What does MLD stand for? I've seen some references to the term "MLD" but have failed to find a definition in any list of MTG terminology or slang.  What does this mean?

All of the top hits on Google refer to MLD as "mass land destruction", i.e. cards like Armageddon.

Or, to quote one of the moderators on MTGSalvation:

  MLD is mass land destruction, so generally speaking, any card that destroys multiple lands at once. This is usually indiscriminate, so Ruination is considered MLD while Sylvan Primordial is not. Back to Basics, and things that prevent you from using lands are not MLD, simply resource denial. At least, that's my take. I don't think the term has made its way into Webster's yet.

So you're right, it's not an official Magic: The Gathering term.


Open lead in a variant of Spades, where players must play a winner if able (CallBreak) CallBreak is an Indian variant of Spades, The rules differences from normal Spades are:

Solo (no partnerships)
Possible bids are from 1 to 8  (no Nil bids)
Players must play a stronger card than the current trick winner, if able.
Can lead first trick with a spade (No “spades broken” rule).
No bags penalty.
Game ends after 5 rounds.

My question is, what is a strong open lead in CallBreak?
While this question could be seen as opinion based, it is not so since I have access to a simulator of the game which allows me to compare clones of the same AI-agent that differ solely in the open lead, thus finding which open lead is better.

It is available to play in many mobile game applications and also at http://callbreak.com/.

I made several AI agents that plays CallBreak. My current strongest rule-based agent uses the following lead:

If starting with 5+ spades, lead them: lead boss, otherwise lead lowest.
Lead sidesuit Boss.
Lead strongest below the second-Boss from sidesuit with a second boss.
Lead low from Short sidesuit.
Lead Trash - low from worst suit.

Terminology:

Lead - the first card in the trick.
Open lead - the lead in the first trick of the round.
Boss - Strongest card in the suit, based on the cards that were already played. For example, the King is the Boss if the Ace was played.


Progenitor Mimic copying a creature with counters When Progenitor Mimic creates a copy of a creature like Nimbus Swimmer,  will Progenitor Mimic copy the counter that creature has on it?

No, counters are not copied. The Progenitor Mimic, when copying a Nimbus Swimmer, would enter the battlefield as a 0/0 creature and immediately go to the graveyard.

The Progenitor Mimic copies the Nimbus Swimmer's ability. However, X is zero everywhere except on the stack, so it will enter without +1/+1 counters and go to the graveyard the next time a player would gain priority.

  107.3f If a card in any zone other than the stack has an {X} in its mana cost, the value of {X} is treated as 0, even if the value of X is defined somewhere within its text.

The spirit of 107.3f is mirrored in the rules for copying objects. The value of X can be copied, but only when it's on a spell or ability on the stack.

  706.2. When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object's characteristics and, for an object on the stack, choices made when casting or activating it (mode, targets, the value of X, whether it was kicked, how it will affect multiple targets, and so on). The "copiable values" are the values derived from the text printed on the object (that text being name, mana cost, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, power, toughness, and/or loyalty), as modified by other copy effects, by its face-down status, and by "as . . . enters the battlefield" and "as . . . is turned face up" abilities that set power and toughness (and may also set additional characteristics). Other effects (including type-changing and text-changing effects), status, and counters are not copied.


What does it mean when you prevent a unit from attacking? For instance, the Illusionist has an ability:

  Target unfortified enemy does not attack this combat.

Does that mean it doesn't deal damage, or that it does not participate at all in combat?

IE: Can I still kill this unit even though it isn't attacking?

Of course you can kill it. That's the point of the Illusionist. The ability doesn't say "The enemy cannot combat", just that you can skip its attack phase.

I like to see it as

  "Your fellow illusionist cast a powerful spell that makes the monster
  believe you are elsewhere. The monster tries to attack you, but
  instead he attacks an empty space, making his attack so worthless you
  don't even need to block. Now you can strike back and put him out of his misery!"


When to buy cards costing 1 "Rune" in Ascension? I rarely purchase 1-Rune cards. Their effects are pretty poor, and I feel that these cards lower my deck strength (Note: I'm a recovering Dominion addict, and a strong believer in "trash early; trash often" strategies).

I might buy a 1-Rune card if:

I won't get through my deck before the game is over, or
There are quite a few on the board and I have a bunch to spend (here I'm
hoping that a higher cost card will come up).

When, if ever, is it a good idea to buy 1-Rune cards?

(Edit - I had confused "Rune" with "Honor". I mean the Resource that the Apprentice provides, and which is the COST of adding a card to your deck)

When, if ever, is it a good idea to buy 1-Rune cards?

Almost always. If Chapel in Dominion has taught you anything, it is that trashing the chaff from your deck makes you much more likely to draw the good cards in your deck. For this reason, you should almost always buy Void Initiate. This is especially true early in the game, when you have a high density of Apprentice & Militia cards that are the polluting your deck (which are also worth 0 Honor).

For similar reasons, you should almost always buy Arha Initiate. It gains you 1 Honor (half the cost of a Heavy Infantry, and a third the cost of a Mystic and replaces itself when drawn.

Lifebound Initiate isn't a bad card, but buying a copy isn't a no brainer like Void and Arha Initiate cards are. This card becomes much better with other Lifebound Cards in your deck, and other Void/(Enlightened) cards that strip your deck of the chaff/(draw more) and make you draw into your Lifebound cards more often

Mechana Initiate is the worst of the bunch. I would almost never buy this card. The flexibility of adding Runes or Power doesn't seem that great. Perhaps if enough Burrower Mark II (Draw 1 first Mechana) or Rocket Courier X-99 (When acquire Mechana put into play) and other Mechana cards are available in the center row, then I might consider it, but usually I would pass.

Regarding holding off on buying a Heavy Infantry instead of an Initiate to prevent an opponent gaining a better card

The only real way to calculate this would be to figure out how likely a good card would come up, when your opponent wouldn't have had access to the card if they had to buy the Initiate themselves. For example, imagine if our opponent has 5 Runes worth of cards in their hand and 2 Power. There are 48 cards left in the center deck, (one of each different name). Lets assume for the moment that all the cards showing in the center row have 3 Power or more, and are 6 Runes or more. By not buying the Initiate, you have the possibility of the new center card being a 5 Rune cost card, that your opponent wouldn't have been able to purchase if you hadn't removed the initiate from the center row for them. Since their are only 5 cards that cost 5 Runes ( Ascetic of the Lidless Eye, Flytrap Witch, Snapdragon, Watchmaker's Altar, Voidthirster) out of 48  5/48 = 10% of the time you help your opponent.

Technically speaking, 3 of those 5 cards only gain you 2 Honor anyway. If the game was close to ending, and no one would be able to shuffle anyway, those 3 wouldn't matter (they could have just bought a Mystic and Heavy Infantry instead). If you had exactly 2 Runes though, it would be more likely in this scenario that you would draw one of the 4x Initiates to replace the Initiate in the center row. So you should probably buy the Initiate anyway.


Where can I find a chart or diagram explaining Magic's turn structure? I'm looking for a turn structure diagram for Magic the Gathering to use for teaching new players.  There is a lot of information to keep track of in the turn: there is everything from the fact that the Upkeep Step comes before the Draw Step to when you can play abilities between the game actions of the Combat Phase.

For new players in particular, a graphical representation is particularly useful since I want them to gain an intuitive grasp of how the turn progresses as well as be able to reference particular details that become relevant.

I have seen charts that list the steps and phases in order but I need something more than that for teaching and reference.  Where can I find a chart that includes the order of steps/phases, when you can use various types of cards and abilities, and what game actions happen when?

Here is one I made:

(click for full size - hosted on 27ld.com)


Bang How to Use Ghost Cards How long do ghost cards stay in play. I was wondering if they were just a one time deal. Can you only get rid of them with a panic or cat bayou.

If you are asking about the "Ghost" card from the Valley of Shadows expansion, it says:

  Play in front of an eliminated player. That player returns to life without a character ability and no way to gain or lose life points. Besides this he plays as a normal player.

This means the targeted player returns to the game and since (s)he has this blue card on the table they don't need to discard it, therefore the only way to get rid of them is to remove the Ghost card from play (either discarding it or stealing it).


How do Captivating Vampire and Deadeye Navigator abilities interact? In a recent casual game, an opponent controlled a Captivating Vampire and had enough untapped Vampire creatures in play to use its ability.  I had a Deadeye Navigator on the battlefield, and on my turn I played a Craterhoof Behemoth, soulbonding it with the Deadeye Navigator.  Due to an abundance of mana, I also chose to activate its soulbond ability to exile the Craterhoof Behemoth and return it to the battlefield several times.

At the start of this process, my opponent declared his intent to tap five vampires and activate Captivating Vampire's ability to gain control of my Craterhoof Behemoth, preventing me from activating its ability.  We were unsure of how to proceed from there, as we should both theoretically be given the opportunity to react to each others activated abilities by activating our own creatures' activated abilities, each of which were at odds with the other in regards to who controlled the creature once everything resolved.

Can anyone explain to me how this scenario should have played out, or if there may have been different results depending on when and how each ability was activated?

Works like this

He taps his vamps and targets your fatty.
You respond by exiling the fatty and him coming back in.
His ability resolves, but because its target is no longer in play (it's a different instance) it fizzles.

So you can use that ability as evasion.


Will clone effects copy extra abilities applied to a creature? If not, why does Twinflame work? Let's say my opponent has out Akroma's Memorial, Asceticism, Darksteel Forge, or something similar that uses the word "have" to give abilities. If I use a Clone effect to copy a creature my opponent controls that has any of these extra abilities, will my clone also have Indestructble, Hexproof, or similar?

If not, why does the Clone of a token produced with Twinflame have haste?

No, they will not. You only get to copy what is actually printed on the card; not any information that has changed the properties of that object.

See this ruling on Clone:

  Clone copies exactly what was printed on the original creature and nothing more (unless that creature is copying something else or is a token; see below). It doesn't copy whether that creature is tapped or untapped, whether it has any counters on it or Auras attached to it, or any non-copy effects that have changed its power, toughness, types, color, or so on.

The actual rule that explains this:

  706.2. When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object’s characteristics and, for an object on the stack, choices made when casting or activating it (mode, targets, the value of X, whether it was kicked, how it will affect multiple targets, and so on). The "copiable values" are the values derived from the text printed on the object (that text being name, mana cost, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, power, toughness, and/or loyalty), as modified by other copy effects, by “as . . . enters the battlefield” and "as . . . is turned face up" abilities that set characteristics, and by abilities that caused the object to be face down. Other effects (including type-changing and text-changing effects), status, and counters are not copied.

Copying tokens works a little differently, just because there is no literal "card text" to copy. Instead, a token's copiable values are determined by the effect that created the token.

  110.5b The spell or ability that creates a token may define the values of any number of characteristics for the token. This becomes the token's "text." The characteristic values defined this way are functionally equivalent to the characteristic values that are printed on a card; for example, they define the token's copiable values. A token doesn't have any characteristics not defined by the spell or ability that created it.


If I cast Path to Exile on Leonin Arbiter, can the owner search without paying {2}? Leonin Arbiter says:

Players can't search libraries. Any player may pay {2} for that player to ignore this effect until end of turn.

If I cast Path to Exile on the Arbiter, its controller would usually be able to search for a basic land. Arbiter makes it so that they can't search the library unless they pay {2}, but the Path also removes Arbiter, and once it's no longer on the battlefield presumably its effect doesn't apply anymore. Can the Arbiter's controller search for a basic land or not?

Leonin Arbiter's ability stops working immediately when it's exiled, even during the resolution of a spell or ability. If you exile it with Path to Exile, Leonin's controller may search their library whether or not they paid the cost this turn.
Leonin Arbiter's ability is a static ability that modifies the game rules.

604.1. Static abilities do something all the time rather than being activated or triggered. They are written as statements, and they’re simply true.

It creates its effect while Leonin Arbiter is on the battlefield. As soon as the Arbiter has left the battlefield, it stops working. Spells and abilities resolve all their steps in the order written.

608.2c The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written. [..]

So by the time Path of Exile's resolution comes to the "search your library" step, Leonin Arbiter is already exiled, its ability no longer applies, and its controller may search their library.


MTG: creature and enchantment triggered to opposite effects The situation is my Mortus Strider has been enchanted with Unholy Indenture.

The creature has

  when it dies, return it to his owner’s hand

The enchantment says

  When enchanted creature dies, return that card to the battlefield under your control with a +1/+1 counter on it.

Who gets the creature? Me or my rival?

Does the creature ability trigger before or after enchantment?

Assuming you control both the Mortus Strider and the Unholy Indenture, you get to choose which ability will resolve first. If your opponent controls the Unholy Indenture, it depends on whose turn it is.

The position of spells and abilities on the stack decide the order in which they resolve. Players can only cast one spell at a time, so their order is never in question. However, multiple abilities can trigger at the same time. When that happens, there are rules how to determine their position on the stack:

  603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities they control on the stack in any order they choose. [..]

"APNAP" means "active player, non-active player". The "active" player is the one whose turn it is. If multiple players make a choice at the same time, the active player makes the first choice, followed by all others in turn order.

Therefore, assuming you control both the Mortus Strider and the Unholy Indenture, you get to choose the order of these abilities on the stack. You put the ability you want to resolve first on top of the stack.

If you control only one of those two and your opponent controls the other, then the order depends on whose turn it is. If it's your turn, you put the ability of the object you control on the stack first, and your opponent's ability second. Therefore, your opponent's ability will resolve first. If it's your opponent's turn, the opposite happens.


How is a gold rune different from a silver rune? In this game, it's possible to earn runes and there are some special golden runes you earn by doing extra special stuff! Are the uses of the two types of runes different? So runes can be used to buy spells to help you out. Does this work in the same way even if the runes are gold instead of silver?

Note that what I call runes can also be considered shields/shield tokens.

The ISBN of this game is 978-1-58994-706-1 (this should help in distinguishing versions).

A similar question has been asked at BGG:
The collected wisdom is:

You can buy Gandalf cards with either the gold or the silver, or a combination of the two. Any time you need to discard runes, you can discard either or both.
The silver runes are gained through the spaces on the board, and you always gain one rune per space. The gold runes are stacked face-down (or otherwise randomized) so that you do not know which value of rune you are getting until it is picked. Only a few spaces on the board have you picking a gold rune.
Runes are good for scoring, Gandalf cards and can also be spend to avoid effects of at least one event. And 1 rune can be used to avoid a specific event tile (together with some other stuff). Might be some I have missed.


What are good tips and suggestions for first-time Junta players? We'll be pulling Junta off the shelf for the first time in years, and our group will consist of players who haven't played since the last time years ago, and players who have never played it at all.

I've done a couple obvious things for setup - separated cards and chits into separate zipbags for ease of finding things. What other things can I do to help the game go smoothly?

edit: worth mentioning that we're expecting 8-10 people, so we plan to use the extra positions (Foreign Minister, Farm & Labor, Secretary of War).

I guess the best thing you could do is to make sure there is at least one person really familiar with the rules, ideally someone who have played this game not so long ago. It's great to hear you are making effort to make the game more enjoyable for other players, I would like play a game with such game host. So, with your attitude I would say you're half way there.

As I said, I think the best thing you can do is to learn the rules really well, try going over them in your head (prepare yourself for explaining the rules). If possible, try to play the game yourself a few times before the event. I tried to find you a place to play Junta online, but all i got is PBEM version.

This seems to me as a good rules refresher for Junta.


What should the Overlord change when adding a fifth hero in Descent: Journey Into the Dark, 2nd Ed.? My board game group and I started Descent: Journey Into the Dark, 2nd Ed. last night. This group usually fluctuates between 4 and 6 players and this session we had five, the upper limit for the game. Everyone had a great time beating me to a pulp, as I was the Overlord; the heroes won all three encounters with ease. Next week the group wants to play this again. The problem is that we are probably going to have the 6th player back. If this happens, I need to increase the difficulty in order to have a fair shot at being effective as the Overlord.

What are changes that I can make to increase the difficulty for five heroes while still keeping the game fairly balanced? I already feel like the game is stacked against the overlord pretty heavily, although we did the easiest encounters to get a feel for the game, so maybe that changes by the end. Some suggestions I've read:

Increasing monster health
Taking a "short turn" after the 3rd hero takes their actions. This consists of  drawing an Overlord card and taking actions with one monster group.

We do not want the Overlord to be controlled by two players, so I'm looking specifically for ways to play with five heroes. Also note this is for 2nd Edition.

We've been playing with six players (5 heroes + overlord). The only changes we've made are to:

Play all white minion monsters with red stats. They still count as white minions for hero powers.
Add an additional treasure.
When calculating the boss monster's HP, increase it by one hero.

I think it's a little bit easy for the heros, but it's been close.


What's the difference between "exile" and "destroy"? There is different terminology on MTG cards: "exile" and "destroy"? I do not quite understand the difference. When a card (like Angelic Purge) states:

  Exile target artifact, creature or enchantment

Does this mean that that card is going to the graveyard, or it goes to the "exile zone", i.e. can not be played this round anymore and any circumstances?

Exile and the Graveyard are two different zones in magic. "Destroy" puts a card into the graveyard, and "Exile" puts it in the exile zone.

Why does the distinction matter? Well...

Some cards can retrieve things from your graveyard, like Eternal Witness. The cards that can get them from exile are far fewer, but Pull from Eternity comes to mind.
Cards in your graveyard are used as a resource by certain spells or abilities, most commonly spells with "Delve", like Treasure Cruise.
Many cards have abilities that only work when they are in the graveyard. These are primarily used to recur themselves from the graveyard, like Scrapheap Scrounger.
Eldrazi "Processors" from Battle for Zendikar block have bonus effects if you move an opponent's card from exile to their graveyard, so getting their cards to exile in the first place is valuable. For example, see Wasteland Strangler.
"Regenerate" creates a shield that protects a permanent from destruction, but not from being exiled.
"Destroy" will not be able to destroy a permanent with "indestructible" (e.g. Athreos, God of Passage), but "exile" will work.
Abilities that trigger off a creature/permanent "dying" (like on Blood Artist) only trigger if it goes to the graveyard from the battlefield. Permanents being exiled from the battlefield won't trigger the ability.

(It is of course worth noting that there are far more cards in magic that let you interact with the graveyard than those that let you interact with the exile zone. This is why effects that exile are generally considered more powerful than effects that merely destroy)


Solemnity + chronozoa = Infinte Loop = Draw? I'm building a Solemnity deck. What will happen if, with solemnity in play, I cast a Chronozoa?

Vanishing 3 (This creature enters the battlefield with three time counters on it. At the beginning of your upkeep, remove a time counter from it. When the last is removed, sacrifice it.)
When Chronozoa dies, if it had no time counters on it, create two tokens that are copies of it.

Is the game a draw?

The exact rule for vanishing, very similar to what's in the reminder text, says:

  When the last time counter is removed from this permanent, sacrifice it.

If you have a Solemnity in play, no time counters are ever put on Chronozoa. You don't put some on then remove them, you just never put any on. So you never trigger that ability.

If you wanted to create an infinite loop here, you just need to add a way to repeatedly destroy/sacrifice the Chronozoas. If you wanted a voluntary loop that you could stop at any time, so that you can just make a zillion Chronozoas without forcing a draw, any free sacrifice outlet would work. If you for some reason want the game to be a draw, you'd need something forced, like a few copies of Curse of Death's Hold or Heartless Summoning so that your Chronozoas are 0/0 and die immediately.


Which is the "Action Phase"? A number of cards in the Starcraft Board Game (I believe it's exclusive to those from the Brood War expansion) refer to actions to be done during, or after, the "Action Phase".

The official instructions list only three phases; Planning, Execution, and Regrouping.

From context, I would guess that "Action Phase" is synonymous to "Execution Phase" (many of the cards seem overpowered otherwise), but I was hoping to find an official answer rather than conjecture: Which phase is the "Action Phase?"

You're right that the Action Phase is unique to the Brood Wars Expansion. A quick search of the phrase "Action Phase" in the digital version of both rule books only turned up results in the Brood Wars version.

Like you, I found a lot of people saying that the Action Phase was synonymous with the Execution Phase (example here). The most convincing piece of evidence is straight from the Fantasy Flight Games forums. This question is answered by saying that the Action Phase is identical to the Execution Phase, but since it's on the game designer's website, I would imagine a moderator would have corrected it had it been wrong. It looks like questions are answered by people from FFG at least occasionally, so they are probably looking in on rules questions to make sure information was correct. Not the solid answer you were looking for, but I think it confirms the two are the same.


How to give checkmate in the game of xiangqi? There is a board game called xiangqi. It is also known as Chinese chess. I have found a very nice website which allows people to play xiangqi with computer. This site uses western pieces. http://www.springfrog.com/games/chess/chinese/

I have learnt all xiangqi rules from Wikipedia. I have no problems with understanding them. I even know a little about xiangqi tactics (forks, pins, skewers, checks etc.). And I know the value of each Chinese chess piece.
My problem is I cannot win. I played nearly about 300 games, and I tried to checkmate my opponent (computer) but I constantly fail. Computer always checkmates me despite playing on easiest difficulty.

It seems I have no idea how to give checkmate to the opponent, unlike standard chess where I have very good knowledge of checkmate patterns. In xiangqi, I have almost no idea how to use my general, and I usually don't know how to protect him. I have no idea what exactly I should do to opponent's general either. Sometimes I manage to trade chariots and cannons but not horses.

Is there anyone who can help me? I know that in xiangqi I can also win by stalemating my opponent... But my wish is to give a checkmate at least once. And I want to play normal games, without any handicaps.

The best pieces for giving checkmate are the chariots and cannon that move in straight lines and at long range. Horses can be used, but only at close range, which is to say that they are vulnerable to counterattack by the guards and elephants. It's helpful to realize that the two leaders are limited to nine points of their "headquarters."

The "textbook" method of checkmate is the double cannon attack. If you manage to get both cannons on the vertical line in front of the enemy leader with the other soldiers removed, and the other pieces in their original position, the leader can't move sideways because he is surrounded by the guards. The "back" cannon fires over the forward cannon at the leader, and the leader can't block it with a guard or elephant, because then the forward cannon will fire over it.

Another thing you need to know is that the two leaders can't be on the same vertical line with no pieces between them. So you might use a chariot to drive the other leader to one side, while your own leader controls the central file (after the soldiers have been exchanged), and then movie the chariot to check and checkmate the leader on one of the side files of the two headquarters.


Agricola - Brushwood Collector + Carpenter's Parlor combination So, let's say I have the improvement "Carpenter's Palror", which allows wooden rooms to cost 2 wood and 2 reed.

Then see Brushwood Collector: Each time you renovate or build a room, you can replace the required 1 or 2 reed with a total of 1 wood.

If you interpret this combination in the order Parlor then Brushwood:

It costs 2 wood and 2 reed, then the 2 reed is replaced with 1 wood. So it now costs 3 wood.

In the other order:

It now costs 6 wood in total (brushwood), then the entire cost is set to 2 wood and 2 weed (2 wood and 2 reed).

Which is the appropriate interpretation?

You could build a wooden room for 3 wood.

Carpenter's Parlor sets the base cost, and Brushwood Collector allows you to pay part of the cost differently. Essentially, they don't even interact, since the Parlor is changing the wood cost of wooden rooms and the Collector is changing the reed cost of building/renovation.


Can the Collapsed Room land you in the Mystic Elevator? During a play-through this weekend, we stumbled on the odd happenstance of the Collapsed Room falling into the Mystic Elevator when drawn from the pile.

Is there any rules related to this situation that would somehow invalidate this?  I'm of the opinion that it would be fine and you could magically fall through the floor up into the roof where the elevator could currently be placed.

From my copy of the rulebook:

  If an effect of another tile or card leads to the Mystic Elevator (such as the Collapsed Room or Secret Passage), the token placed by that effect stays on the Mystic Elevator tile even if it moves.

Emphasis mine.

It doesn't explicitly say that the token remains functional, but that clearly seems to be the intent.

I've also been able to find a reference to an FAQ clarification that says much the same thing, although I have been unable to find the FAQ itself.

  Mystic Elevator -- If the Collapsed Room, Secret Passage, Secret Stairs, or Revolving Wall lead to the Mystic Elevator, does the counter stay there even when the elevator moves?
  Yes. It's Mystic, after all.


If there are no prey conditions, does an enemy get assigned to whomever the lead investigator wishes? If I draw a monster that does not have prey instructions, and I have both my investigator and the lead investigator at my location, is it the lead investigator's choice who gets engaged with it?  The rules don't explicitly say under Enemy Engagement in the Rules Reference (page 10):

  If there are multiple investigators at the same location as a ready unengaged enemy, follow the enemy’s prey instructions to determine which investigator is engaged.

Then under Prey on page 17:

  If an enemy that is about to automatically engage an investigator at its location has multiple options of whom to engage, that enemy engages the investigator who best meets its “prey” instructions (if multiple investigators are tied in meeting these instructions, the lead investigator may decide among them)

So, while a card might not actually have a Prey section, can we take this to mean that such cards will be up to the lead investigator to place?

Close. If you draw an enemy (e.g., from the mythos encounter deck or your own deck), then prey instructions are always ignored -- the monster automatically engages whichever investigator drew the card.  The lead investigator has no say in the matter.

However, if there are two investigators at a location, and an enemy moves into that location (e.g., from the hunter keyword) and has no prey instructions, then the lead investigator can choose who the monster engages with.

In the RRG, this is covered under the event details for the Mythos phase:

  If the card is an enemy, spawn it following any spawn instruction the
  card bears. (A spawn instruction is any text bearing a "spawn"
  precursor.) If the encountered enemy has no spawn instruction, the
  enemy spawns engaged with the investigator encountering the card and
  is placed in that investigator's threat area.


Does "one non-Logos card" on Phase Shift limit me, or just enable me? If I play 2 Phase Shifts in the same turn, can I play two non-Logos cards? If I play Wild Wormhole, resulting in playing a non-Logos card, can I still use Phase Shift to play another non-Logos card?

It doesn't limit, it only enables. For every Phase Shift you play, you're going to be able to play one non-Logos card that turn. Here are some additional quotes from emails sent by Brad Andres (developer at FFG):

  The Wild Wormhole is creating it own play permission for
  the card it is playing from the top of the deck separate from the play
  permission that the Phase shift is creating. Meaning that you can
  still play a non-Logos card from playing the phase shift.

FFG also addressed this in this video.


Why is it important that the digits be all different? In standard Bulls and Cows, the digits of the chosen number must be all different.

Is this rule crucial for the "playability" of the game? In other words: if I ignore this rule and allow choosing a code with some identical digits - does it make the game to hard or too easy for the guesser?

As per your linked wikipedia article, a later game based on the same concept is Mastermind. And from that game's Wikipedia article:

  Duplicates and blanks are allowed depending on player choice, so the player could even choose four code pegs of the same color or four blanks.

So no, it's not crucial. It makes the game harder in that there are more possible solutions.


Are Planeswalkers "Legendary"? The new Amonkhet card Lay Bare the Heart says it can remove a non-land, non-legendary card from the opponent's hand. I'm curious if it can hit planeswalkers. I know they suffer from the "legendary rule", but as they don't explicitly say "legendary" on the card I'm inclined to believe that they can be targeted. Does anyone have an official ruling?

The rules for planeswalkers changed with the release of Ixalan on September 29, 2017, so the second part of this answer is no longer correct, but is left for posterity.
With the release of Ixalan all planeswalkers have the Legendary supertype (with all previous ones receiving errata to add it to existing cards), and the Planeswalker Uniqueness Rule has been removed.
This change means that they are no longer be a valid choice for Lay Bare the Heart since Ixalan came out.

They can be chosen with Lay Bare the Heart because Planeswalkers are not Legendary. While the 'Legend Rule' and the 'Planeswalker Uniqueness Rule' have similar effects, they are not the same, and they look at different information on the card.
The Legend Rule looks at the name of the card, so you can have Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius and Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind on the battlefield at the same time even though they are the same character because the card name is different. However you could not have Nissa Revane and Nissa, Steward of Elements on the battlefield at the same time because the Planeswalker Uniqueness Rule looks at the planeswalker type and they both have the planeswalker type 'Nissa'.

704.5j If a player controls two or more planeswalkers that share a planeswalker type, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners’ graveyards. This is called the “planeswalker uniqueness rule.”
704.5k If a player controls two or more legendary permanents with the same name, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners’ graveyards. This is called the “legend rule.”


In what situation is Last Word really relevant? Last Word reads

This spell can’t be countered.
Counter target spell.

But if I were to be using another counterspell in any situation, couldn't I just choose to target the original spell again? There's no reason for me to be forced to target Last Word with, say, another Cancel. So in what situations is Last Word's first line really important?

Player A casts a spell that essentially reads "You win the game". Player B casts Last word to counter it. Player A has 20 counterspells ready, but they won't save his game-winning spell.

Last Word's uncounterability is less useful if it counters another counterspell because, as you say, the opponent can just target the original spell. But if the opponent is the one starting with the valuable spell, Last Word all but guarantees that the valuable spell gets countered.

Also, there can be many different variations of counterspells with various restrictions and benefits. If Player A casts any creature spell, and player B has Counterspell and Negate, player B has to use Counterspell. If player A protects their creature spell with Last Word, player B's Negate is useless because it can't target the creature spell.


If I use a colorless commander, can I use colored spells? In Commander, your General's color identity defines what other cards you get to use, but what happens when you have a colorless General? Can you play any other colors of cards (WUBRG), or are you stuck playing only colorless?

You can only use cards with a colorless color identity with a commander that has a colorless color identity.
Rule 903 has the rules for the commander format, and the following subrules are relevant here:

903.4. The Commander variant uses color identity to determine what cards can be in a deck with a certain commander. The color identity of a card is the color or colors of any mana symbols in that card’s mana cost or rules text, plus any colors defined by its characteristic-defining abilities (see rule 604.3) or color indicator (see rule 204).

903.5. Each Commander deck is subject to the following deck construction rules.

903.5c A card can be included in a Commander deck only if every color in its color identity is also found in the color identity of the deck’s commander.

"Colorless" color identity means that the card has no colors in its color identity. If you tried to put a card in your deck that had any colors in its cost or rules text or indicator, then it would have a color in its color identity that is not in the commander's color identity.


Do you score points for claiming a route in Ticket to Ride Pennsylvania? Do you score points for claiming a route in Ticket to Ride Pennsylvania as you do in all other variants of the Ticket to Ride game?

The rules aren't explicit and there is no scoring guide.

In Ticket to Ride, the expansions rules feature the differences with the base game ones.

If the routes were not meant to be scored, it would be stated in the rules for that map.

On the Pennsylvania map, you score using the same points scheme as usual:

1 space   --> 1pt
2 spaces --> 2pts
3 spaces --> 4pts
4 spaces --> 7pts
5 spaces --> 10pts
6 spaces --> 15pts
7 spaces --> 18pts

This backed by Alan R. Moon himself on BGG


Are there any conditions or situations that prevent a player from choosing to be lead investigator? The lead investigator may pass the token to another player. Are there any situations or conditions that prevent a player from receiving the token? I initially wondered this when an investigator received a delayed condition, concluded that he could be lead, then wondered if any case at all ever prevented an investigator from being granted lead.

The rulebook states:

  At the end of each Mythos Phase, the Lead Investigator may pass the Lead Investigator token to any player of his choice.

Therefore no, according to the rules.

As an added point. If the Lead investigator wanted to pass it to a dead character this would happen:

  If the defeated investigator has the Lead Investigator token, he must pass the token to an investigator of his choice.

But since New Investigators are chosen at the end of the Mythos phase as well you could always ensure that New Investigator choice takes precedence to prevent any chance of the dead player being left out.


Ultimate Werewolf Deluxe Edition vs One Night Ultimate Werewolf Recently played One Night Ultimate Werewolf, but it is sold out on the website, and currently not in stock near me. That said, Ultimate Werewolf Deluxe Edition is in stock, but I can't tell the difference other than I believe there is a difference.

Is it possible to play "One Night Ultimate Werewolf" with "Ultimate Werewolf Deluxe Edition" and if so, how? If not, why?

They are actually quite different games. Ultimate Werewolf is a version of the party game known more widely as simply Werewolf, or Mafia. In its most basic form, there is an informed minority (the titular werewolves or mafia) and an uninformed majority (the town). The game is played over several rounds, or Days (or Day/Night cycles to be more accurate), where each Day everyone votes on a player to eliminate via lynch and each night the werewolves choose a (non-werewolf) player to eliminate via a "night kill", which then repeats until one side has eliminated the threat of the other. It generally requires a moderator who knows the roles of all players, especially when some players may have additional powers (such as a seer who can find out whether another player is town or werewolf, or a doctor who can save someone from being killed at night).

ONUW is a game that is essentially played in a single round, with the aim of distilling a lot of the discussion and voting of Werewolf and removing the player elimination factor. In addition, it adds roles that mean that players may not be entirely sure of their role once discussion starts. It still has the informed minority versus the uninformed majority, but it then takes things in quite a different direction and it contains some very different roles (as well as some similar ones).

Technically, you could possibly use the role cards from one to play the other, but you'd then need to know enough of the rules to explain what each role actually does since the card's text would often be completely inaccurate for what the role does in the other game.


When should I choose an Explore card in Race For The Galaxy? On a VERY basic level, my RFTG choices work like this:

  Pick Develop if you want to build a development

  Pick Settle if you want to settle a world

  Pick Trade if you want to trade

  Pick 2x VPs if you want to get extra VPs from your consumption of goods

  Pick Produce if you want to produce goods

  Pick Explore if you want to ?????????

Where do the 2 Explore cards come in? I guess the obvious choice is "If you need more cards and have no better way of getting them." I've gone through a few games without ever picking explore because it essentially gives you a 1 card advantage if you pick the 'look at 1 more, keep 1 more' card and an advantage of maybe getting a slightly better card than your opponents with the 'look at 5 more cards' card. Both Develop and Settle give you a 1 card advantage at the very least, both Consume phases can lead to big card advantages, and Produce can set you up for an amazing next turn and sometimes give you card advantage in itself.

Is my analysis roughly correct? With all these things going against it, when should I pick each different Explore card in my phase selection? It seems to be a desperate pick when you have virtually no other options, so at the very least you can be happy with getting a net advantage of 1 card over all of your opponents, or are hoping for a certain card, have a lot of cards in you hand already, and have no better options.

Your analysis is not wrong, but it is a little simplistic, mostly because you are ignoring the existence of the other players, and the state of their games.

Explore is the only option that doesn't depend on anything else. You can always play an Explore. Yes, it's not as efficient as Trading. But Trading isn't always possible. If you've run out of cards, or your cards just plain suck, then Explore is pretty handy.
Explore prevents your opponent leeching, and taking advantage of your action. For example, an opponent playing a military strategy may be waiting for you to choose Settle, so he can dump a military world for free. Playing several Explores in a row can force opponents to choose actions they would rather you chose for them.
Similarly, you don't want to choose Settle, and settle something rubbish, if that gives your opponent the opportunity to play something amazing. So if an opponent has many cards in hand, or has a clear strategy developing based around obvious Phase choices, then you're going to want to avoid those when you can. Explore is often a good alternative.
Explore is crucial if you think an opponent is planning to Develop or Settle, and you want to take advantage of that, but don't have a card of that type in hand, or, even worse, you have a card you want to play, but don't have enough to pay for it. In this case the fact Explore happens before anything else is really valuable.
Cards that generate Explore bonuses, particularly things like Research Labs, can make Explore much more lucrative for you than for anyone else. These also allow you to leech other people's Explores. Obviously, they will try to avoid this, but as we've noted, often Explore is the only option, particularly early game, or with rash plays that have emptied one's hand unhelpfully.
In general, Explore +1/+1 makes more sense in the early game, because your hand is smaller, and later on you will usually have alternative ways to generate card flow. Explore +5 makes more sense as a later-game play, particularly to maximise your strategy. For example, finding large military worlds, getting more blue production worlds, finding that killer 6 development etc. are all things that might justify a late-game Explore.

So, overall, while Explore is often not what you want to do, it does have wide versatility, and can occasionally be fantastic. I think careful tactical use of Explore is an essential tool.


The Master combinations in Dr Who the Card Game When attacking with The Master it says that it can be combined with any enemy card.

So when I place The Master first: does it mean I can add any enemy?

If so, then when I attack with a certain enemy and place The Master with it in succeeding turns, can I still add another card to combine with The Master?

Based on the rulebook it stated there

  You can add Enemy cards to one of your attacks, as long as the card
  or cards you play can be legally played with the cards already in
  place

Based on my understanding, if The Master is already in play along with another enemy, the enemy card you are going to add should be legally played with the cards. (meaning all of the cards) including the other enemy cards with The Master.


An activated ability of a card that affects that card If you have a Fleecemane Lion that is enchanted by Shielding Plax, and you pay to activate the ability Monstrosity 1, then would the creature fail to become monstorous and would not receive it's +1/+1?

Monstrosity does not target, so it is not affected by Shielding Plax. Something is only a "target" if the spell or ability uses the word "target" in its text, or the rules text for a keyword ability, or if it is an Aura spell, which is always targeted.

  114.10a Just because an object or player is being affected by a spell or ability doesn’t make that object or player a target of that spell or ability. Unless that object or player is identified by the word “target” in the text of that spell or ability, or the rule for that keyword ability, it’s not a target.

Shielding Plax only prevents the creature from being targeted, so it has no affect at all on things like Monstrosity.


When does Hushwing Gryff prevent abilities from triggering? Can you play a Hushwing Gryff as the last card from resolving Eureka and stop abilities from triggering? Or does it only prevent the triggers of creatures put into the battlefield after it?

All enters-the-battlefield abilities on permanents that entered the battlefield before Hushwing Griff entered will trigger. Hushwing Griff will only stop the abilities of permanents that are put into play after it.

Eureka describes a sequence of events: each player, in turn order, puts permanents into play. Any triggered abilities on those permanents will trigger (or not) based on the state of the game as it enters. This is confirmed in a ruling by a level 2 judge in this forum post.

An article on Gathering Magic has a more directly relevant explanation involving humility:

  Eureka and Hypergenesis however both work a bit differently, as they allow players to take turns putting cards onto the battlefield. This means that there is a window for a permanent to exist on the table without Humility in play, even if it is the second card that enters the battlefield from this effect. So, if Angel of Despair is put in by the active player and the ability triggers. Non-active player puts Humility into play, there has been a period of time where Angel of Despair exists without Humility, although no future creatures that come into play off this spell will have abilities trigger, Angel of Despair's ability will trigger and can even target Humility. This works because while the ability has triggered, it cannot be put on the stack until a player can receive priority, which cannot happen until either Hypergenesis or Eureka has finished resolving.


Can an opponent folding make you go from probable winner to probable loser? I was watching a World Series of Poker video, and noticed a strange thing with the percentages that each player had for their chance to win the hand.

Before the flop, after all but 3 players had folded, the percentages were like this:

Player A: 9♥9♣ - 35%

Player B: A♦Q♦ - 40%

Player C: J♥10♦ - 25%

Player C folded, and immediately player A went to 56%, while player B went to 44%. Player B was the favorite based on his cards, but after player C folded, player A became the favorite. How is this possible?

Here is the video in question, at the relevant timestamp:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZP3OrtcO-Q&feature=youtu.be&t=1m22s

Suppose the five community cards wind up being 9♦, 10♥, 10♣, J♠, and 3♠. Then C would win with a better full house than A, but A's full house is better than B's pair of 10's. Before C folds, this would count towards his 25% win chance; after he folds it counts for A's 56%. When C folds, we're essentially taking his 25% chance to win, and splitting it up between the two remaining players. The issue then becomes that the cards that help C out also help A more than they help B, so most of C's 25% goes to A rather than B after C folds.


Blood Moon and Arixmethes Spoilers for Commander 2018 have begun, and one card in particular has caught my attention:

This card is like no other I know. What may be truly interesting is how it interacts with the enchantment Blood Moon:

Here's a blog post about this by a level 3 judge. I don't agree. How I see this interaction is as follows:

Blood Moon is on the battlefield. I cast Arixmethes.
Arixmethes resolves and enters the battlefield. As it must exist on the battlefield with at least one slumber counter in order to be a land, Blood Moon does not see it until after it has entered the battlefield as a land, tapped, and with five slumber counters. So far, I agree with the blog post.
Blood Moon finally recognizes Arixmethes as a nonbasic land. Arixmethes loses all subtypes and abilities and gains Mountain as a subtype (by Gatherer's second ruling on Blood Moon: "Nonbasic lands will lose any other land types and abilities they had.").
The effect that makes Arixmethes a land as long as it has a slumber counter is an ability (the example for rule 112.2a is very similar: "Example: '[This creature] can't block' is an ability."). This effect is therefore lost, and Arixmethes is no longer a land.
Immediately, Blood Moon begins ignoring Arixmethes. The ability that makes Arixmethes a land is regained, and Arixmethes becomes a land once more.
Repeat ad infinitum.

All of these happen too quickly for any player to do anything. The way I see it, Arixmethes and Blood Moon on the battlefield simultaneously will immediately end the game in a draw (unless, of course, Arixmethes has no counters).

Is there an error in my thinking?

The blog post is correct. What you're missing is the system that governs the order in which those effects are applied, commonly known as the "layer system", and officially known as Interaction of continuous effects

Put simply, the layer system creates a fixed order in which continuous effects apply to an objects, so there are no loops like you think you're seeing, and there is a single fixed answer to how any set of continuous effects apply to an object.

In this particular case, both of the effects modify the type of the object, so they both apply in the same layer. Then we have to consider timestamps and dependencies to determine the order in which to apply them. The relevant dependency rules say this:

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

  613.7a An effect is said to “depend on” another if (a) it’s applied in the same layer (and, if applicable, sublayer) as the other effect (see rules 613.1 and 613.3); (b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to; and (c) neither effect is from a characteristic-defining ability or both effects are from characteristic-defining abilities. Otherwise, the effect is considered to be independent of the other effect.
  613.7b An effect dependent on one or more other effects waits to apply until just after all of those effects have been applied. If multiple dependent effects would apply simultaneously in this way, they’re applied in timestamp order relative to each other. If several dependent effects form a dependency loop, then this rule is ignored and the effects in the dependency loop are applied in timestamp order.

Before either effect is applied Blood Moon's effect has a dependency on Arixmethes' effect, because Arixmethes' effect changes what Blood Moon's effect applies to, specifically making it apply to Arixmethes. Arixmethes' effect does not depend on Blood Moon's effect, because applying Blood Moon's first will do nothing, because at that point in the evaluation, Arixmethes is not a land.

So, we apply Arixmethes' effect first, then Blood Moon's effect, and we end up with the result described in the linked blog post: Arixmethes is a Legendary Land - Mountain that can tap to add {R} with no other abilities.


What happens to an investigator who arrives at a gate already explored by another? Say Investigator A goes through a gate and comes back to Arkham, and Investigator B moves to that location. What happens, assuming A goes before B?

Here are some cases:

If A moves to Arkham on his movement phase, then B moves to the gate location, B can hand A an elder sign to then use to seal the gate, correct?

If A moves to Arkham on his movement phase, then sits at that location and, in a later turn, B comes to the gate to give him an elder sign but is first to act in that turn, then before A gets a chance to seal the gate, B gets drawn into the other world, correct?

It seems pretty straight-forward as long as we observe the phase to phase step-wise turns, but I wanted to be sure that such a plan, to pass items to help someone who wanted to seal a gate, would work and that care needed to be taken how and when investigators arrive at the gate location.

Yes, you're correct about both.

Until the Arkham encounter phase, it doesn't really matter that there's a gate there. So you can do whatever you like during movement, including exchanging items.

When you arrive at the Arkham encounter phase, each player in a location with a gate will be drawn in if they haven't been through the gate before. So depending on turn order, as you say, either the player who's been through can close/seal the gate first, or the other player will be drawn in.


Are Magic The Gathering Proxy cards illegal to print? I tried to print a bunch of Magic the Gathering Proxy cards through my local Costco.  (An MTG Cube)

They called me up and told me that those cards are copyrighted material and that it would be illegal to print them.

I have seen people use proxy cards so I just assumed that Wizards of the Coast allowed printing cards that are clearly not the real card (on photo paper and not the right size).

Is there an official ruling from Wizards of the Coast on this?  If it is allowed is there something I can show my local CostCo?

Seems that Wizards Of the Coast classifies it as full on illegal unless the card is made by a judge in a tournament when the original card is damaged.

  Policy Regarding Proxies and Counterfeits
  Proxies

  Proxies are substitute cards created solely by judges in sanctioned tournaments pursuant to the official tournament rules. These substitutes are allowed when authorized game cards become unplayable during a sanctioned tournament because of damage or excessive wear. Proxies do not include any graphical reproduction of their intended substitutes.

  Counterfeits

  Counterfeits are copies or reproductions of actual Wizards trading cards, whether or not they are identified as non-genuine. The creation and distribution of counterfeits violate United States and international copyright laws and negatively affects the integrity of Wizards’ trading card games. Counterfeits are strictly prohibited, even for personal, non-commercial use.

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/TCG/Resources.aspx?x=magic/rules/cardpolicy


Do I need to reveal card added with the Archived Memories? I've got no face-down cards in the archives. I play Archived Memories. Do I need to show card I add to the HQ with it? Or the only thing runner can do is to watch the archives after this and figure out the missing card?

Short answer: yes you must show the card and they will see what it is.

Visible cards remain faceup when they go to the Archive.

The Corporation must show cards chosen by effects to the Runner without changing the face-up/down status, and if it is faceup the Runner will be able to see what it is.

Only facedown cards remain hidden from the Runner unless a game effect instructs you to reveal one.

If you were to have facedown cards in the Archive your opponent would see that you picked a facedown card but not see the front of it.

From the official rules

  Revealing Cards

  If a Corporation card is not visible to the Runner when it is trashed
  or discarded, then it is sent to Archives facedown. If a Corporation
  card is visible to the Runner when it is trashed or discarded, it is
  sent to Archives faceup.

  If a specific card or card type in an inactive state is chosen by a
  card effect, the Corporation must show that card to the Runner without
  changing its faceup or facedown status. The Corporation only reveals
  the card if it was facedown and the effect says he must reveal it.


In bridge, does it make sense to "tighten" or 'loosen" up on bidding depending on vulnerability? For instance, the minimum standard seems to be about 12 points to open with a five card suit, or 13 points with a four card minor. That makes sense with equal vulnerability (both vulnerable or both not).

Suppose you're vulnerable and they're not. Are there players that would pass 12-13 point hands, needing 13-14 points (depending on suit length), because of the greater penalties for going down.

Conversely, at favorable vulnerability, (they are, you're) not, would you shade your opening requirements down to about 11 points to try to catch up?

For opening suit bids no, emphatically not. The reason is simple mathematics in that when you open (in 1st or 2nd seat) you have no idea whether your side is looking at part score, game, or slam; and the appropriate aggressiveness towards each of these levels varies differently with vulnerability.

The relative worth of game to part-score goes up with vulnerability so it is appropriate to bid slightly more aggressively towards vulnerable games at IMP (and Rubber, both Four-Deal/Chicago and standard) scoring.  For example, it is appropriate to bid a non-vulnerable game with a 50% chance to make (ie requiring only a finesse) and appropriate to bid a vulnerable game with a 35% chance to make (requiring a finesse and a 3-2 break).

However the relative worth of slam to game goes down when vulnerable, so one should be slightly more cautious bidding vulnerable slams at IMPS. It is now appropriate to bid a non-vulnerable small slam with a 50% chance to make but only appropriate to bid a vulnerable small slam with a 65% chance to make (roughly requiring only a 3-2 break).

Empirically, these percentage differences are often estimated as representing about a 1 or 1.5 point difference in partnership combined strength, when better information is not available.

Third seat openings however can probably discount the possibility of slam when holding minimum values, so here the logic is that one should open slightly more aggressively, not less, when vulnerable, because of the increased relative value of game.

This is all nearly the complete opposite of your suggestion. Only when making a competitive part-score decision or a preemptive opening does the logic of the question hold true.

Therefore, until you know which levels your partnership is aiming for, it is inappropriate to adjust your bidding. This is done by having the inviter, only, make the adjustment and only with the inviting bid. Then the partnership can rely on all other calls being standard, allowing more consistent decisions to be made by the partnership.

As a final note, in regards Grand Slam bidding, Barry Crane (and the Four Aces before him) had a commandment to never bid grand slam in Swiss Teams (my emphasis):

  The caution about not bidding grand slams in Swiss Teams made a lot of sense particularly if
  your opponents are not all that skillful as nothing is more demoralizing than to go down one at
  seven while the other team only reached game. In fact, I remember the original Four Aces of forty
  or more years ago had a rule that if you bid seven once and went down you would be forgiven but
  if you did it the second time you were off the team.

Revisiting, for Matchpoints:

The above discussion is entirely intended to guide bidding in IMPS, Chicago, or Rubber scoring. In Matchpoints, different considerations apply.

In Matchpoints the amount by which you gain or lose compared to the field is irrelevant. Rather the number of times you are plus or minus to the field is paramount. This means that far more decisions should be made purely on a basis of
whether or not they succeed a straight 50% of the time.

Consider a touch-and-go game in a major that can be made only on a favourable lead and finding a subtle endplay. Here is a Matchpoint analysis for a case of likelihood for the four cases:

Contract                 Raw Score
& Result                  NV   V    #   MPs
Bid 4 making 10 tricks:  420  620   2  11.0
Bid 3 making 10 tricks:  170  170   2   9.0
Bid 3 making  9 tricks:  140  140   4   6.0
Bid 4 making  9 tricks:  -50 -100   4   2.0

In both case, simply making the 10th trick without bidding it is both sufficient to generate a good to excellent Matchpoint score, and avoids the risk of a terrible one.

In the nearly 5 decades I have been playing bridge, the quality of my game (at Matchpoints) has almost never been from the number of tops partner and I got - it is almost always a consequence of all the available bottoms that we didn't get.


How to deal with Legendary tokens? Can you have more than one "Legendary Token"? I don't think so, but I have a creature named Tolsimir Wolfblood that allow me to tap it to create a 2/2 Legendary Wolf token named Voja.

If you can't have more than one legendary creature on the field, would you have to sacrifice the wolf token or Tolsimir Wolfblood? How does that work?

Are legendary tokens and legendary creatures different from each other? Or is it that legendary creatures can't have the same name as the other?

I believe you've misinterpreted the "Legend Rule", which is CR 704.5j (emphasis mine):

  704.5j If a player controls two or more legendary permanents with the same name, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners’ graveyards. This is called the “legend rule.”

You can have as many legendary permanents as you want, as long as they have different names. Some cards, like Brothers Yamazaki and Mirror Gallery can ignore that rule.

Also, you can read Tolsimir Wolfblood's rulings in its gatherer page:

  7/1/2013: The “legend rule” means that creating a second Voja while one is already under your control will result in one of them being put into its owner’s graveyard (where it promptly ceases to exist). You choose which of the two remains on the battlefield and which is put into the graveyard.

In your specific case, you can only have one Voja token, and only one Tolsimir Wolfblood, but both permanents can coexist on the battlefield.


Which spells or abilities are affected by things that care about targeting? Note: this is intended to be a canonical question about whether or not a spell or ability targets so there are multiple sub-questions.

Can Hexproof or Shroud save my creature from Wrath of God? What about a Cyclonic Rift that was cast for it's Overload cost?
Does shroud prevent me from using the Monstrosity ability of a creature, or from giving it more counters with Proliferate?
Can I cast an Aura Enchantment on one of my creatures with Shroud, or an opponent's creature with Hexproof? Or can I use the Equip ability to attach an equipment to one of my creatures with Shroud?
Will Diffusion Sliver's ability trigger when my opponent plays Wrath of God? And will I have to sacrifice my Phantasmal Image if my opponent casts Nausea?
Will Shroud or Hexproof prevent an opponent from choosing me with Stuffy Doll's ability?
Will Hexproof keep one of my creatures from being affected by Sleep?
If an Aura or Equipment is attached to a creature with Hexproof, does the Hexproof protect the attached permanent?

The answer to all of these questions is no.

Hexproof and Shroud only prevent "targeting"; there are many ways for a spell or ability to affect something without that something being a "target".

  702.11b “Hexproof” on a permanent means “This permanent can’t be the target of spells or abilities your opponents control.”

  702.18a Shroud is a static ability. “Shroud” means “This permanent or player can’t be the target of spells or abilities.”

The important thing here is to keep in mind that when Magic uses the word "target", it is using a specific rules-defined term; it is not just the English word that can mean "a thing you go after or attack".

  114.10a Just because an object or player is being affected by a spell or ability doesn’t make that object or player a target of that spell or ability. Unless that object or player is identified by the word “target” in the text of that spell or ability, or the rule for that keyword ability, it’s not a target.

A spell or ability only targets the things it is affecting in the following 3 situations:

It uses the word "target" in the text of the spell or ability.

  114.1a An instant or sorcery spell is targeted if its spell ability identifies something it will affect by using the phrase “target [something],” where the “something” is a phrase that describes an object and/or player.

  114.1c An activated ability is targeted if it identifies something it will affect by using the phrase “target [something],” where the “something” is a phrase that describes an object and/or player.

  114.1d A triggered ability is targeted if it identifies something it will affect by using the phrase “target [something],” where the “something” is a phrase that describes an object and/or player.

It uses a keyword that has the word "target" in the rules text, such as "Equip".

  114.1e Some keyword abilities, such as equip and provoke, represent targeted activated or triggered abilities. In those cases, the phrase “target [something]” appears in the rule for that keyword ability rather than in the ability itself. (The keyword’s reminder text will often contain the word “target.”)

It is an Aura spell, which by the rules are always targeted spells (targeting the object that you want to enchant).

  114.1b Aura spells are always targeted.

(Note that Aura spells are only targeted when they are cast; if an Aura is entering the battlefield through some other means, it could be attached to a creature without targeting that creature).

If a spell or ability is none of the above, it does not target, and thus is not affected by Hexproof or Shroud. Even if the spell or ability tells you to “choose” something.

For the specific questions/examples given:

Wrath of God can destroy creatures with Hexproof or Shroud because it does not contain the word "target".
Cyclonic Rift is normally targeted, but if it was cast for the Overload cost, then the word "target" is replaced with the word "each", so the spell as it exists on the stack doesn't contain the word "target".
Monstrosity does not target the permanent it affects, because "target" does not appear in the rules text for it.
Proliferate also does not use the word target in the rules text.
You cannot cast an Aura Enchantment on a creature with Shroud, because Aura spells always target.
You cannot use the Equip ability on a creature with Shroud, because the rules definition of Equip uses the word "target" (as you see in the reminder text for Equip).
Diffusion Sliver's ability only triggers when a Sliver is targeted; which Wrath of God does not do.
Phantasmal Image also only triggers when it is targeted, so it will not be affected by Nausea.
You can still choose an opponent with Shroud with abilities such as Stuffy Doll which tell you to “choose”, because choosing isn’t the same as targeting.
Sleep targets a player, not individual creatures. That means that creatures that player controls with Hexproof are still affected.  However, if the player themself has Hexproof, you cannot target that player.
Attached permanents are not protected by the Hexproof of the creature they are attached to, and can still be destroyed if a spell targets the attached permanent specifically (like Naturalize).  A card like Blastfire Bolt that targets the creature could not be used, though.


Modern affinity deck without Mox Opal I am making a modern affinity deck with all the usual cards, Arcbound Ravager, Etched Champion, Inkmoth Nexus and the like.

The problem is I can't afford the Mox Opals - they're over £200 for the play set and that's just crazy.

Mox Opals are used both for early mana ramp and mana colour fixing, not to mention thay are zero cost artifacts that power Metalcraft.

Basically I need a card or cards to replace the 4 Mox Opal missing from the deck that will replicate their function as best as possible.

Start by accepting that your deck won't be as straight-up competitive as it could be with Mox Opal — it's a staple, and cutting staples, especially for budget reasons, inevitably involves giving away some percentage points here or there. Maybe you can gain some improvements in unusual matchups, though.

What does Mox Opal do for you?

Consider what Affinity does, in general:

Affinity is a fast aggressive creature deck
Generally, Affinity is an "all-in" deck. The Affinity player wants to dump their hand onto the battlefield as quickly possible in order to power up a card like Cranial Plating. The deck mainly relies on speed to blank a lot of your opponent's card. You have a few cards to dig you out of a stall (Etched Champion, Thoughtcast) but you really aren't trying to grind down an opponent slowly.
It plays a bit like a combo deck, sacrificing individual card power for massive synergy.
There's significant redundancy in kill conditions. Cranial Plating, Ravager + Inkmoth, Signal-Pest-powered beatdown, &c. But your deck generally sucks if you don't have one of your key cards out.

So, what does Mox Opal do in that deck?

It's an accelerator. You can use it to put a Cranial Plating or an Arcbound Ravager down on the field on turn 1.
It's color-fixing in a deck that plays lots of colorless lands (up to 12) and 2-4 colors of spells. Don't underestimate the value of being able to make BB to move Cranial Plating around at instant speed, as well!
It's an artifact. It ups your artifact count for Cranial Plating, Thoughtcast, and Etched Champion. You can sac it to Ravager. It'll keep your Glimmervoid from dying.
It's free. You can dump an Opal onto the field without disrupting the flow of the rest of your turn.
It's a non-creature artifact so it'll survive sweepers (besides the ones people sideboard specifically to hose you). I don't think that's as important right now, ever since Zoo pushed Pyroclasm out of the format.

That's a tough act to follow!

Suggested alternatives

Here's my best shot.

The most important thing is to remember that consistently executing the deck's overall concept is more important than finding a direct functional replacement for the mana rock.

The closest thing to Mox Opal in functionality is Springleaf Drum. You should be playing a playset of these already, though.
You can also just add lands. Replacing 4 Opals with 4 lands won't do good things for your deck, of course, but you could totally add 1-2 lands. Gemstone Mine (already a staple) and City of Brass/Mana Confluence are decent picks for multicolor support.
Paradise Mantle is a 0-cost card that's basically a worse Springleaf Drum. It's a bit harder to get explosive starts with it due to summoning sickness. The main knock against it, though, is that doubling up on Springleaf Drums stretches your creature base pretty thin. I'd playtest 2 rather than the full 4.
Gitaxian Probe is a 0-cost cantrip. You can run these in the hopes of just getting to your other cards quicker. (It is way better for this purpose than Mishra's Bauble, which is an artifact but pretty terrible.)
Chromatic Star is a bit slow for this deck but it might be a decent color-fixer in a pinch. It cantrips if you feed it to a Ravager, and it counts for Thoughtcast's affinity even if you sac it to make blue mana for the spell (because you calculate costs first, then pay them).
Many Affinity decks already play a singleton Welding Jar. So try 1-2 and see how far that takes you. It's great for pushing through an Inkmoth kill.
You can always just up the creature count and play it more like a beatdown deck. Affinity typically runs some mix of "lords" like Signal Pest, Steel Overseer, and Master of Etherium. Just add the one you don't have already. (If you have all of those already: did you take out Vault Skirge or something? Try putting that Vault Skirge back in.)
You can experiment with maindecking hate cards, especially if you play in a relatively small and cozy environment where you know what decks you'll face:

Spellskite and Phyrexian Revoker are nifty creatures that can mess up a lot of decks (Ethersworn Canonist, too, but you're cutting color depth so I'd stay away from colored artifacts).
Relic of Progenitus is a great non-creature pick, since it cantrips and gives you splash hate against decks that run Goyf and Snapcaster.
Pithing Needle and Grafdigger's Cage can also work if you really, really know your metagame well.
Another way to maindeck hate is to add targeted discard in the form of Thoughtseize, Duress, or maybe Inquisition of Kozilek. Essentially you're accepting that your deck will be just a bit slower than the typical shell, but you're planning to make up for it by disrupting opponents more. You'll want to rejigger your mana to support more black sources to make this work, of course.

To reiterate: you'll probably want to add a land! Even if you go the Paradise Mantle route, none of these cards are quite as fast and flexible as Mox Opal, so you really do just want the extra land to smooth out mana production.

Note that you may need to adjust other cards if you're changing your ability to produce mana — not playing Mox Opal basically guarantees that you can't play the greediest of the Affinity lists.

Above all else, remember that, since there's no drop-in "next best" replacement, you're going to have to test and tune your deck.


Is there a white or green card that turns an artifact into a creature? I'm looking for white or green cards that turn an artifact into a creature indefinitely while retaining their abilities (similar to March of the Machines).  Is there a card like that?

The closest equivalent to March of the Machines in white or green is Titania's Song.

It has equal converted mana cost. The most signficant difference to March is that the animated artifacts lose their abilities.

I found that card through this Gatherer search, so you might find something else to your liking, or you could refine the search to include other cards. For example, Karn, Silver Golem is an artifact creature that also animates artifacts, except one by one and only until end of turn.


Can I use Jyn Odan's Quick Draw if I don't have line of sight normally, but do with Trick Shot? Jyn Odan's Quick Draw works as follows:

  2 Strain: Use at the start of a hostile figure's activation. Interrupt to perform an attack with a Pistol targeting that figure. Limit once per round (twice if you have 2 activation tokens).

For 4 XP, Jyn can buy the Trick Shot skill:

  1 Strain: Use before you declare an attack with a Ranged weapon. You can draw line of sight from any space within 3 spaces.

It's not clear to me: can these two can be used together? Can I use Quick Draw against someone I don't normally have line of sight to, but do with Trick Shot?

Yes

Justin Kemppainen, Assistant Board Game Manager for Fantasy Flight Games, definitively stated that it is allowed:

  Question:
  If a Trooper "just around the corner" (out of LOS) activates, can Jyn activate Quick Draw and Trick Shot (to gain LOS) to attack him?

  Answer:
  Yep! That combination of abilities is legit, and they remain legit even if the target is not currently in line of sight.


Is a yellow sign marker still added if the terror level increase is reduced to 0? In the King in Yellow Herald variant, there is a rule about increasing the terror level (emphasis mine):

The blasphemous play "The King in Yellow" is being performed in Arkham. Every time the terror level increases, the investigators must do one of the following:
A: Place a yellow sign token in the space just vacated by the terror marker.
or
B. Place a yellow sign token on the doom track as if it were a doom token.

There are ways to reduce the terror level increase, such as the Director's Diary:

Discard this card when the terror level is increased to reduce the amount by which it is being increased by 1.

What is the order of these two events? Do I place a yellow sign token first before I reduce the terror level? Or do I reduce the terror level and then not place a yellow sign token because it is staying the same?

Using this card when the terror level is increased by 1 would effectively make it increase by 0 and prevent the requirement to place the yellow sign token.  Notice the wording of the card is to discard it when the terror level is increased to reduce the amount increased.  If it had said something along the lines of discarding it to decrease the terror level, then one might construe that to mean the terror level increased then decreased, but in this case it strongly implies you are cancelling the action, not subsequently reverting it.


Ugin's Conjurant vs. un-preventable damage If I had Ugin's Conjurant with 10 +1/+1 counters on it (and no other effects modifying its toughness,) and my opponent cast a Banefire for 5 damage on it, would +1/+1 counters get removed from the Conjurant, as well as the damage being dealt, killing the Conjurant?

Relevant text on Banefire:

  Banefire deals X damage to any target.
  If X is 5 or more, this spell can't be countered and the damage can't be prevented.

and on Ugin's Conjurant:

  If damage would be dealt to Ugin's Conjurant while it has a +1/+1 counter on it, prevent that damage and remove that many +1/+1 counters from Ugin's Conjurant.

If Ugin's Conjurant takes damage that cannot be prevented, it will both take the damage and lose that many +1/+1 counters. This is covered by rule 615.12:

  Some effects state that damage “can’t be prevented.” If unpreventable damage would be dealt, any applicable prevention effects are still applied to it. Those effects won’t prevent any damage, but any additional effects they have will take place. Existing damage prevention shields won’t be reduced by damage that can’t be prevented.

So, if the Ugin's Conjurant has 10 +1/+1 counters on it and it is hit with a Banefire for 5 damage, it will end up as a 5/5 with 5 damage marked and it will die.


In Last Will is property purchasing broken? I've played Last Will with 2-4 other friends a few times.
One friend consistently wins.  He never buys any property and just plays event cards, goes to the theatre and plays non property cards in his play areas.

I buy my houses when the market is high, trash them and sell low successfully but he still ends up winning.
Is it unbalanced?  Have I missed some errata?  Are we doing it wrong?

There are a couple of observations that can be made about property purchasing in Last Will:

They don't get rid of as much money as you think. Sure, they cost a lot to buy, but the house is still an asset and part of your funds, and this is something you might be tempted to forget. Right up until you sell it and the money cascades back into your pile. If you spend the whole game focussing on just a couple of properties, you'll find that the total outlay isn't that much. Even with a fully favourable market, total decay, and an estate agent or two, you might only manage to sink 30 cash into a house at the most, and that's not a great return if you've spent a lot of turns on it (and nothing else; which brings me to my next point...).

Make sure you have a finishing strategy. If you learn only one thing from this answer, learn this. Properly done, houses can get rid of a lot of money, but it's actually impossible to get rid of ALL your money exclusively through property because you have to sell said property, which leaves you with a small pile of remaining money and no way left of efficiently spending it. I've seen games of Last Will in which a player has absolutely hosed his money away on properties, sold them at the end for a crippling loss, but has still been forced to crawl over the finish line because they're relying entirely on event cards and the "theatre" board action to get rid of their remaining pennies. Invariably another more balanced player will cross the line first (or at least go further into debt) because when it got to the end, they could still spend a decent amount with each action.

The most obvious player interaction is on the property market. There's very little interaction in the game. Actions on player's individual boards are totally independent. There's a little competition for good cards, or the wild-card companions, and there's competition for spaces in the turn order, but fundamentally, this does little except to change turn order for chasing the good cards. (If you don't care about turn order, there's pretty much always somewhere you can go that gets you close to what you want for cards/errands/actions balance.) But there's only one property market space, and it will affect everyone in the property business, and this can have a profound effect. The best time to dip into the property market will often be when most other people aren't interested. As always, you'll do better with no competition. Your opponent probably found that he could get decent helpers from the board (while everyone else fought over property-oriented cards) and largely play his own game, unconcerned with other players.

TL;DR:

Don't plough all your actions into maintaining properties and playing/activating helpers that only affect properties.
Have an escape plan. Play a couple of helpers that work well together and will still be able to spend money once your properties are gone.
As in all games, take the path of least resistance. Go for the strategy that the fewest other players are going for and you'll find less competition for the cards that suit that strategy.


In Bridge, Why Do People Use "Transfer Bids" Over 1 NT? Over 1NT, some people bid two diamonds to say they have five hearts, and two hearts to say they have five spades. The 1NT person bids the desired suit, completing the transfer.

Apparently the idea is to "hide" the (stronger) 1NT hand. Except for one thing. As a defender I already have a pretty good idea of the 1NT hand; balanced distribution probably one or more honors in every suit. A defender might actually be more interested in seeing the "five trump" hand, particularly if is highly distributional (singletons and voids, instead of high card points). The "no trumper" has three trumps, on average.

Can the advantages of transfer bids possibly outweigh the disadvantages? Put another way, why is it more important to hide the high cards than the five trumps?

A much more important reason is to allow the responder to describe their hand more fully. A 1NT opening bid describes both shape and point count and so it's usually up to responder to then set the contract - the 1NT opener will typically not bid again. However, responder with points for a 2NT raise and a five card major is in a quandary. Bidding 2NT may mean missing a 5-3 major suit fit, but bidding 3M may take them past the safe level of 2NT if opener is minimum. With transfers, responder gets two bites at the cherry. Holding five spades, responder bids 2H. Opener converts to 2S and now responder bids 2NT getting across shape and point count and leaving opener much better placed to set the final contract.


Is there an in-game mechanic reason for placing action cards face down during the planning phase I've just picked up Space Alert, and read through handbook (as yet un-played), the thing that I can't understand is the reason for placing your action cards face down during the planning phase.

The only reason I can think of is that it adds to the chaotic-ness of the planning phase, being unable to instantly see what another player is planning.

I just wanted to check there's not a mechanic somewhere that I've missed. (Was thinking along the lines of BSG game, where any cylon players are trying to undermine the success of the mission but negatively contributing towards the goals)

It is to promote communication between players.

If you and I (try to) use the same lift/elevator in the same turn, one of us will be delayed - and this send all of that player's subsequent plans back a turn!

Likewise for shooting guns, firing missiles, certain energy transfer actions... you can get really messed up if two players "do" the same thing in a single turn.

So what does that have to do with why it is required?
The crux of Space Alert is solving a puzzle in a short amount of time. One aspect of the puzzle is the face-down action cards.
It is common for new players/teams to play with cards face-up. This is, obviously, a "house rule". If you feel that the missions are too challenging, or just want an easier pass at things, then go for it!

Playing with cards face-up allows you to avoid duplication, and make it easier for someone to verify that the mouse is going to be wiggled this phase!


Can a sacrifice be used to pay for more than one effect? Someone tried to play the following combo in a game I was in. I think it is an illegal play, so I wanted some help to clarify the rules.

The cards were:

1) Launch Party - "As an additional cost to cast Launch Party, sacrifice a creature."

2) Mogg Fanatic - "Sacrifice Mogg Fanatic: Mogg Fanatic deals 1 damage to target creature or player."

The other player played Launch Party and wanted to sacrifice Mogg Fanatic to pay Launch Party's cost. However, they also wanted to benefit from Mogg Fanatic's own ability.

This doesn't seem legitimate, because it would be a "two for one" (pay one cost, get two spells). Am I correct?

You're absolutely correct: you can only sacrifice the Mogg Fanatic to pay the cost for one of those two effects, not both.  From the Comprehensive Rules:

  117.10. Each payment of a cost applies to only one spell, ability, or effect. For example, a player can't sacrifice just one creature to
  activate the activated abilities of two permanents that each require
  sacrificing a creature as a cost. Also, the resolution of a spell or
  ability doesn't pay another spell or ability's cost, even if part of
  its effect is doing the same thing the other cost asks for.


3-of-a-kind bonus in Ruk Shuk In Ruk Shuk, can the 3-of-a-kind bonus be scored for using 3 white rocks?

And if so, do bridge rocks count as white rocks for this purpose?

Disclaimer, I've never played this but found rules online and seem fairly straight forward.

Yes the 3-of-a-kind bonus can be score with 3 white rocks.   This has bee confirmed by designer on the BGG forums here

As far I as I can tell from BGG pictures of the game, all bridge rocks are grey, not white.  Also looking at rules here the bridge rocks are not even defined by a colour and just called 'bridge rock' as opposes to 'white rock', 'blue rock' etc so don't see why a bridge rock would could towards 3 white rocks.


Can I choose that crossroad option? Thumbs up option of the crossroad card ("Old divisions") says: Remove 1 helpless survivor

There are no helpless survivors at the colony right now.

Can we choose the thumbs up option in this case or do we have to choose the thumbs down option?

The rules state (p. 12):

  If a player is unable to meet the conditions of an option on a crossroads card, she must choose the other option.

So no, you have to pick the other option.


What are the differences between the 1st and 2nd editions of Galaxy Trucker? What are the differences between the two editions of galaxy trucker and are the expansions compatible with either version?

Consensus at BoardGameGeek seems to be:

  My impression from all of the people who have actually commented after receiving the expansion is that one can play just fine with the original base game as long as one is willing to tolerate some minor inconsistencies.

Apparently the size of cards differ between 1st ed and the expansions, but that can be remedied by sleeving the cards. There are a few inconsistencies in rules texts, but overall 1st ed seems playable with the expansions.


MTG: Priority before attacking When does my opponent receive priority? It's the beginning of my turn; I draw a card and decide to go straight into combat. Can my opponent tap my creatures before declaring attackers with Gideon's Lawkeeper? Even though I didn't take any actions before declaring them as attackers meaning he never got priority before?

Yes, your opponent gains priority and has several opportunities to activate their Gideon's Lawkeeper.

Your opponent will get priority and may activate their Lawkeeper in your Upkeep, Draw, 1st Main, and Beginning of Combat steps.  You cannot skip any of those steps.  If you draw your card for turn and go straight to combat you're proposing a shortcut, but your opponent is not obliged to accept that shortcut.  They can stop you at any time they would receive priority and cast instants or activate abilities.


Catan Pirates Starting Phase Question When each player is placing their initial Harbor and settlement, does the first player place BOTH their Harbor and settlement immediately or does the first player place only their Harbor then it's the next player's turn to place one Harbor?

Using the turn order described in base Catan, each player places a harbor settlement first and a regular settlement second on the starting island (each without a road).  Your harbor settlement must be placed on one of the intersections marked with a circle (page 9). The regular settlement may be placed on any intersection, including those marked with a circle. You must of course observe the distance rule when building all harbor settlements and regular settlements.  Your starting resources are 1 card from each terrain hex adjacent to your starting settlement (not harbor settlement).
The last player to place a settlement is the first to place a road adjacent to that settlement.  That same player then places a settler ship (ship + settler) on one of the sea routes adjacent to his or her harbor settlement.  The other players follow clockwise.  Once everyone has placed their pieces the starting player begins the game by rolling the dice.

I read that first line to mean you play like the base game, you place your harbor and then everyone else does too.  Then the last person to place a harbor, places their settlement, with a road and then places a settler ship, back to the original player.


Prophet of Kruphix: Can I flash Bestow? If I have Prophet of Kruphix out (which gives all my creatures flash), can I use the bestow ability of my enchantment creatures during my opponents turn? For example, can I bestow Thassa's Emissary on one of my creatures, during my opponents turn?

Bestow text for reference:

  If you cast this card for its bestow cost, it's an Aura spell with
  enchant creature. It becomes a creature again if it's not attached to
  a creature.

Similarly, if I do not have enough devotion for Thassa, God of the Sea to be a creature, can I use flash to cast her during my opponents turn?

Thassa's devotion related text, for reference:

  As long as your devotion to blue is less than five, Thassa isn't a
  creature. (Each Blue in the mana costs of permanents you control
  counts toward your devotion to blue.)

Yes, you can, for both. Prophet of Kruphix allows you to cast "Creature Cards" as though they had flash. Thassa's Emissary IS a Creature Card. It's NOT a "Creature", as a "Creature" is a permanent on the battlefield, which it isn't while it's in your hand or on the stack. But it IS a "Creature Card", and that's all that matters.

See rules for Bestow, noting that Bestow ability that allows you to cast it as an Aura is a static ability of the card itself, not of a creature or aura permanent.

  702.102. Bestow

    702.102a Bestow represents two static abilities, one that functions while the card with bestow is on the stack and another that functions
    both while it's on the stack and while it's on the battlefield.
    "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. These
    effects last until one of two things happens: this spell has an
    illegal target as it resolves or the permanent this spell becomes,
    becomes unattached." Paying a card's bestow cost follows the rules for
    paying alternative costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2e–g.


Gisela, the Broken Blade or Bruna, the Fading Light as a Commanders Gisela, the Broken Blade is a legendary creature that melds with Bruna, the Fading Light to create Brisela, Voice of Nightmares. All three are legendary creatures and as part of the meld action are exiled before returning melded into a new object. The question is, will that new object, Brisela be considered a player's commander still, for purposes of doing commander damage?

Yes, if either Gisela or Bruna are your commander at the start of the game, when they meld together Brisela will still be considered your commander for all purposes. When and if Brisela leaves the battlefield only the original commander half will follow the commander rules for returning to command zone, the other half will behave as any other creature would. This is covered in the rulings for both Bruna and Gisela:

  In a Commander game, your commander may be Bruna, the Fading Light or Gisela, the Broken Blade, and the other may be in your deck. If they meld into Brisela, Voice of Nightmares, Brisela will also be your commander; but if Brisela leaves the battlefield, only the card chosen as your commander at the start of the game may be put into the command zone.


Is the Signal Flare a gun? We played Last Night On Earth yesterday and got a little confused as to whether or not the Signal Flare was a gun.

I had Father Joseph in the Gun Shop and I thought that the Signal Flare was a gun (it looks like a gun, you fire it) which meant that I could pick it up but not use it. My opponent thought it was not a gun which meant I'd have to go to the Airplane Hanger to pick it up, but Father Joseph could use it.

Last Night on Earth guns should say "Item - Ranged Weapon - Gun" beneath the picture, and also  have a little red icon of a gun in the top right corner of the text box.

I don't have the card to hand, but my understanding of Signal Flare is that it doesn't conform to the above and isn't a gun (despite the obvious superficial similarities).

It seems a bit strange that a priest would have moral compunctions about using a signal flare in any case!


What happens to an unattached Aura? I haven't played magic in forever and I need some clarification on a rule.
Let's say I cast Arrest on a creature my opponent controls. Then on his turn he returns the creature to his hand. Now I'm wondering what happens to my arrest,

Does it get assigned to a new creature? or does it go to my graveyard since the target that got picked is now no longer valid?

When the creature that the Arrest is attached to leaves the battlefield, the Arrest goes to your graveyard because it is not attached to anything. There are several conditional actions that you check every time anyone gets priority called State-based actions. One of those, specified in rule 704.5n is

  If an Aura is attached to an illegal object or player, or is not attached to an object or player, that Aura is put into its owner's graveyard.