of his or her library into his or her graveyard.

Now my my thinking is that the text in bold and the text in italics sets off an infinite loop if a player draws a card other than their first.

The steps:

Player A draws a second card on their turn
COM triggers, Player A discards a card
COMs second ruling makes Player A  draw a card, again triggering
COMs first ruling and so on to certain death...

Am I missing something with this card or is it actually as ridiculously broken as I am making out?

Card Link: Chains of Mephistopheles

Edit

On closer inspection, it appears it would only make the person discard their hand completely if they draw a second card at all... this is really confusing me.

My thinking on this is that Player A would have to discard a card instead of drawing it... then try and draw again and discard till his hand is gone then mill the top card. Is this how this card works?

Chains of Mephistopheles doesn't form an infinite draw combo.

The main principle is this: when an event happens, we check all available replacement effects, and then we apply each of them just once. When Chains of Mephistopheles replaces your draw with an instruction to discard & draw, that's not a new draw to which a replacement effect might be applied — it's just a modification to the original draw event, and Chains has already had its turn to change that event.

All of that happens specifically because Chains is a replacement effect, since it uses the language "If (thing would happen), (other thing happens) instead." If it was a triggered ability it would definitely go infinite.

Consider also that if this would lead to infinite draw, Anointed Procession would lead to infinite tokens, Winding Constrictor would lead to infinite counters, etc.

So what does it do? Chains of Mephistopheles is one of those very old cards that's complex enough it needs a flowchart to really understand. Magicjudge produced one here:


Can the winged dragon of Ra use its effect during another players turn? One of my friends has the winged dragon of Ra and he payed 1000 LP during my turn to destroy one of my monsters before I could destroy one of his. Is that a legal move?

The answer is no.

The reason why is that the Winged Dragon of Ra's effect is not a quick effect. Quick effects are monster effects you can choose to activate during either player's turn. You can think of them like quickplay spells or set traps. Quick effects are usually designated by the phrase "during either player's turn", or have the text "(quick effect)" inserted after the effect description. Winged Dragon of Ra's effect to destroy monsters reads as follows:

  You can pay 1000 LP, then target 1 monster on the field; destroy that target.

Since it lacks a phrase that marks it as a quick effect, if Ra is in your opponent's control, it can only be activated during your opponent's main phase 1 or main phase 2, and can't be activated during your turn.


What is an unmodified hit roll? In Warhammer 40k 8th Edition, Orks commonly have an ability called "Dakka! Dakka! Dakka!". The rule reads:

  Each time you roll an unmodified hit roll of 6 with a ranged weapon made by this model, that hit roll succeeds regardless of any modifiers. [...]

I am very confused by the wording, and don't exactly know how to apply it. Imagine I have an Ork with this ability and a ballistic skill of 5+, and they would fire eight shots at an enemy unit. The dice return as follows:

  1 1 2 3 4 5 6 6

Since no modifiers were applied, to me this seems like an "unmodified hit roll", and three hits would be counted, out of which two (the 6's) would be affected by "Dakka! Dakka! Dakka!". Is this understanding correct?

Now imagine that the weapon my Ork was affected by some ability that would allow them to add +1 to their hit rolls. If the same dice result would come up, it would now result in 4 hits, but none of those hits would be affected by "Dakka! Dakka Dakka!". Is this understanding correct?

And if so, would that mean that, for the sake of "Dakka! Dakka! Dakka!", every "buff" to my hit rolls would actually disable this very useful skill?

"Dakka! Dakka! Dakka!" will still apply to the 2 "natural" 6s.

The wording can be a little confusing, but Warhammer uses "unmodified hit rolls of 6" and "hit rolls of 6 before modifiers are applied" interchangeably.

Essentially it only cares about the number showing on the dice and doesn't pay attention to modifiers being applied.

The place this is most clearly set out is in the Designers Commentary


If partner opens one heart, what do I need to respond with one spade? If my partner opens one heart, and I respond one spade, am I showing four or five spades?

In Standard American bidding (and 2/1 game forcing for that matter), after partner's 1H opening, 1S promises at least 4 spades. After 1H-1S, partner's mostly likely calls are 1NT (5332 shape with no more than 14 HCP), 2 of a minor (5-4 or better in the bid suits, may have anything short of a game force in terms of values), 2H (6+ hearts, probably less than 17 high card points), 2NT (18-19 HCP, 5332 shape), or some number of spades.

After 1H-1S-1NT, your rebids:

2H: This is a tough one. Probably 5 spades, a doubleton heart honor, and shortness in one of the minors. You're taking the position that playing 2H in a 5-2 fit is better than playing 1NT (if you had 3 hearts and a weak hand, you shouldn't have bothered to show spades).
2S: The 2S rebid shows a weak hand, usually with 6+ spades (though it could be an exceptionally weak hand with shortness somewhere and only 5 spades, e.g. Qxxxx x Kxx xxxx, which rates to take 0-1 tricks at NT but a few tricks with spades as trumps).
2NT: Invitational values, likely exactly 4 spades and 2 hearts.
3NT: Game forcing values, likely exactly 4 spades and 2 hearts.
2m: You should have a discussion with your partners about this auction, but SAYC says this should be non-forcing and natural.
3H: 3-card heart support, invitational values.
pass: any weakish hand not covered above.

After 1H-1S-2m:

Pass: A weak hand with 3- or 4-card support for the minor and usually a singleton or void in hearts.
2H: A weak hand, virtually guaranteed to have a heart doubleton (again, with 3-card support, why not raise hearts in the first place?)
2S: Shows 6 spades or better (or, more rarely, a weak 5-5 in spades and the unbid minor with a singleton heart). With other shapes and a weak hand, correct to 2H with a doubleton heart or pass partner's minor.
2NT: Balanced, invitational.
3m: 4-card support for the minor, invitational values.
3S: 6+ spades, invitational values
The fourth suit at the cheapest level: forcing for one round, unable to make a natural bid at this point. Examples:

Interested in 3NT but unable to stop the unbid minor.
Interested in slam in one of partner's suits and thus unwilling to jump directly to game.
Interest in a spade slam but require more information from partner

After 1H-1S-2H:
 - 2S: This shows a weak hand with 6 spades or better and likely a heart void; why else correct from partner's 6-card suit to yours?

2NT: Natural, invitational.
3m: Natural and game forcing.
3H: Invitational with 3 hearts.

Obviously, this doesn't cover all the bases, but it lays out some of the most common situations.


Necroskitter and Everlasting Torment I am playing a game of EDH against 3 other opponents and I control an Everlasting Torment and Horde of Notions, and I have a Necroskitter in my graveyard. My opponents control a whole host of non-token creatures. If one of us were to cast a Blasphemous Act for example and I use Horde of Notions ability to bring back Necroskitter, would I then gain control of all creatures that died to Blasphemous Act?

If so, as a bonus question: What about if they cast Anger of the Gods instead of Blasphemous Act?

You will get back all non-token creatures killed by having 0 (or less) toughness after the Blasphemous Act thanks to the Necroskitter (unless something else prevents them from hitting the graveyard or moves them from the graveyard before your triggers resolve).

What happens is :

Someone casts Blasphemous Act.
In response you bring back your Necroskitter with Horde of Notions
Blasphemous Act resolves, all creatures get 13 -1/-1 counters.
State based effects are checked, all creatures with 0 toughness or less die.
Necroskitter triggers for each dying creature your opponents control.
Profit!

Note: while they trigger Necroskitter like any creature, you won't return token creatures because they cease to exist as soon as they enter the graveyard.

Note 2: You also won't get the creatures if they get moved from the graveyard before your triggers resolve (it can happen depending on which player is the active player if something like a Mortus Strider dies) or if they don't get into the graveyard in the first place (for example with a Rest in Peace on the battlefield, in which case Necroskitter doesn't trigger at all).

This doesn't work with Anger of the Gods, because it says "If a creature dealt damage this way would die this turn, exile it instead.". It works even if the damage was done in the form of -1/-1 counters. And it is a replacement effect, preventing the act of dying altogether so you don't get Necroskitter triggers at all, just like with Rest in Peace.


Fallout Board Game: How to resolve card 16 Card 16, "All Aboard", has a condition "Place the third shield on the map".

This is the condition to complete this quest, so how can I as a player complete this condition? What third shield? Place it how? Place it where on the map?

I'm just guessing as I haven't played the game or read the rules.

It appears as though in order to place the shield you need to contact the Institute locations at that icon I can't quite make out.

Edit: Did some research, this link appears to say you should have added an additional institute location to the map in the previous quest?  https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1893927/quest-states-simply-place-icon-map


When a monster is tributed due to the effect of Soul Exchange, whose graveyard does it go to? The text specifies that I tribute the target of soul exchange "as if [I] controlled it". When I tribute a monster, it normally goes to my graveyard. Is that because I control it?

To answer to the question in your title, all tributed cards go to their respective owner's graveyard. Now,

  When I tribute a monster, it normally goes to my graveyard. Is that because I control it?

Yes, it goes to your graveyard, but it is because you own it.

Two key terms here:

Owner: The player who owns the card, regardless where that card may be.
Controller: The player who has a specific card under their control. In other words in which side of the field that card is.

When a card is going to be destroyed, tributed, sent, returned, etc., it goes back to it's owner's possession and to the respective destination the card was redirected (owner's GY, deck, hand, etc.)


How inappropriate is it to track semi-secret information using paper or other memory aids? Many board games have information which is semi-secret, where it's possible to keep track of it, but not easy.  For example, which resources you get and spend in Catan is public knowledge, but which resources you currently have is secret.  If I was able to mentally count every player's income and expenditures, I'd know exactly what they were holding, but that's a lot of information to keep track of.  Similarly, many games make earning victory points public, but the total number earned private.

This gives an advantage to players with better memories.  It's not necessarily an unfair advantage, and there's only so much you can generally do with the information, but it is an advantage.

Given this, how appropriate or inappropriate would it be to keep a record of this information?  I can write down every resource card someone collects, and scratch them off when they spend them, or keep a running total of points earned.  Assuming I'm accurate, this would be even more precise than the people with good memories.  But is it good sportsmanship?

Obviously, a group of friends who regularly play together can establish whatever social norms or house rules they want.  I'm more interested in the general case, where you're playing with people you may not see regularly or may not know at all.

There's two schools of thought on this subject - one is that you can do anything unless the rules say you can't, the other is that you can only do what the rules say you can. I believe there's a better argument for the second case, because the rules are generally written to define the game, and can't expressly prohibit everything you might try to do. The rules of Catan don't specifically say you can't look through the Development Card deck, but I don't think anyone would consider that fair play. By-hand tracking is never mentioned in the rules, so I don't think it should be included.

In my opinion, a board game should be one person's brain and luck against the other's. Would it be fair to run an app computing my odds of winning a Risk battle? Or compute my chance of drawing that straight flush in a poker game? These are things I could figure out myself if I had the time and math skills, but are much easier with an aid. Similarly, tracking resources could be done with a good memory, but augmenting that with paper and pencil doesn't seem right.

TL;DR: I would consider by-hand point or resource tracking at best unsporting, and at worst, against the rules.


Can Romanians be placed in Finland in Stalingrad? In Avalon Hill’s classic game Stalingrad, may Romainan units be placed in Finland at the start of the game as part of the 8 Combat factors that can be placed in Finland by the Germans?

After looking around through other AH Stalingrad rules (later editions and addenda), I found that Romanians can indeed be placed in Finland at game’s beginning.
Rules state that a maximum of 8 German and or Romanian Combat factors can be placed in Finland as part of the 8 axis points that may be allocated there.  So you could have 4 German and 4 Romanian Combat factors or 2 German and 6 Romanian and so on.


Do bestow count toward cards that say "when [sub-type] enters on the battlefield" Champion of the Parish gains +1/+1 "Whenever a another human enters the battlefield under your control". If I play Nyxborn Shieldmate as a bestow does it count toward this effect? I know it does not count as a creature but it is still a human is it not?

According to the definition of "Bestow" (702.102a), the card will enter as an Aura spell.

  "Bestow [cost]" means "You may cast this card by paying [cost] rather than its mana cost." and "If you chose to pay this spell’s bestow cost, it becomes an Aura enchantment and gains enchant creature.

The game will remove the Creature type from the card. Since Human is a subtype of Creature and not a subtype of Aura, the card loses the Human subtype per 205.1a

  "If an object's card type is removed, the subtypes correlated with that card type will remain if they are also the subtypes of a card type the object currently has; otherwise, they are also removed for the entire time the object's card type is removed."

The ability won't trigger since the card does not have the subtype Human.


Can you attack any creature of your opponents with flying if he can't block it Let's say you have a flying creature and your opponent has nothing with flying or reach. Could you attack any one of his creatures you choose?

No, because you don't attack creatures in Magic; you attack players (or planeswalkers), and then the player being attacked can choose to block (or not block) your attacking creatures with their creatures if able.  If your opponent has nothing with flying or reach, they will be unable to block an attacking flyer, and so your flyer will deal damage directly to your opponent.


Rules for solitaire card games I know of pagat for games with multiple players, but is there anything similar for solitaire?  I prefers to play with real cards so I am only looking for the sets of rules.

Wikipedia has quite a collection, and the site you mention also has a page with further links. You might find more online if you also search for "patience", the more common name for "solitaire" outside North America.


Activated ability that share a name If i have two Vector Asp's on the battlefield and I attack with both.
If I use the ability, "{B}:Vector Asp gains infect until end of turn", do I have to pay twice (once for each attacking Vector Asp) or only once?

When a card refers to it's own name in text, it isn't actually referring to cards with that name; it's referring to itself.

So Vector Asp's activated ability actually means: "{B}: This Card gains infect until end of turn". You can attack with both Vector Asps, and activate each ability separately, to give one, both or neither of them infect.

Some cards will refer to other cards with a certain name, but this is usually formatted as "... a card named ~" (eg. Accumulated Knowledge).


Do you have to tell the truth? If you wanted somebody to discard a card, it seems advantageous to lie and say it's something that is obviously not playable. Do you have to tell the truth about the card you are giving a clue about?

Yes you must always tell the truth about cards in Hanabi. When you give information you give it about the card. If you give color you must give it for all cards of that color. If you give it about the number you must give it about all cards with that number. Given those two facts it is absolutely against the rules to lie.

Here is a link to the rules.

https://www.villagehome.org/blog/attachment/index.php/4923/1/regle_en_hanabi.pdf


What happens when multiple Canker Abominations enter the battlefield simultaneously? Alice and Nicholas each control five Elvish Mystics. Each graveyard has a Canker Abomination and nothing else. Alice casts and resolves Exhume.

How many Canker Abominations remain on the battlefield after state-based actions are checked?

More generally, what happens when multiple permanents with "as [this object] enters the battlefield" effects enter at the same time, specifically when the act of entering would change the board state in a way the effect cares about?

After Exhume resolves, there are two Canker Abominations on the battlefield, each with 5 -1/-1 counters. Rule 101.4 says

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

Canker Abomination's ability says

  As Canker Abomination enters the battlefield, choose an opponent. Canker Abomination enters the battlefield with a -1/-1 counter on it for each creature that player controls.

This is a replacement effect, as described in 614.1c. Clone, another creature with an enters-the-battlefield replacement effect, has a ruling on Gatherer that says

  If Clone somehow enters the battlefield at the same time as another creature, Clone can't become a copy of that creature. You may only choose a creature that's already on the battlefield.

This means that when multiple permanents enter the battlefield simultaneously, they do not see each other when applying replacement effects.

Therefore, the spell resolves like this:

Exhume starts to resolve. Each player must choose a permanent in their graveyard to put on the battlefield.
Alice chooses her Canker Abomination.
Nicholas chooses his Canker Abomination.
Alice chooses Nicholas for her Canker Abomination's ability. It will enter with 5 -1/-1 counters.
Nicholas chooses Alice for his Canker Abomination's ability. It will enter with 5 -1/-1 counters.
Both Canker Abominations enter simultaneously, each with 5 -1/-1 counters.


Does Bound by Moonsilver prevent crewing? Does Bound By Moonsilver prevent a creature enchanted by it from crewing a vehicle? My opponent crewed a vehicle with a Pyrohound I had enchanted with Bound By Moonsilver and we weren't sure if this was actually possible.

Bound by Moonsilver does not prevent crewing. Bound by Moonsilver has the ability

Enchanted creature can't attack, block, or transform.

Crewing a vehicle is none of those things, so Bound by Moonsilver does not affect it.
Here are the rules for Crew:

702.121a Crew is an activated ability of Vehicle cards. “Crew N” means “Tap any number of untapped creatures you control with total power N or greater: This permanent becomes an artifact creature until end of turn.”

702.121b A creature “crews a Vehicle” when it’s tapped to pay the cost to activate a Vehicle’s crew ability.

702.121c If an effect states that a creature “can’t crew Vehicles,” that creature can’t be tapped to pay the crew cost of a Vehicle.

So, the only way to stop a creature from crewing a vehicle is either with an effect that specifically says so, like Revoke Privileges as doppelgreener mentioned, or by keeping it tapped with an effect like on Malfunction.


Difficulty Ranking of the Ancient Ones in Elder Sign? Is there a list (formal or informal) of how difficult each Ancient One is in Elder Sign? Clearly, some of them have powerful static abilities (like Cthulhu) and some of them have attacks with the potential to devour investigators. I'm interested in a rough guide of each Ancient One and whether they're easy, moderate or hard difficulty.

Considerations for Ranking Ancient Ones:

How many Elder Sign tokens are needed to banish them versus how many Doom tokens are required before they awaken.
How difficult their tasks to remove Doom tokens are. Count investigations as more difficult than other symbols (peril, terror, lore) and multiples of a given icon as being more difficult than a single icon.

TL;DR

Easy: Azathoth, Yog-Sothoth and Hastur
Medium: Yig and Nyarlathotep
Hard: Shub-Niggurath, Ithaqua and Cthulhu

In Detail

Regardless of the Old One, once they've awakened they're very difficult to beat. Winning that way will always be tough! For that reason, I consider Azathoth to be one of the easiest to defeat. Sure, when he awakens, Azathoth destroys the world (which kind of sucks), but that's his only ability and with a huge 12 Doom required, the investigators have plenty of time to get their affairs in order and start going after Elder Signs.

Yog-Sothoth is also not too tough. Despite having a [do X] or be devoured attack, his ability (which is an alternative awakening trigger) is related to the Other World cards. The Other World cards typically have good rewards, but you can definitely win the game without them, so it's not such an issue to just ignore them.

Next is Hastur, who also has an Other World-related ability; his adds Doom. The obvious strategy there is: stay away from Other World cards. He has a brutal attack which could lose 2 Sanity with each attack once he's awakened. Without clue tokens to defend with, most players won't last more than two rounds. What's more, his task can be very difficult since it gets tougher when there are more monsters on the board (and he generates five himself). If he awakens, he's very tough to defeat, but, like Azathoth, he has a long Doom track making him not such a threat.

Yig and Nyarlathotep are more intermediate. Both have short Doom tracks (8 and 9 respectively) so you don't really have much prep. time before you have to start going after the Elder Signs. Also, they both have strong monster-synthesis. Yig pulls out five monsters. With only 8 Doom, that means they come out fast. Nyarlathotep's ability adds the incredibly tough Mask Monsters to the pool. They keep coming back and don't give out trophies and when they land in the wrong place can cause a real headache. When these two awaken, they're not too tough to reduce Doom for, but Yig devours any player that doesn't lose a Common item, a Unique item AND a Spell (a high price if they can even afford it!) when he awakens and Nyarlathotep's attack can devour players.

Shub-Niggurath is the toughest monster-related Old One. He pulls out seven monsters AND adds to the tasks for all of them. This can make some of them incredibly tough to defeat without items. Once he's awakened, his attacks can devour too, unless the players have trophies. Fortunately, with the number of monsters around, there should be plenty of trophies available by the time he comes out!

Ithaqua is very tough. His ability punishes any player who uses a Unique item or a Spell. It's almost impossible to play the game ignoring those two, so this will definitely sting you at some point. Over the course of the game, this can sap you quite a lot, and make players need to spend turns to heal up rather than completing tasks. When he awakens, there's a 50% chance that each item will be lost, and when he attacks he reduces two Stamina at a time. This focus on just one of the two health stats makes him especially tough for the low-Stamina characters.

And, appropriately enough, I consider Cthulhu to be one of the toughest. It's a toss-up whether he's tougher than Ithaqua and/or Shub-Niggurath, but I'll list him last because he's earned the prestige (:P). Straight out of the gate, he reduces everyone's maximum Stamina and Sanity by one. He's incredibly tough to defeat if he awakens, since he heals during every attack and slowly does unhealable (and unpreventable) damage to all the players. Fortunately, he has a long Doom track (11) and does damage very slowly when awoken, but the reduced maximum to the two health stats is such a significant, unignorable disadvantage that it makes him much tougher than others with long Doom tracks like Azathoth and Hastur.


In 7 Wonders, can you make an informed decision on which resources to draft? I am learning 7 Wonders from the rulebook but I do not see this question addressed. Is there a way to know which structures you can build by taking a specific resource other than memorizing the cost of each structure?

For example, let's say I am passed a manufactured goods card such as glass and I already can produce two wood and clay. Is there a way for me to tell which structures are opened up for me if I take that glass without memorizing which structures in the game require glass and some subset of two wood and clay?

The last pages in the rulebook have a tree showing all the structures, what they cost, when they become available, and which structures allow them to be built for free. I'm not aware of something similar for the expansions though.

That being said, if you're constantly analyzing all the cards that might become available in the future before making a pick, you're not going to be very popular with your group...


Seeker of Slaanesh Threat Card Clarification In Relic, this threat card says something along the lines of 'If you win, you may discard 1 corruption card. If you do not, gain 1 corruption card".

I interpreted this as if you win the battle, you have to discard one corruption card. If you choose not to (or if you have no corruption to discard), you must gain 1 corruption card.

Another one of the players claimed that it meant if you lose the battle, you draw 1 corruption card (in addition to losing 1 life).

Which interpretation is correct?

The card is not intended to include any extra "loss" effect. In other words, if you lose the battle you still just lose 1 Life like normal without taking any additional effect.

In addition, the statement of "If you do not…" in the "win" effect is in reference to whether or not you discarded a Corruption card from the first effect. If you have no Corruption cards to discard or choose not to discard one, you draw 1 Corruption card.


Are equip cards destroyed when you attack the equipped monster twice In duel links equip cards like Intrigue Shield and Amazoness Heirloom are destroyed when the equipped monster is attacked twice.

I want to know does this happen in the real game of yugioh or just in the game?

In duel links equip cards like intrigue shield and amazoness heirloom are destroyed when the equipped monster is attacked twice i want to know does this happen in the real game of yugioh or just in the game

This you are experiencing is part of such equip card effects. Both of them happen to have the ability to save the monster they are equipped once, so when your monster has to be hit twice before it goes.

From the Intrigue Shield, emphasis mine:

  Target 1 face-up monster you control; equip this card to that target. Once per turn, while the equipped monster is in Attack Position, it cannot be destroyed by battle. You take no battle damage from attacks involving it.

And from Amazoness Heirloom:

  Equip only to an "Amazoness" monster. Once per turn, that monster cannot be destroyed by battle. When the equipped monster attacks, after damage calculation, destroy the attack target.

So this is part of the YuGiOh ruling in general, more specifically, due to the specific card texts and effects you mention.